Completely Non-FF Thoughts

[SteelersPride]

Victorious Patrick Mahomes Thanks Bears For Drafting Mitchell Trubisky

I realize this is fake but it still hurts.

What really hurts is both that the bears traded UP to grab trubisky, the team they traded with just made a superbowl run. and well mahomes.......and watson.....sorry dude

 

[averagejoe]

What really hurts is both that the bears traded UP to grab trubisky, the team they traded with just made a superbowl run. and well mahomes.......and watson.....sorry dude

Well, not that i want to rehash the draft, but i still cant fault decades of QB futility by moving up. If i were GM, i would have moved up too. But i also would have drafted 2 QB in each draft over the last 3 seasons.

 

[SteelersPride]

Well, not that i want to rehash the draft, but i still cant fault decades of QB futility by moving up. If i were GM, i would have moved up too. But i also would have drafted 2 QB in each draft over the last 3 seasons.

I dunno Man they could of had trubs that much higher I just can't fathom it

 

[averagejoe]

I dunno Man they could of had trubs that much higher I just can't fathom it

Thats not my point.
Bears havent had a franchise QB since Luckman. They had a good run with McMahon.
You wont get it because you had Bradshaw and Maddox and Slash and Roethlisberger. Teams/franchises that did not have to suffer for decades at QB will all think it was dumb.

 

[SteelersPride]

Thats not my point.
Bears havent had a franchise QB since Luckman. They had a good run with McMahon.
You wont get it because you had Bradshaw and Maddox and Slash and Roethlisberger. Teams/franchises that did not have to suffer for decades at QB will all think it was dumb.

But that is my point. To make that move, for one spot, You ARE saying trubs was that much higher. Because otherwise you would stayed put And taken whoever was there.

they clearly had a grade on him that much higher than mahomes and Watson. If they didn't there was zero need to do that. Futility doesn't change the draft evaluation being so unbelievably wrong

 

[averagejoe]

But that is my point. To make that move, for one spot, You ARE saying trubs was that much higher. Because otherwise you would stayed put And taken whoever was there.

they clearly had a grade on him that much higher than mahomes and Watson. If they didn't there was zero need to do that. Futility doesn't change the draft evaluation being so unbelievably wrong

Futility changes everything. But thats my
Just stings cause Trubisky looks like a bum.

 

[SteelersPride]

Futility changes everything. But thats my
Just stings cause Trubisky looks like a bum.

It does but it doesn't. I get why you are saying I really do. I guess what I'm saying is,the futility that made the bears qb situation what it's been, reared it's head AGAIN.

theoretically there were 3 qbs to choose from. I'm using a theoretical 0-100 scale here. But let's say the grades we're

trubisky 86
Mahomes 83
Watson 81

is trading up one spot?! Worth it for that minuscule difference. I say no they r close. You don't mortgage picks for a small difference.

my point was the only way you make that trade is if you are sold on one guy being that much better than the others so:

trubs 93
Mahomes 80
Watson 75

then yeah go get your guy. I'm all for trading your ENTIRE draft haul to get the right quarterback. I think it's necessary. Single most important position. You 95% of the time need a good an. But when you're the wrong, AND you gave up the picks..... that's the continuation of futility that put the bears in that situation to begin with.Do I make sense?

if they were right then yeah it's totally worth it, but they weren't. They weren't even in the same ballpark, or world, really compared to both other quarterbacks

 

[MilkSpiller22]

But that is my point. To make that move, for one spot, You ARE saying trubs was that much higher. Because otherwise you would stayed put And taken whoever was there.

they clearly had a grade on him that much higher than mahomes and Watson. If they didn't there was zero need to do that. Futility doesn't change the draft evaluation being so unbelievably wrong

not true at all.... You should ALWAYS pay up for a QB...

if you think QB A is better than QB B... then why would you ever want QB B??? there are only 32 starting QBs... why would you want a lesser QB when you have the opportunity to get the better???

 

[SteelersPride]

not true at all.... You should ALWAYS pay up for a QB...

if you think QB A is better than QB B... then why would you ever want QB B??? there are only 32 starting QBs... why would you want a lesser QB when you have the opportunity to get the better???

