Wake up!!! We are not

dbldrew

Well-known member
Joined:
Aug 24, 2012
Posts:
5,215
Liked Posts:
1,220
Same song & dance about the QB class every year.

but its true unfortunately. year after year teams are taking QBs and year after year there is only a handful of teams set at the QB position.
 

ZOMBIE@CTESPN

Well-known member
Joined:
Dec 19, 2012
Posts:
17,907
Liked Posts:
19,548
Location:
MICHIGAN
How is taking one next year easier than this year? Nobody has a clue to who booms or busts in this draft or the next one. What guarantee is there that all those stud QBs for next year declare, don't digress and don't get hurt? All I keep hearing is that 2018 is our savior but come next year, the same talk will be said for the 2019 class and our futility will never end.

The excuse next year will be it's not fair we need to give glennon few years to develop and need to get him weapons. I've read this story before
 

Chicoman

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Aug 22, 2012
Posts:
1,400
Liked Posts:
1,114
Location:
Magic Mushroom Land
17662319_407258076299696_7571904944869998592_n.jpg


Can't wait for 2017 season! Wooho
 

onebud34

Packer Fan
Donator
Joined:
Aug 16, 2011
Posts:
22,029
Liked Posts:
13,189
Location:
Favorite Corner Bar
My favorite teams
  1. Minnesota Twins
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Minnesota Wild
If the Bears had a solid starter in place, would you still disagree with this being a weak QB class? My theory is the need at QB is preventing people from maintaining subjectivity.

Maybe you should re-read your post again
 

satchice

Well-known member
Joined:
Aug 21, 2010
Posts:
3,720
Liked Posts:
1,463
Location:
Schaumburg
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
If the Bears had a solid starter in place, would you still disagree with this being a weak QB class? My theory is the need at QB is preventing people from maintaining subjectivity.

I've seen Pittsburgh, Saints, Cardinals, and Chiefs all being linked to QBs and they all have a solid starter in place. Maybe you are right they should all wait until next year to draft Darnold.
 

onebud34

Packer Fan
Donator
Joined:
Aug 16, 2011
Posts:
22,029
Liked Posts:
13,189
Location:
Favorite Corner Bar
My favorite teams
  1. Minnesota Twins
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Minnesota Wild
What part are you having trouble understanding? I can try and simplify it for you.

I thought the 2013 QB class was bad & the Bears needed a QB then.
 

ijustposthere

Message Board Hero
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '20
Joined:
Aug 20, 2012
Posts:
33,374
Liked Posts:
27,841
Location:
Any-Town, USA
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
  1. Michigan Wolverines
  2. Purdue Boilermakers
I hate to agree with the jackass OP, but I do. I have the feeling that I'm going to be very disappointed in the Bears direction the next few days. Though, I hope I'm wrong.
 

ijustposthere

Message Board Hero
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '20
Joined:
Aug 20, 2012
Posts:
33,374
Liked Posts:
27,841
Location:
Any-Town, USA
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
  1. Michigan Wolverines
  2. Purdue Boilermakers
I know some people think this is a weak QB class (I don't), but you exaggerate it to an absurd degree.

I don't think this class is any weaker than any other year. It's not even determinable until these guys actually play in the NFL. If the Bears pass on a QB, I hope they all become studs to expose Pace's cowardice.
 

onebud34

Packer Fan
Donator
Joined:
Aug 16, 2011
Posts:
22,029
Liked Posts:
13,189
Location:
Favorite Corner Bar
My favorite teams
  1. Minnesota Twins
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Minnesota Wild
I hate to agree with the jackass OP, but I do. I have the feeling that I'm going to be very disappointed in the Bears direction the next few days. Though, I hope I'm wrong.

It's sad to think that the last time our front office looked competent was under the early Angeloof/Lovie years
 

bearmick

Captain Objectivity
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '19
Joined:
Aug 20, 2012
Posts:
37,895
Liked Posts:
43,086
If the Bears had a solid starter in place, would you still disagree with this being a weak QB class? My theory is the need at QB is preventing people from maintaining subjectivity.

