Fox hasn't decide which QB to give team 1 reps

modo · Aug 22, 2017

r1terrell23 said:
This is why so many of our past coaches are fired, as were gm's. I would have hired Arians over Tres in a heartbeat. I would not have re-signed Jay Cutler. So yes, they are obviously smarter, but it's not like decisions shouldn't be questioned, like Langford starting over Howard last season.

I certainly question their decisions but we always have the 20/20 view of hindsight. In this case they may be doing what is better for Trubiskys development and not what may give them a slightly more incremental chance of winning a game in a year they are probably not going to compete for a Superbowl.

Dragon Slayer · Aug 22, 2017

Myk said:
What it is about is who gives you the best chance of winning now and who gives you the best chance of winning sooner. Trubisky is the guy on both counts. Don't start him until next year and next year will be his mistake filled year.
The only reason to start Glennon is if the plan is to be going for the #1 pick in 2018.

I don't care if Trubisky starts at the beginning of the season, but once Glennon begins to struggle, I think you give him a chance whether Fox thinks he is ready or not. Best way to see if he is ready is to throw him to the fire and see how he handles it. 4-6 games into the season would be a good mark for him if not sooner.

remydat · Aug 22, 2017

Myk said:
I think you need to realize this is a message board. The front office most likely does not have a bookmark to CCS. And we are not going to agree with everything the Bears' organization does. We are allowed to voice our disagreements and they have no bearing on letting them do anything.

Development has nothing to do with it. It has pretty much been proven that it cannot be proven that starting a QB too soon can make or break them. If he was going to break from being started too soon he would likely break being started late.
What it is about is who gives you the best chance of winning now and who gives you the best chance of winning sooner. Trubisky is the guy on both counts. Don't start him until next year and next year will be his mistake filled year.
The only reason to start Glennon is if the plan is to be going for the #1 pick in 2018.

I love how you say it cannot be proven that starting a QB too soon can make or break them then say that if Trubisky doesn't start until next year that next year will be his mistake filled year. Those two statements contradict. You can't proven that his not starting this year means he will have a mistake filled year next year.

Further, you also can't really prove that Trubisky is the best guy for the job this year for sure because you don't know what's going on in practice and Trubisky has been playing with the 3s. It is quite conceivable that playing against No 1 defenses would expose in greater detail his weaknesses.

So perhaps you should accept your original statement and accept that nothing can be proven one way or the other on many of these supposed facts you are stating. All we know is the coaching staff has more information than you do as it relates to these two players.

Myk · Aug 22, 2017

modo said:
I certainly question their decisions but we always have the 20/20 view of hindsight. In this case they may be doing what is better for Trubiskys development and not what may give them a slightly more incremental chance of winning a game in a year they are probably not going to compete for a Superbowl.

And hind sight says yes we are smarter than the Bears' staff.

remydat · Aug 22, 2017

Myk said:
And hind sight says yes we are smarter than the Bears' staff.

No it doesn't because none of us are accountable for our actions. For every decision we get right on a message board, there are probably many more we get wrong. The only difference is none of us brag about when we fuck things up and no one is really keeping track.

I suspect many here wouldn't be able to take the pressure of having every decision second guessed so forgive me but this post is full of shit.

Myk · Aug 22, 2017

remydat said:
I love how you say it cannot be proven that starting a QB too soon can make or break them then say that if Trubisky doesn't start until next year that next year will be his mistake filled year. Those two statements contradict. You can't proven that his not starting this year means he will have a mistake filled year next year.

Further, you also can't really prove that Trubisky is the best guy for the job this year for sure because you don't know what's going on in practice and Trubisky has been playing with the 3s. It is quite conceivable that playing against No 1 defenses would expose in greater detail his weaknesses.

So perhaps you should accept your original statement and accept that nothing can be proven one way or the other on many of these supposed facts you are stating. All we know is the coaching staff has more information than you do as it relates to these two players.

Again this is the coaches' failing. The #2 pick should've been getting time with the 1s if they plan on him ever being a starter.

I pretty much guarantee a player who has seen no game time will make mistakes the first year he does see game time. Even players who've been off a year with injury come back rusty. You're not going to fix his mistakes on a bench.

modo · Aug 22, 2017

Myk said:
And hind sight says yes we are smarter than the Bears' staff.

no we are not. You are ignorant of what it takes to run an NFL franchise and much of the decision-making that goes into it. Certainly from a player development and training standpoint.

It is fun to criticize their decisions but please don't be stupid enough to believe you can step in and do a better job at almost anything in an NFL franchise.

