So which QB do we think will be available at #9?

[mav1234]

9 minutes ago, TheCasillas said:

How about 8+ page threads labeled Bryce Young Thread on the Chicago Bears forum, wouldnt that be an ideal place where this convo would take place?

 

Surely you came across that when you were scouring. Majority of that thread is about the concern around Fields long term, and they could probably get more for Fields then they could trading down now. My favorite line in that thread: Never forget the Bears passed on Dan Marino twice in 1983 because they had their guy in Jim McMahon.

 

The other piece they widely speak of is that fields is NOT Poles/Eberflus's guy... they came into the franchise with him in place already. They devoted a lot of resources this past offseason to help Fields develop more into a passer.  They aren't seeing the ROI on that.

I'd be surprised if Young or Stroud became Marino but who knows.

Keep in mind we also have a Sam Darnold thread. Does that mean our fan base wants to keep Sam Darnold and pass on drafting a QB?

As to the last comment, this is why I could see them going in a different direction.  If you trade Fields, though, and Fields improves while the QB you draft #1 falls on their face, you basically lose your job the next year.  You may get another year even if Fields is bad to use the pieces you got for the #1 to go after a different QB.

[TheCasillas]

1 minute ago, Varking said:

You linked to our forum. I’m asking what is the Chicago Bears forum. Windy City?

the link is in that message. I hyperlinked it. However, here you go: 

[mav1234]

Just now, TheCasillas said:

the link is in that message. I hyperlinked it. However, here you go: 

I'm only seeing plain text in your post you linked, fwiw.  But maybe that's something on my end.

[TheCasillas]

1 minute ago, mav1234 said:

I'd be surprised if Young or Stroud became Marino but who knows.

Keep in mind we also have a Sam Darnold thread. Does that mean our fan base wants to keep Sam Darnold and pass on drafting a QB?

As to the last comment, this is why I could see them going in a different direction.  If you trade Fields, though, and Fields improves while the QB you draft #1 falls on their face, you basically lose your job the next year.  You may get another year even if Fields is bad to use the pieces you got for the #1 to go after a different QB.

I would be too. I am simply stating that Bears fans know better than many of us on here. That piece about Poles and Eberflus... how many people have taken that into consideration in this thread as opposed to just stating that Fields "play good for a few weeks"

[TheCasillas]

1 minute ago, mav1234 said:

I'm only seeing plain text in your post you linked, fwiw.  But maybe that's something on my end.

something is going on with the huddle... im getting an error when posting hyperlinks. it's the bears forum "chicago city sports" 
 

[Krovvy]

Here's a Windy City Gridiron thread for example.

[UNCrules2187]

7 minutes ago, mav1234 said:

I'd be surprised if Young or Stroud became Marino but who knows.

Keep in mind we also have a Sam Darnold thread. Does that mean our fan base wants to keep Sam Darnold and pass on drafting a QB?

As to the last comment, this is why I could see them going in a different direction.  If you trade Fields, though, and Fields improves while the QB you draft #1 falls on their face, you basically lose your job the next year.  You may get another year even if Fields is bad to use the pieces you got for the #1 to go after a different QB.

Eh the flip side is you keep Fields and he tops out as a mediocre passer and the QB who goes #1 becomes the next superstar. You probably lose your job then too. 

[mav1234]

5 minutes ago, TheCasillas said:

I would be too. I am simply stating that Bears fans know better than many of us on here. That piece about Poles and Eberflus... how many people have taken that into consideration in this thread as opposed to just stating that Fields "play good for a few weeks"

A few of us have... some place... Or I'm pretty sure a couple of us have said "you can use the assets you got from trading the #1 to move up next year if needed"

1 minute ago, UNCrules2187 said:

Eh the flip side is you keep Fields and he tops out as a mediocre passer and the QB who goes #1 becomes the next superstar. You probably lose your job then too. 

I doubt it. There's virtually no chance that whomever goes #1 is a superstar QB next year that lights the league on fire. Rookies just don't do that. If your draft pick does well AND Fields develops it doesn't matter. If Fields fails but you have lots of pieces to build around, you reload next year.

If you take a QB #1, you are committed to them for at least 3 years...

[TheCasillas]

Not sure whats going on but when I hyperlink I get this: 

[UNCrules2187]

2 minutes ago, mav1234 said:

A few of us have... some place... Or I'm pretty sure a couple of us have said "you can use the assets you got from trading the #1 to move up next year if needed"

I doubt it. There's virtually no chance that whomever goes #1 is a superstar QB next year that lights the league on fire. Rookies just don't do that. If your draft pick does well AND Fields develops it doesn't matter. If Fields fails but you have lots of pieces to build around, you reload next year.

If you take a QB #1, you are committed to them for at least 3 years...

Missed the part where you said "you lose your job the next year". If they trade Fields and draft a QB at 1, no chance the coach/FO would lose their job the following year unless Fields immediately won MVP with his new team and the Bears went 0-17 with the rookie looking like a Leaf-level bust. 

[CRA]

52 minutes ago, TheCasillas said:

There is no way you can compare the way Cam came into the league vs Fields. There is reason for doubt for Fields. Cam came in and dominated and never looked back.... until 2017....

That revisionist history and hindsight though. 

Cam had tons of question marks coming into the league.  More than Fields.  And best case, just as many questions.  Carolina gambled on him because they didn't have a QB and importantly tailored the team around him day 1.  Which was the right call given where Carolina found themselves. 

now, that's not an argument Fields will be better.   We know Cam's career/results.   Little chance of that. 

[Varking]

Just looked at that 8 page thread and it’s mostly 3 folks saying they would trade Fields for 2-3 firsts and keep going with rookies on 5 year deals until the rest of he team is better, and the others arguing over if they should be banned or not. This is hardly anyway to get a consensus. 
 

The one thing they seem to want more than anything is to get more picks, including trading down. 
 

Also, that cite is a cesspool and often times is much worse than our free speech area here, which is why I stopped visiting there. 

[mav1234]

12 minutes ago, UNCrules2187 said:

Missed the part where you said "you lose your job the next year". If they trade Fields and draft a QB at 1, no chance the coach/FO would lose their job the following year unless Fields immediately won MVP with his new team and the Bears went 0-17 with the rookie looking like a Leaf-level bust. 

I could see an owner moving on if they limp to a similar record with a different QB.  Maybe you're right and they'd get another year after that, but I think it is a huge gamble to move on from a QB most seem to think is improving.

[mav1234]

15 minutes ago, TheCasillas said:

Not sure whats going on but when I hyperlink I get this: 

The Huddle is behaving VERY weird for me today. Keep getting weird freezes, unable to quote posts, etc. Not sure if my ad-blocker is acting up or what.