Victorious Patrick Mahomes Thanks Bears For Drafting Mitchell Trubisky

Urlacher_24

Member
147
96
12
And if we had Watson we maybe win the superbowl in 2018 and we get to atleast the NFC championship game this year. Trubisky was Nagys #3 rated QB in 2017 according to Laurence Holmes.

I didn't see anywhere that had Mahomes number 1 but I didn't see a place that had Mahomes over Watson yet we know of atleast 2 teams that were planning on taking him before Watson.
Yeah tbh I wanted Watson first then trubs 2nd if Watson has been taken. Mahomes scared me in his play style I kep thinking he might be great or a turnover machine lol. So I was going to be happy with Watson or Trubs one of those two are who I wanted. I was happy when they drafted Trubs but most def unhappy with freaking trading up one damned spot to do it. Pace would still catch criticism for this draft but not as bad had he not traded up one spot for it. Smh.
 

Urlacher_24

Member
147
96
12
The guy banged & knocked up a cheer leader(and was married). He then helped run a pill mill out of the Saints locker room. And then of course lied about the Bounty Program.

Edit: that's only 2 out of 32 teams too.

Mahomes was Nagy's dream QB, this has been verified by the Chiefs.
Bears need to let Nagy draft the next qb. If Pace let’s him.
 

remydat

CCS Hall of Fame
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '19
39,469
16,281
135
Meh. I don't believe half the stuff said about drafts

either before picks like "The Browns are itching to move up to take Trubisky"

nor after picks including "I would have picked Mahomes" after the fact.

Possibly true but none of it is here nor there when considering Pace moved up to be SURE he got HIS QB and he flubbed it. I didn't have a problem with the trade-up then and I actually still don't. If he had picked Mahomes or even Watson, none of us would be reasonably complaining.
I had a problem with the trade up. I could understand if there was a clear cut No 1 guy but there wasnt. The guy he fell in love with had one year starting. Mahomes was a project in a system that struggled to produce NFL QBs and Watson had accuracy and turnover concerns. Trubisky was simply not head and shoulders above everyone else so there is a fundamental flaw if that was the conclusion Pace reached.

Especially when there is now talk that Fox loved Watson, Pace had Mahomes as 2 and Ragone had Mahomes I think. If everyone in that building is not 100% convinced about someone then the smart thing to do is stand pat as at best all 3 guys will be there and at worst 2 out 3 will be there.

So there is a level of hubris involved where Pace ignored the fact there was no overwhelming consensus and basically said fuck it I am going with the guy I like and wasting draft picks to do it. Didnt even bother to let Fox know probably because Fox had a different guy. Say what you will about Fox but he had decades of experience over Pace and Pace just ignored it because he thought he was the smartest guy in the room.

As with the Greeks, hubris tends to result in tragedy. In short, whether he made the right or wrong shot, his process was flawed. Akin to taking a 30 foot shot with 20 seconds left. It is a dumb shot whether it goes in or not unless you are Steph Curry and Pace had no reason to believe he was.
 
Last edited:

remydat

CCS Hall of Fame
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '19
39,469
16,281
135
Just goes to show how there's no exact science to the draft. Shit some of our very own "draft gurus" (Windy and Remy to name a couple) said Trubisky was the most accurate QB in that draft but do you think they think that now?
The stupidity in this logic is if there is no exact science to the draft you shouldnt be trading up one spot to draft someone you basically just admitted you cant be sure about.

You trade up to draft slam dunks. Why? Because drafting is an inexact science so more often than not you are better off having more lottery tickets not less.

If Trubs was Andrew Luck then by all means trade up. Luck was described as the best QB prosepct in decades. Instead you trading up for a one year wonder with huge questions in a draft process that once again is an inexact science. Pretty stupid if you ask me.
 

Bort

Well-known member
1,385
1,386
70
Literally no one was taking mahomes in the top 5.

There wasn't a clear consensus QB, you're right, but it was never Mahomes who was in debate as that guy. It was always Watson vs. Mitch.
Literally I was posting on this website that someone should take Mahomes in the top 5. If a competent team like the Chiefs or Saints had a top 5 overall pick, Mahomes would have gone in the top 5.
 