If they let you be waterboy for the next game you probably be so fucking lost as to how to be effective at that job.

Myk · Aug 22, 2017

modo said:
no we are not. You are ignorant of what it takes to run an NFL franchise and much of the decision-making that goes into it. Certainly from a player development and training standpoint.

It is fun to criticize their decisions but please don't be stupid enough to believe you can step in and do a better job at almost anything in an NFL franchise.

If they let you be waterboy for the next game you probably be so fucking lost as to how to be effective at that job.

Duuhhh yeah boss, I've never seen a football game before or read anything about it.

You're a fucking idiot. Yes let's all just post Rah Rah posts. That's what sports forums are all about.

r1terrell23 · Aug 22, 2017

modo said:
I certainly question their decisions but we always have the 20/20 view of hindsight. In this case they may be doing what is better for Trubiskys development and not what may give them a slightly more incremental chance of winning a game in a year they are probably not going to compete for a Superbowl.

Your point is valid. But what's best for Trubs is unknown and the only way to find out is letting him play against some ones. I'd let Glennon play the first quarter, Trubs the second and third, and Sanchez the 4th.

r1terrell23 · Aug 22, 2017

modo said:
no we are not. You are ignorant of what it takes to run an NFL franchise and much of the decision-making that goes into it. Certainly from a player development and training standpoint.

It is fun to criticize their decisions but please don't be stupid enough to believe you can step in and do a better job at almost anything in an NFL franchise.

If they let you be waterboy for the next game you probably be so fucking lost as to how to be effective at that job.

The thing is there is no script. These guys are wrong most of the time. In fact, looking at Trubs I'd say he is a guy that will suffer more by not playing. His downfall is experience and strong suit is his accuracy. He's not going to learn a thing by sitting on the bench watching the game like he did at UNC and practicing against backups.

BearbaFett · Aug 22, 2017

when the games count, all we really need is for our qb to be a game-manager and take care of the ball. our identity is forming around our solid D and running game.

it's not even a matter of glennon performing at a high level, its just a matter of not fucking up....and he's not doing a very good job at it so far. with whatever reps he has on sunday, he needs to show improvement and more poise behind the pocket. i honestly think he'll be fine and will do enough to keep the starting job. it's in the bears best interest to have both qbs perform well in the reps that are given to them.

modo · Aug 22, 2017

Myk said:
Duuhhh yeah boss, I've never seen a football game before or read anything about it.

You're a fucking idiot. Yes let's all just post Rah Rah posts. That's what sports forums are all about.

So you've watched a football game and believe you could step in and be a better GM coach or even a water boy.

Is like staying at a Holiday Inn Express.

modo · Aug 22, 2017

r1terrell23 said:
Your point is valid. But what's best for Trubs is unknown and the only way to find out is letting him play against some ones. I'd let Glennon play the first quarter, Trubs the second and third, and Sanchez the 4th.

That is not enough time to give Glennon.

They have reduced Sanchez to one series already.

Eventually they will give time to Trubinsky with the ones, but it had better be on the verge of naming him the permanent starter. Once you put him with the ones you have a real quarterback competition and you had better be prepared to pull the trigger on going with Trubisky.

What if he truly isn't ready. What if you have to pull him and put Glennon back in.

As I have stated in another thread the list of successful long term QBs that have been pulled for non-performance is short.

Putting someone in the line of fire before they are ready is not smart. It can potentially hurt that player's development and it can certainly hurt the team.

satchice · Aug 22, 2017

modo said:
This is a shallow, short sided view.

Don't you think there could be any other reason than to simply tank?

This is simply not about winning games. This is about what gives Trubisky the best chance of being the franchise QB for the future.

If the Bears wanted to tank they could have done it for cheaper.

Help me out here. I am trying to understand your point but I cant think of any situations where keeping a guy on the bench though the season and not letting him practice with the starters would help a guy become a franchise QB.

Logical, I would think the sooner he starts the better. With the only exception is if the O-line can not give him enough time to make decisions and he has to either force the ball out early or take sacks. I mean lets say he sits for 2 years and then is forced to start. If he starts making mistakes it would be safe to say they are his rookie mistakes and he needs to have playing time to master the fine details of being a starting QB. No matter how much game tape or practice he has he will never experience the same pressure and see the different defensive looks he would in a real game or even in a preseason game.

Mongo_76 · Aug 22, 2017

Interestingly, Glennon has got to play with the top receivers and made them all look worse. Meanwhile Trubisky has played with some scrubs who were on the bubble (Gentry, Thomson) and made them look good. Thomson now actually will likely make the active roster.

