Rate Ryan Poles Draft

satchice

Well-known member
Joined:
Aug 21, 2010
Posts:
3,475
Liked Posts:
1,231
Location:
Schaumburg
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
There are some things you just can’t control.

There weren’t any WR or LT prospects that you could pencil in as starters available at 39 so Poles went with Gordon and Brisker, both of which will likely be very good starters.

Reaching for a WR or LT in the 2nd would have been the mistake.

I agree that Velus Jones was a terrible pick in the 3rd, though.

And I like most of the day 3 picks. Some excellent athletes with legit upside.
There weren’t any WR that you could pencil in at 39? What about the 52nd pick a legit #1 receiver Pickens? He would instantly be our best WR.
 

WestCoastBearsFan

Well-known member
Joined:
Dec 25, 2017
Posts:
16,350
Liked Posts:
11,069
My favorite teams
  1. Los Angeles Lakers
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Los Angeles Kings
  1. Clemson Tigers
C-. Liked the volume approach on day 3, but they didn’t do enough to help Justin the first two days.
 

BaBaBlacksheep

Just a kid from the burbs...
CCS Hall of Fame '21
Joined:
Aug 20, 2012
Posts:
29,184
Liked Posts:
37,237
Ask me in two years. I would say I certainly hope the teams with multiple first round picks had a better draft than the Bears. Would be pretty pathetic if they didn’t.
 

HearshotKDS

Well-known member
Joined:
Sep 9, 2012
Posts:
3,947
Liked Posts:
3,973
Location:
Shanghai
B-, Like the picks although wish Poles had found a way to trade down in the 3rd and I think he probably still gets Jones. Unfortunately there were decent runs on the Offensive positions the Bears needed before they picked, so I think this draft makes Poles inability to find a better solution at RG than Mustipher/Dozier rotation look even worse.
 

TL1961

Well-known member
Joined:
Apr 24, 2013
Posts:
29,063
Liked Posts:
15,845
There weren’t any WR that you could pencil in at 39? What about the 52nd pick a legit #1 receiver Pickens? He would instantly be our best WR.
He had red flags all over him.

Can the Bears afford another Anthony miller right now?
 

Bort

Well-known member
Joined:
Dec 19, 2014
Posts:
1,693
Liked Posts:
2,086
There weren’t any WR that you could pencil in at 39? What about the 52nd pick a legit #1 receiver Pickens? He would instantly be our best WR.

Yes. You can’t pencil in as a starter a guy who most teams passed on for being too much of a head case.
 

The Big Grabowski

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Aug 21, 2010
Posts:
1,509
Liked Posts:
1,859
Location:
Austin
I’d give Poles a solid B.

Both 2nds were great value and filled a need with day 1 starters.

Jones has playmaker potential but also question marks. If he hits, it’s a fantastic draft.

There’s a lot of upside with the day 3 picks. Much needed developmental LT and center depth. OL to compete at RG. Love the upside at DE and FS. And competition at P.

RB was the only pick I didn’t care for. Would have preferred taking a WR instead.

I thought Poles made a lot of progress stocking the roster with limited resources. He clearly had a plan but remained flexible with the way positions fell.
 

satchice

Well-known member
Joined:
Aug 21, 2010
Posts:
3,475
Liked Posts:
1,231
Location:
Schaumburg
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
The goal was not to improve the offense, the goal was to improve the team.

The first two picks have the potential to significantly improve a secondary that killed the team last year. The fact that they are not WRs or OL does not mean they're bad picks or it is a failed draft.

The WR in the 3rd? Yes, a surprise pick. But many here would have been happy with drafting Calvin Austin there, but the consensus among GMs in the league was that Austin wasn't worth taking before 138, 67 picks lower than fans wanted. But they will criticize a GM taking a different guy 67 picks too high because of where some TV draft guru said he should go. Yes, his lack of production is a concern. But his special teams potential is real. A dangerous return man is a weapon, too.

Before the draft we had a discussion here that this is a good draft for late rounders due to the increased number of players coming out this year after the extra year of eligibility. Poles added 5 picks with trades. One clown here will automatically criticize any and every trade down, but most will at least realize when the Bears need to fill a lot of spots on the roster, this is not a bad move.