My opinion that this isn't a weak QB class is largely because I think Watson is going to be a star. I agree with David Haugh that he's going to be one of the 5 best QBs to come out in the last decade.

Then I look at groups like (Goff, Wentz, Lynch, Hackenberg), (Winston, Mariota, Grayson, Manion), (Bortles, Manziel, Bridgewater, Carr), (Manuel, Geno Smith, Glennon, Barkley).

Watson, Trubisky, Mahomes and Kizer are just as talented a group as most of the past several years of top 4 QBs imo.

So I can't really agree that this is a notably weak QB class at all. It may turn out bad, it may turn out to have two HoFers. To me, the level of talent in this draft is actually pretty good. What it does have is young underclassmen from some various spread systems who probably need a year.

But I don't think talent and readiness are the same thing. The two most ready QBs in this draft are arguably Peterman and Kaaya. The top tier talent probably needs a year.
 

Milky

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Aug 14, 2010
Posts:
3,349
Liked Posts:
3,625
My opinion that this isn't a weak QB class is largely because I think Watson is going to be a star. I agree with David Haugh that he's going to be one of the 5 best QBs to come out in the last decade.

Then I look at groups like (Goff, Wentz, Lynch, Hackenberg), (Winston, Mariota, Grayson, Manion), (Bortles, Manziel, Bridgewater, Carr), (Manuel, Geno Smith, Glennon, Barkley).

Watson, Trubisky, Mahomes and Kizer are just as talented a group as most of the past several years of top 4 QBs imo.

So I can't really agree that this is a notably weak QB class at all. It may turn out bad, it may turn out to have two HoFers. To me, the level of talent in this draft is actually pretty good. What it does have is young underclassmen from some various spread systems who probably need a year.

But I don't think talent and readiness are the same thing. The two most ready QBs in this draft are arguably Peterman and Kaaya. The top tier talent probably needs a year.

I agree with everything you just said mick.

Personally I'm so fuckn sick of hearing what a strong class 2018 will be. The truth is we won't know that until after this coming season is over. At the beginning of the draft process last year many thought Kizer and Watson were better prospects than Goff and Wentz and now those two are sure fire busts?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Myk

85in25
Joined:
Sep 27, 2010
Posts:
11,028
Liked Posts:
4,426
Here's the key... the top tier QBs this year would be low 1st to 2nd round QBs any other year. Drafting a QB at #3 this year... the team still isn't getting a QB normally picked at #3.... it would be getting a QB who would be a late 1st rounder at best in any other year. I'm basing this off comparative ratings, analysis to other QBs from past years and generally what scouts are themselves saying about this class.

Just because you reach and draft the 35th best player available at #3 doesn't suddenly mean he was the 3rd best player... he was still 35th. Look back at the drafting trends of QBs over the past decade.... teams don't reach even for QBs as much as people believe they do.

If the team falls in the 10-20 range next year, that suggest you believe picking an Adams would improve the team, but to your question.... next year you wouldn't have to reach... you would get a QB viable to being picked in that range. You may not get the #3 at the top QB... but you not getting a QB worth being picked #3 at the top this year either.

So your logic is to PREDICT that the QBs this year will suck and PREDICT the QBs next year will be great so you can draft the same quality of QB next year at #20 as you could've got this year at #3????
Why are you begging to pass this year on the same quality you want next year???

Why not take the QB now and if they suck in reality, not a prediction, then you can get the same level of QB next year to try?

Oh yeah, because there's some other player that you personally want because you predict they'll do better than what you predict the QBs will do.
WTF is with people that they believe their predictions are factual?

The fact is we have the #3 pick. The fact is you don't know how ANY player in the draft is going to pan out until after the fact. If even the pros predictions were always factual there would be no busts and no UDFA break outs.

And then you say go ahead and take a QB this year but not the first or second choice of QB this year??? If the #3 pick isn't worth a QB in 2017 there is no sense in drafting any QB in 2017. We don't need another Fales.

I hate to agree with the jackass OP, but I do. I have the feeling that I'm going to be very disappointed in the Bears direction the next few days. Though, I hope I'm wrong.