So you would mortgage the future for the difference between say kirk cousins and andy dalton?

 

[MilkSpiller22]

So you would mortgage the future for the difference between say kirk cousins and andy dalton?

Not a good example. Neither were first round picks. And neither were seen as an elite option on draft day.

 

[SteelersPride]

Not a good example. Neither were first round picks. And neither were seen as an elite option on draft day.

its an example of quarterbacks closely matched. was there thought to be a HUGE divide bw the 3 on draft day? thats the point........

 

[MilkSpiller22]

its an example of quarterbacks closely matched. was there thought to be a HUGE divide bw the 3 on draft day? thats the point........

quarterbacks taken after the first round are not seen to be franchise QBs at the time... they are either projects with potential, or standbys for the future... teams only hope that these players become more... Just like any other pick...

So no, I would not pay up for a qb that I would not take in the first round... if my teams need of QB doesn't have me picking them with my first pick(even if I have multiple picks in the first round), I would not pick a qb at all until round 4 or 5...


its just plain old silliness to give your team to a QB you believe is inferior...


the biggest problem with these arguments is that people think that real life results are all that matters... Just because Mahomes looks like a future HOFer and Trubisky looks like a bust, doesn't mean Trubisky was the wrong move... If you aksed every expert which QB they would rather have going into the draft, they would have all said Trubisky…. and they would have all said it isn't even close....

 

[SteelersPride]

quarterbacks taken after the first round are not seen to be franchise QBs at the time... they are either projects with potential, or standbys for the future... teams only hope that these players become more... Just like any other pick...

So no, I would not pay up for a qb that I would not take in the first round... if my teams need of QB doesn't have me picking them with my first pick(even if I have multiple picks in the first round), I would not pick a qb at all until round 4 or 5...


its just plain old silliness to give your team to a QB you believe is inferior...


the biggest problem with these arguments is that people think that real life results are all that matters... Just because Mahomes looks like a future HOFer and Trubisky looks like a bust, doesn't mean Trubisky was the wrong move... If you aksed every expert which QB they would rather have going into the draft, they would have all said Trubisky…. and they would have all said it isn't even close....

They all would have said trubisky? Don't think so. And by a lot? Nope. I also said over both mahomes And Watson. A quick google search confirms that.
Some had trubs, some had Watson heck some had kizer. A lot did have trubs. A lot had trubs and stated it was a toss up. Regardless the point is ,it wasnt a big gap.
But ok.

I'm also not sure what later round qbs have to do with the argument.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

They all would have said trubisky? Don't think so. And by a lot? Nope. I also said over both mahomes And Watson. A quick google search confirms that.
Some had trubs, some had Watson heck some had kizer. A lot did have trubs. A lot had trubs and stated it was a toss up. Regardless the point is ,it wasnt a big gap.
But ok.

I'm also not sure what later round qbs have to do with the argument.

you brought it in with you Dalton and Cousins question...

But again, if nobody had Mahomes, then how can you expect mahomes to be the RIGHT pick?? just because he is the best now, and that isn't close....

Point is simple, you can only make decisions with what you know at the time... Trubisky was the top QB on most boards... maybe not all... but he was the MONEY bet to be the best... why would you not want the best QB available?? QB is not a position you can hide... why hide inferior players??

 

[averagejoe]

But didnt all 3 teams (CHI, HOU & KC) move up to get their guy?

In hindsight it was stupid for CHI to move up, but no one is saying HOU or KC was stupid for moving up.

Its like i said, franchises who never had decades of QB futility will understand.

 

[SteelersPride]

you brought it in with you Dalton and Cousins question...

But again, if nobody had Mahomes, then how can you expect mahomes to be the RIGHT pick?? just because he is the best now, and that isn't close....

Point is simple, you can only make decisions with what you know at the time... Trubisky was the top QB on most boards... maybe not all... but he was the MONEY bet to be the best... why would you not want the best QB available?? QB is not a position you can hide... why hide inferior players??