No, it won't net three quality starters from Round 7 but they're adding a lot of candidates on the OL and that's not the worst thing in the world.

The LB from Miami? We'll see. Some predict he's a steal.
The RB? Maybe they see a Tariq Cohen replacement as he has good speed and can run routes.

Lots of unknowns, that is fair to say. But I see no need for ripping our dicks off.
The secondary killed the team last year? Really, because the team that I watched last year, The Chicago Bears, were killed by the offense.

Fact:
When the bears scored more then 19 points they were 7-3 in 2020 and 6-4 in 2021.
When the bears score less then 20 points they are 1-6 in 2020 and 1-8 in 2021


League average is 23 points per game. So, if they could just be average they will win a lot more games with the current D.

Last season they averaged 16.3 points a game and they gave up 21.4
Is it logical to say lets improve the secondary and only give up 19.8 ppg and then we will only lose by a 3.5 ppg??? NO
It is logical to close the gap! they need to score more points!

Its almost like half this board doesn't actually watch the games!
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Myk

didshereallysaythat

Well-known member
Joined:
Aug 14, 2011
Posts:
18,168
Liked Posts:
8,206
Like everything else, we just have to wait and see. Tell you one thing though. If Belichick takes Jones in the 3rd round, it's considered genius. If a rookie GM does it, then it's stupid. Point is, you gotta earn the trust of the fans.

I like most of the picks from the standpoint of what I saw during the college year and what the Bears need and want to do. Brisker is a really great impact player. He just flies to the ball. It seems the Bears are trying to be a much faster team.
 

IBleedBearsBlood

Well-known member
Joined:
Aug 21, 2012
Posts:
7,647
Liked Posts:
2,813
I’m just glad we got some attitude players. You gotta play this game with attitude and emotion!!!
 

satchice

Well-known member
Joined:
Aug 21, 2010
Posts:
3,475
Liked Posts:
1,231
Location:
Schaumburg
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
Yes. You can’t pencil in as a starter a guy who most teams passed on for being too much of a head case.
You are making an assumption. Maybe, he fell because of the torn ACL that lend to the lack of production last year. Maybe the rumors of him being a headcase aren't true? I mean the Pittsburgh Steelers GM drafted him and he a VERY good at his job, in fact he might be one of the best GMs in the NFL. The Steelers OC, Canada said he had Pickens as the best receiver in the class before the injury and spent 2 days with him at his pro day and saw nothing changed.

Maybe your right to listen to the internet rumor that he is a spoiled kid and not to draft him because he might hurt someone's felling's. We will find out in a couple months.
 

satchice

Well-known member
Joined:
Aug 21, 2010
Posts:
3,475
Liked Posts:
1,231
Location:
Schaumburg
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
He had red flags all over him.

Can the Bears afford another Anthony miller right now?
What were the red flags? I know the ACL tear was legit, but he did come back in 9 months for the final 4 games, that shows me high character. I also heard the unnamed internet source saying that he was spoiled but did not hear the whole story, if you know could you please share? The Steeler's seemed to vet him pretty well and they seem very happy that he fell.
 

Bort

Well-known member
Joined:
Dec 19, 2014
Posts:
1,693
Liked Posts:
2,086
You are making an assumption. Maybe, he fell because of the torn ACL that lend to the lack of production last year. Maybe the rumors of him being a headcase aren't true? I mean the Pittsburgh Steelers GM drafted him and he a VERY good at his job, in fact he might be one of the best GMs in the NFL. The Steelers OC, Canada said he had Pickens as the best receiver in the class before the injury and spent 2 days with him at his pro day and saw nothing changed.

Maybe your right to listen to the internet rumor that he is a spoiled kid and not to draft him because he might hurt someone's felling's. We will find out in a couple months.
Uhhhh, it’s not just some guys on Twitter saying Pickens has huge character issues, it’s multiple news articles quoting actual NFL scouts…
 

satchice

Well-known member
Joined:
Aug 21, 2010
Posts:
3,475
Liked Posts:
1,231
Location:
Schaumburg
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
Legit #1 WRs don’t fall to pick 52…lol. Nutcases do though…
You seem to be a WOKE person, so please enlighten me why didn't you want him? what did he say or do that made him undraftable? Do you agree on his talent level he was a 1st rounder?
 

Top