Monster

Well-known member
13,295
7,340
75
Yeah but Houston drafted after Chiefs so never really had a chance. Bears and Niners biggest losers as if either had draft Patty, they probably would be SB champions one of the last 2 years.
Chiefs traded up with the 27th pick... my point being any of the other 26 would have moved had they had a crystal ball.
but hindsight is pointless..
 

remydat

CCS Hall of Fame
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '19
39,469
16,281
135
Chiefs traded up with the 27th pick... my point being any of the other 26 would have moved had they had a crystal ball.
but hindsight is pointless..
Yes but Bears didnt have to trade up so misleading to lump them together.

Pace fuck up at 3 far worse than the team with 25th pick not trading up.
 

TheMarshallPlan

Ladies: Libertarians Do It Better!
506
-19
38
My favorite teams
Chicago Bears
Am I the only one who thinks that if the draft was held again today that Pace would still take Mitch?
 

Outlaw Josey Cutler

CCS Donator
Donator
3,315
1,777
70
My favorite teams
Chicago Bears Penn State Nittany Lions
I had a problem with the trade up. I could understand if there was a clear cut No 1 guy but there wasnt.
But there was a clear cut number 1 guy. Don't conflate pre-draft analysis by media to in-the-war-room GMs and their scouting teams.

I mean, you might have a point if this was the draft of Jamarcus Russell, Brady Quinn, Drew Stanton and Trent Edwards. History would prove no GM picking QB that year was going to look good. And before anyone says the obvious "hindsight is 20/20", I am talking in the context of a GM whose job it is to find the right QB for his team in the position to get the pick of the litter first in line.

I honestly wonder if you would have an issue with the trade-up if Mahomes was running the Bears offense and hitting no-look passes. If you did, I would heartily disagree. As it stands in our universe, Pace's main fault for me was not trading up but picking the worst of the three no-brain first rounders. Just because draft gurus couldn't agree on who was best doesn't absolve Pace of blame for failing to identify and draft the best.
 
Last edited:
146
90
12
Literally no one was taking mahomes in the top 5.

There wasn't a clear consensus QB, you're right, but it was never Mahomes who was in debate as that guy. It was always Watson vs. Mitch.

I have to wonder if anyone other than the Bears was taking Mitch in the top 5.

Anyway, of the three, we appear to have drafted the least talented one.

Just a darn shame.
 

remydat

CCS Hall of Fame
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '19
39,469
16,281
135
But there was a clear cut number 1 guy. Don't conflate pre-draft analysis by media to in-the-war-room GMs and their scouting teams.

I mean, you might have a point if this was the draft of Jamarcus Russell, Brady Quinn, Drew Stanton and Trent Edwards. History would prove no GM picking QB that year was going to look good. And before anyone says the obvious "hindsight is 20/20", I am talking in the context of a GM whose job it is to find the right QB for his team in the position to get the pick of the litter first in line.

I honestly wonder if you would have an issue with the trade-up if Mahomes was running the Bears offense and hitting no-look passes. If you did, I would heartily disagree. As it stands in our universe, Pace's main fault for me was not trading up but picking the worst of the three no-brain first rounders. Just because draft gurus couldn't agree on who was best doesn't absolve Pace of blame for failing to identify and draft the best.
There wasnt. I referenced the fact Fox and Ragone apparently wanted someone else. There was disagreement within the Bears that mirrored the disagreement across the league. This was not a situation where a guy like Like was number 1 by everyone.

As I criticized it at the time so not hindsight. Doesnt matter who they picked. It was discussed ad naseum in several threads at the time.
 

ijustposthere

Message Board Hero
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '20
27,009
19,004
105
My favorite teams
Chicago Cubs Chicago Bulls Chicago Bears Chicago Blackhawks Michigan Wolverines, Purdue Boilermakers
https://www.si.com/nfl/2017/04/12/browns-top-pick-myles-garrett-mitchell-trubisky
https://www.cleveland.com/browns/2017/04/browns_buzz_on_trading_up_myle.html
https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/...-taking-trubisky-over-garrett-with-no-1-pick/
https://www.sbnation.com/2017/4/27/...itchell-trubisky-adam-schefter-nfl-draft-2017
https://bleacherreport.com/articles...ll-potential-no-1-pick-in-nfl-draft-by-browns

The trade up probably wasn't required but done to prevent the Browns from doing so ahead of us. Once Mitch is gone, Browns then don't trade up a couple spots for Mahomes and trade away their next 1st rounder (12) to Houston (Watson). They wanted Mitch near where we were drafting and Pace knew it because they were talking.
Browns interested in a QB, and the Bears actively traded up to draft him. Just terrible.
 

