What do you guys think about trying to draft a starting QB?

[Deleted]

Aug 25, 2016 6:35:32 GMT -6 riczaj01 said:

Aug 25, 2016 6:15:03 GMT -6 JABF said:

I'm more curious than anything about the future QB situation.  I figure this is the litmus test on Ryan Pace.  He may be no better than previous GMs we've had over the past 30 years.  Or he could be better.  How much better is something I'm curious about.   We talk about player's "ceilings" all the time.  I think there is also a GM "ceiling" and let's just see what Pace's is.

One key measurement (for me anyway) is to see how he handles the franchise QB situation for the post-Cutler era.  That will go along ways to defining Ryan Pace's Chicago Bears tenure... to me anyway.

I understand the view of some posters, that if Pace builds a strong enough team, then that would allow us to be successful with a bit more of a mediocre QB.  I understand that, but I don't buy into that belief totally.  Sure, a stronger team helps.  That's obvious.  But you still need a decent QB too.  You don't need a Tom Brady level QB.  But you can't have a crap QB either.  There is a threshold of talent needed in the guy you allow to run the Chicago Bears offense.  

Only time will tell though.  I'm just sitting back, watching how the Pace/Fox era unfolds.  It's too early to tell much after only 1 season of play.  This season I hope to see some improvement in the team.  Then next year I hope to see us bring in a young QB through the draft.  After the 3rd season (2017), we will know what we have in both Pace and Fox.  That's when I will have a final judgement on the pair.

If you want a consistent playoff team, and one that is always in the hunt for a SB, then you need a great qb. Rogers, Brees, Roth, Brady, Manning, and newer ones like Russell Wilson and Luck, allow their teams to lose other key players to FA and then replace them and still be in the running. Pace needs to find "that qb". 

Yup. Don't remember what the stats are but there are always a few QBs who together hold the majority of wins in any given era. The stats support it and it is why teams spend so much in resources to get a good QB. It makes a difference. No doubt in mind.

[Deleted]

Does the FO have the talent where they can build a successful system on offense to use just a system QB like they did with Josh M 2 years ago? In a scenario like that couldn't Jay thrive as a game manager.

[dachuckster]

Aug 24, 2016 20:53:55 GMT -6 blueshoes said:

Whether it's by the draft , or by FA , if the player they want is available then they need to strike immediately . But pick a kid who has proven he can THROW while in college , and not some Jim Harbaugh type who handed off during his college career .

I don't think the FA route will work for a QB.  Likewise with a trade.  The price will be exorbitant. 

[Deleted]

Aug 25, 2016 11:27:11 GMT -6 malagabears said:

Does the FO have the talent where they can build a successful system on offense to use just a system QB like they did with Josh M 2 years ago? In a scenario like that couldn't Jay thrive as a game manager.

Trust me when I say I am not a fan of Trestman, but the guy knew how to get the most out of a QB. Josh is a journeyman but under Trestman and his QB friendly O, he looked great.
Trestman second year was a complete and total disaster, not because he forgot offense but because he lost the team.

[riczaj01]

Aug 25, 2016 11:14:12 GMT -6 @bearsinhouston said:

Aug 25, 2016 6:35:32 GMT -6 riczaj01 said:

If you want a consistent playoff team, and one that is always in the hunt for a SB, then you need a great qb. Rogers, Brees, Roth, Brady, Manning, and newer ones like Russell Wilson and Luck, allow their teams to lose other key players to FA and then replace them and still be in the running. Pace needs to find "that qb". 

Yup. Don't remember what the stats are but there are always a few QBs who together hold the majority of wins in any given era. The stats support it and it is why teams spend so much in resources to get a good QB. It makes a difference. No doubt in mind.

Well the last 15 years
There has been 9 SB winning QB's. 
Prev 15 years was 11 QB's

20 qb's won 30 sb's. so 2 out of 3 qb's. So if you get a great qb you'll likely end up w/at least a shot at multiple sb's. 

[mikegolf]

The way I see it, if you don't play you can't win. They should be drafting a mid rounder every year until they think they have a guy to develop. Recently our team has been so empty of talent that every draft pick was needed to improve. Now this QB replacement issue is sneaking up on us. Can Culter play till 36?39? Does he even want to? We have a unique opportunity that Bears fans are not used to, we can develop a QB. We better take advantage of it.

[Deleted]

Aug 25, 2016 14:36:13 GMT -6 mikegolf said:

The way I see it, if you don't play you can't win.

This explains why I consistently don't win the lottery.

[Deleted]

Aug 25, 2016 6:15:03 GMT -6 JABF said:

Aug 25, 2016 3:26:35 GMT -6 germansbombedph said:

I agree and I don't see us signing him.

For us, it'll be Cutler and from Cutler we'll go to 7 different Starters within 2 years. It's da Bears way to do it. We all know it will happen and many will see how good Cutler was for us (as sad as it might be).

I'm more curious than anything about the future QB situation.  I figure this is the litmus test on Ryan Pace.  He may be no better than previous GMs we've had over the past 30 years.  Or he could be better.  How much better is something I'm curious about.   We talk about player's "ceilings" all the time.  I think there is also a GM "ceiling" and let's just see what Pace's is.

One key measurement (for me anyway) is to see how he handles the franchise QB situation for the post-Cutler era.  That will go along ways to defining Ryan Pace's Chicago Bears tenure... to me anyway.