The Hawk · Aug 22, 2017

Myk said:
Again this is the coaches' failing. The #2 pick should've been getting time with the 1s if they plan on him ever being a starter.

I pretty much guarantee a player who has seen no game time will make mistakes the first year he does see game time. Even players who've been off a year with injury come back rusty. You're not going to fix his mistakes on a bench.

I agree with that. They already have a body of work regarding what Glennon can and can't do and he can't do much that is good. But Trubisky should have a decent chance to be evaluated on what he can do, good or bad. He isn't going to get that as a 3rd string qb and that would be stupid.

jonimus · Aug 22, 2017

r1terrell23 said:
The thing is there is no script. These guys are wrong most of the time. In fact, looking at Trubs I'd say he is a guy that will suffer more by not playing. His downfall is experience and strong suit is his accuracy. He's not going to learn a thing by sitting on the bench watching the game like he did at UNC and practicing against backups.

Sorry, but using UNC as an example is 100% against the point you're trying to make. The dude went from a no name to #2 pick in the draft from 1 season of playing after sitting on the bench as a backup for multiple seasons. Seems to me like maybe that did help his growth. Learn the offense, learn the reads, learn different looks - 1 year of sitting can only help him. The question is can he be damaged or can his development be hindered by starting too early. The coaches watch every throw of every practice. We watch 1 preseason game and family fest a week. To Modo's point, I think they have more intel on this matter than us.

Myk · Aug 22, 2017

modo said:
So you've watched a football game and believe you could step in and be a better GM coach or even a water boy.

Is like staying at a Holiday Inn Express.

Since when is commenting on an internet forum about how to handle a rookie QB trying to run a franchise?
At best it's a consultant who is pointing out there is no historical precedent to say starting a QB you thought was good enough to not only draft at #2 but move up to #2 to get him will ruin him. If he can't start game 1 this year he wasn't worth the pick.

Once you put him with the ones you have a real quarterback competition and you had better be prepared to pull the trigger on going with Trubisky.

Uh-oh, look who's playing GM now! I thought you hated when people did that on forums. I guess you only hate it when others do it and want to dictate their opinions.
So you're not really saying people should let the smarter coaches figure it out, you're saying to shut up because you don't agree.

If he isn't ready and you put Glennon (I'd prefer Sanchez) back in he deals with it. He watches films of his games and rights himself for the next time he starts.
Why do you think it matters whether he sits the first half of the year vs the 2nd half of the year? You're destroying his confidence telling him he is worse than Glennon as it is.
Oh noes!!!1 Rodgers played a game and went back to the bench. He's ruined forevers!!!111

Was Orton ruined forever because they handed his winning rookie season to Grossman to throw away the same as Orton would've? Did Grossman sitting for so long make him great?
Jim McMahon was surely ruined because he was allowed to be in a real competition for the starter position his rookie year. 85 was a crap season because he was in and out of games both for real injuries and sitting for part of games he was able to play in.

I don't think there is any worries about Glennon or Sanchez creating a QB controversy by relieving Trubisky.

Bearly · Aug 22, 2017

I didn't realize that this was an either or scenario. I'd like to see them both get 1st team reps next game.

I'd like to see a 1st team D ignore Trubisky's scrambling the way they do Glennon.

Myk · Aug 22, 2017

jonimus said:
Sorry, but using UNC as an example is 100% against the point you're trying to make. The dude went from a no name to #2 pick in the draft from 1 season of playing after sitting on the bench as a backup for multiple seasons. Seems to me like maybe that did help his growth. Learn the offense, learn the reads, learn different looks - 1 year of sitting can only help him. The question is can he be damaged or can his development be hindered by starting too early. The coaches watch every throw of every practice. We watch 1 preseason game and family fest a week. To Modo's point, I think they have more intel on this matter than us.

Actually people who went to practices said Glennon has always looked worse than Trubisky.
It would be one hell of a conspiracy to keep Glennon from playing well whenever people outside of the coaches are watching. I'd love for that to be the case because I would like Trubisky to get brought in slowly but I highly doubt that's what's going on.

If sitting improves a player shouldn't Glennon be great by now?

Fox hasn't decide which QB to give team 1 reps

Based

Formerly Hawkeye

CCS Hall of Fame

85in25

CCS Hall of Fame

85in25

Based

85in25

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Based

Based

Well-known member

My favorite teams

Well-known member

Well-known member

My favorite teams

Well-known member

85in25

Dissed membered

My favorite teams

85in25