Alpha Male

Well-known member
3,083
945
70
That's absolutely incorrect and a false narrative even if we use the chart.

2600 point 2nd pick vs 2600 points within a few points up or down depending on how you value a following years 4th. Use draft position by pick # and not rote draft position as comp picks affect values. 2600 vs #3 + #67 + #111 + next year 4th which is worth about 35 points =2562.

At full value of where the 4th ended up instead of a lowered value to 1/2 the middle of the round, which is the common practice, it's 2600 vs 2613 max uncompensated value. You just don't get closer that that in large value trades. Considering trades like this often require a premium, Pace did fine on value. Need is a completely different question.
the 3, 67, 111 are 2527 pts alone. They gave a third the following year and thats what made the trade lopsided. If they had added another lower round pick it might have been fair. But if i was a gm i would never give up that much to move one spot no matter where I am on the board. And i remember getting in to many arguments with you and you were pretty adamant they needed to trade up. Have you changed your position since then?
 

Alpha Male

Well-known member
3,083
945
70
The stupidity in this logic is if there is no exact science to the draft you shouldnt be trading up one spot to draft someone you basically just admitted you cant be sure about.

You trade up to draft slam dunks. Why? Because drafting is an inexact science so more often than not you are better off having more lottery tickets not less.

If Trubs was Andrew Luck then by all means trade up. Luck was described as the best QB prosepct in decades. Instead you trading up for a one year wonder with huge questions in a draft process that once again is an inexact science. Pretty stupid if you ask me.
100% agree on this. You only trade up if you know its a sure thing. manning and luck were sure things. Trubs was an inexperienced project.
 

SilenceS

Moderator
Staff member
Donator
20,166
8,316
105
Literally no one was taking mahomes in the top 5.

There wasn't a clear consensus QB, you're right, but it was never Mahomes who was in debate as that guy. It was always Watson vs. Mitch.
I know according to your thoughts. GMs just throw darts at the wall on draft day. KC never target him or anything.
 

SilenceS

Moderator
Staff member
Donator
20,166
8,316
105
Yeah because trusting anything Sean Payton has to say is a good idea. The dude is classless and lies thru his fucking teeth every damn day. Only retards would believe this fuck.
Seems salty. Payton is a top offensive coach in the league. May want to trust his process on people over others.
 

roadwarrior_joe

Well-known member
1,560
593
70
The GM should never be allowed to pick a QB without the HC having a whole lot of input into the choice. To critical of a chioce that has a long term impact on the teams future. Pace thought he was the smartest guy in the room, went behind Fox's back. Thouhgt he just stole the next Drew Brees, and he exposed himself for what he is. Not a very good GM.
 

Midwaymonster75

Well-known member
952
518
68
I could be languishing at the bottom of the NFC North and running for my life after every snap behind a terrible offensive line. I’m so glad I get to throw to Tyreek (Hill) and Sammy (Watkins) my whole career instead of whoever the hell is on the Bears.”
We can't change the Mitch selection, it's the part about the terrible Oline that could have been changed in the past 4 years. Maybe next year! Ha!
The Oline stuff is a bunch of bullshit until it isnt. I heard the same thing about Cutler. "he needs a better offensive line". He got one and was still fucking terrible. If we fix the line and Scrubisky turns into a Pro bowl QB then we have our answer. Until then I dont want to hear about the OLIne. Elite QBs still perform at a high level inspire of their bad line.
 

TheMarshallPlan

Ladies: Libertarians Do It Better!
506
-19
38
My favorite teams
Chicago Bears
This is the way I see it kemosabe.

If the draft was held today here's how I think it would go down:

1) Cleveland - Mahomes
2) San Fran - Watson
3) Chicago - Mitch

So you see? Like my man Rust Cohle says, "Time is a flat circle. Everything we've ever done or will do, we're gonna do over and over and over again."

Therefore we're going to see Mitch walk up to that podium and hold up that #1 jersey over and over and over and over again.
 

Top