Then I guess my big dilemma is whether to watch Colts or Packers next year. Especially if I need neck surgery ASAP and have to miss hunting season.
If Bears can't find a QB with the #3 pick worth a risk I'm done with this joke of a team. At least Colts and Packers try and I can watch as many of their games as I can Bears'.
 

CNiel36

Active member
Joined:
Sep 29, 2014
Posts:
870
Liked Posts:
96
Location:
Portland, OR
When the draft is super deep at Cb and S why would you pick one at 3?

Plenty of quality players can be had in rounds 2 and 3 maybe even later

Get that franchise qb in round 1 and the rest of the draft is easy

Every mock I've done comes out better when picking a qb first

Thats great, but there are no franchise QBs in this draft. sooo....
 

CNiel36

Active member
Joined:
Sep 29, 2014
Posts:
870
Liked Posts:
96
Location:
Portland, OR
So your logic is to PREDICT that the QBs this year will suck and PREDICT the QBs next year will be great so you can draft the same quality of QB next year at #20 as you could've got this year at #3????
Why are you begging to pass this year on the same quality you want next year???

Why not take the QB now and if they suck in reality, not a prediction, then you can get the same level of QB next year to try?

Oh yeah, because there's some other player that you personally want because you predict they'll do better than what you predict the QBs will do.
WTF is with people that they believe their predictions are factual?

The fact is we have the #3 pick. The fact is you don't know how ANY player in the draft is going to pan out until after the fact. If even the pros predictions were always factual there would be no busts and no UDFA break outs.

And then you say go ahead and take a QB this year but not the first or second choice of QB this year??? If the #3 pick isn't worth a QB in 2017 there is no sense in drafting any QB in 2017. We don't need another Fales.



Then I guess my big dilemma is whether to watch Colts or Packers next year. Especially if I need neck surgery ASAP and have to miss hunting season.
If Bears can't find a QB with the #3 pick worth a risk I'm done with this joke of a team. At least Colts and Packers try and I can watch as many of their games as I can Bears'.

Peace out!
 

Bear_Assed

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Aug 20, 2012
Posts:
2,927
Liked Posts:
2,771
who was the guy on here who went on a rant about how Capernick was going to be the next great qb... after only like a year in the league?
 

EL ROCKSTEADY

CBMB Refugee
Joined:
May 2, 2012
Posts:
880
Liked Posts:
206
Location:
Behind Enemy Lines
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Fire
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
Taking a QB at #3! They didnt sign Glennon and Sanchez to sit a #3 behind both of them for two years especially with a better qb class available in next years draft. At best we take a chance on a qb in the 4th and hope we strike gold or at worst have a future back up for the first round qb we select next year. I know this isnt what 95% of you want to hear but its the truth. If im wrong and we go qb ill make a thread admitting how wrong i was and ill ban myself for 3 months. I dont think im wrong. I dont care what the talking heads are saying as its all misinformation at this point. Its clear to see they arent going qb.

ya, or have a guy sit behind a vet for a year or two. that would be strange
 

MrOuija

Well-known member
Joined:
Aug 20, 2012
Posts:
1,691
Liked Posts:
1,123
The disconnect is the general belief that all QBs not named Luck are considered to be longshots, while everyone else, and especially defensive players, are day 1 elite difference makers. This is proved wrong year after year but people still believe it. I think Adams is great, but odds are he's not the next Earl Thomas or Eric Berry.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Myk

Gresher

Member
Joined:
Aug 21, 2012
Posts:
99
Liked Posts:
77
Location:
Central Texas
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
I haven't heard that anywhere. Plus, I think what really made Tom Brady so special was his development, coaching and surrounding cast. I just don't know if it'd be worth taking 3 clones, because of the whole nature vs. nurture thing. Also, I know a clone will immediately try to kill the original if they ever meet. Does this hold true for clone multiples? We don't even know yet.

Seriously some irrational thinking on this board.


What was that Michael Keaton Movie where he cloned himself? Hopefully we dont get the one that keeps the pizza in his underwear
 

Top