I understand the view of some posters, that if Pace builds a strong enough team, then that would allow us to be successful with a bit more of a mediocre QB.  I understand that, but I don't buy into that belief totally.  Sure, a stronger team helps.  That's obvious.  But you still need a decent QB too.  You don't need a Tom Brady level QB.  But you can't have a crap QB either.  There is a threshold of talent needed in the guy you allow to run the Chicago Bears offense.  

Only time will tell though.  I'm just sitting back, watching how the Pace/Fox era unfolds.  It's too early to tell much after only 1 season of play.  This season I hope to see some improvement in the team.  Then next year I hope to see us bring in a young QB through the draft.  After the 3rd season (2017), we will know what we have in both Pace and Fox.  That's when I will have a final judgement on the pair.

Yeah, I would agree on both points.  Elway's ability to maneuver in the draft to get Lynch into his pipeline is an example of the type of aggressive move that may finally be needed to get our next QB lined up and in the pipeline.  It has to come sooner or later because I don't believe they'll go another route other than that one.

The progress in the team throughout this season and the play of the younger players will tell us a lot about where we stand by the time FA and the 2017 draft role around.  From the early opinions being rendered it sounds like it may not be a great year for NFL ready top QB which to me means a decent project to develop may be had later in round one or in two.

The one thing I do feel Phil Emery was not off base about is that the chances of finding starting caliber talent after the first two rounds diminishes to almost nothing.

[dachuckster]

Aug 25, 2016 21:39:57 GMT -6 @soulman said:

Aug 25, 2016 6:15:03 GMT -6 JABF said:

I'm more curious than anything about the future QB situation.  I figure this is the litmus test on Ryan Pace.  He may be no better than previous GMs we've had over the past 30 years.  Or he could be better.  How much better is something I'm curious about.   We talk about player's "ceilings" all the time.  I think there is also a GM "ceiling" and let's just see what Pace's is.

One key measurement (for me anyway) is to see how he handles the franchise QB situation for the post-Cutler era.  That will go along ways to defining Ryan Pace's Chicago Bears tenure... to me anyway.

I understand the view of some posters, that if Pace builds a strong enough team, then that would allow us to be successful with a bit more of a mediocre QB.  I understand that, but I don't buy into that belief totally.  Sure, a stronger team helps.  That's obvious.  But you still need a decent QB too.  You don't need a Tom Brady level QB.  But you can't have a crap QB either.  There is a threshold of talent needed in the guy you allow to run the Chicago Bears offense.  

Only time will tell though.  I'm just sitting back, watching how the Pace/Fox era unfolds.  It's too early to tell much after only 1 season of play.  This season I hope to see some improvement in the team.  Then next year I hope to see us bring in a young QB through the draft.  After the 3rd season (2017), we will know what we have in both Pace and Fox.  That's when I will have a final judgement on the pair.

Yeah, I would agree on both points.  Elway's ability to maneuver in the draft to get Lynch into his pipeline is an example of the type of aggressive move that may finally be needed to get our next QB lined up and in the pipeline.  It has to come sooner or later because I don't believe they'll go another route other than that one.

The progress in the team throughout this season and the play of the younger players will tell us a lot about where we stand by the time FA and the 2017 draft role around.  From the early opinions being rendered it sounds like it may not be a great year for NFL ready top QB which to me means a decent project to develop may be had later in round one or in two.

The one thing I do feel Phil Emery was not off base about is that the chances of finding starting caliber talent after the first two rounds diminishes to almost nothing.

I did some research a year or so ago on QBs who had won more than one SB.  A disproportionate number of that group weren't just drafted in the first 2 rounds, they were drafted in the first 5 or 10 picks in the first.

[Deleted]

Aug 25, 2016 22:56:56 GMT -6 dachuckster said:

Aug 25, 2016 21:39:57 GMT -6 @soulman said:

Yeah, I would agree on both points.  Elway's ability to maneuver in the draft to get Lynch into his pipeline is an example of the type of aggressive move that may finally be needed to get our next QB lined up and in the pipeline.  It has to come sooner or later because I don't believe they'll go another route other than that one.

The progress in the team throughout this season and the play of the younger players will tell us a lot about where we stand by the time FA and the 2017 draft role around.  From the early opinions being rendered it sounds like it may not be a great year for NFL ready top QB which to me means a decent project to develop may be had later in round one or in two.

The one thing I do feel Phil Emery was not off base about is that the chances of finding starting caliber talent after the first two rounds diminishes to almost nothing.

I did some research a year or so ago on QBs who had won more than one SB.  A disproportionate number of that group weren't just drafted in the first 2 rounds, they were drafted in the first 5 or 10 picks in the first.

That's not at all surprising chuck.  I've not done the research you did but my hunch would have led me to think that was probably what would come of it.  An NFL QB may have one of the toughest jobs in all of sports these days if not the toughest.  With the speed of the game and all of the information they need to process they practically need a mini computer inside their heads.

The number of players who come out of college who have that rare combination of size, speed, mobility, arm strength, and football intellect is pretty small.  I think that's why few of them ever make it as starters and even fewer enjoy long careers as successful starters.  Those few who can initially depend on their athleticism and a strong arm end up with short careers if they don't also have the smarts and the savvy to add to that as they age.

For these reasons alone I favor building a strong and dominant defense and maintaining it.  It's the only way to stay consistently on top without that franchise QB like a Brady, Rodgers, or a Manning and even then to win championships even those guys need a strong defense.