No I didn't bring draft rounds into play. I was comparing mediocre qbs. We are going agree to disagree. You are not getting my point.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

No I didn't bring draft rounds into play. I was comparing mediocre qbs. We are going agree to disagree. You are not getting my point.

i think i got your point... that how can you pay so much for such a small difference... But i think you are conflating perceived value at the time with with REAL Value that they have now...



if you are bringing up how the Vikings over-payed for Cousins... you have to remember the vikings had a very late first round pick, and were in a win-now situation... So of course they will pay for a free agent over drafting a QB... and trading up... and cousins, was the best QB available... He was a product of circumstance...

But once again, they over-paid for him, why??? not just because he was the best available... But also because the team wanted to show how much faith they have in him... Its all about a confidence boost... it failed, but that doesn't mean it was the wrong move...

so, yea... i agree i am not getting your point... maybe i am missing it... or maybe i just 100% disagree with it....

 

[SteelersPride]

i think i got your point... that how can you pay so much for such a small difference... But i think you are conflating perceived value at the time with with REAL Value that they have now...



if you are bringing up how the Vikings over-payed for Cousins... you have to remember the vikings had a very late first round pick, and were in a win-now situation... So of course they will pay for a free agent over drafting a QB... and trading up... and cousins, was the best QB available... He was a product of circumstance...

But once again, they over-paid for him, why??? not just because he was the best available... But also because the team wanted to show how much faith they have in him... Its all about a confidence boost... it failed, but that doesn't mean it was the wrong move...

so, yea... i agree i am not getting your point... maybe i am missing it... or maybe i just 100% disagree with it....

lol The first part is what im getting at. paying so much for a small difference. Lets take away everything mahomes , watson, and trubs did now.Lets only focus on what they were coming out of college. Trubs was likely the higher ranked by most people, but we disagree on by how much. Ive looked at that drafte extensively. Those that had him on top, didnt have him on top by much, and there were alot who didnt. Like I said analysts had kizer on top. Mahomes was mostly the 2-3 QB. But this isnt just about mahomes, its about watson as well. Its about picking between the lot of the 3 Qb's. So yes my point is you gave up that much, at that time, for what was perceived by most to be a small difference, if any.

My next point is the futility point. Teams that wallow in futility continuously make bad decisions, bad evaluations. Not only did they get the evaluation on trubisky wrong, they made a bad decision on top of it to give up capital to go get him. Thats a two fold F' up.

The comparison of Cousins and Dalton was not made for contracts, draft position or anything else. It was merely here is two qb's who are mediocre. Would you give up THAT much more to get one of them over the other one, assuming theoretically they are the same age etc. Just based on skill

Cousins absolutely was a product of circumstance, good for him. I am no disputing that at all. Im not disputing any part that you are saying of his FA, contract etc, except for the confidence boost part

I dont think they overpaid for him for a confidence boost, thats just me. They were giving him silly money to begin with. The market demanded that because there were no QB's available.

I guess another way for me to say this. Right now If YOU are a team, and you have your choice of dalton or cousins. Dalton you can have. Cousins you have to give up two third round picks and a 4th round pick to get. To me, im just taking Dalton and investing the picks. Cousins is not worth that extra capital.

If you said Ok heres another choice. You can sit put and have Dalton. Now you can give up 2 3rd's and 4th for Carson wentz. I give up the picks.

The bears front office made the assessment , at that time, that Trubisky WAS that much better than the other two quarterbacks. They then doubled down and made a move for it. They were wrong in both evaluation and the move to get him.

I don't know how else I can say it. I very well be making zero sense, because, well I do that.

Its 100% fine if we disagree, thats precisely what makes message board banter fun, and enlightens me to others line's of thought. Especially you, because your thought process is WAY OFF mine usually

 

[MilkSpiller22]

lol The first part is what im getting at. paying so much for a small difference. Lets take away everything mahomes , watson, and trubs did now.Lets only focus on what they were coming out of college. Trubs was likely the higher ranked by most people, but we disagree on by how much. Ive looked at that drafte extensively. Those that had him on top, didnt have him on top by much, and there were alot who didnt. Like I said analysts had kizer on top. Mahomes was mostly the 2-3 QB. But this isnt just about mahomes, its about watson as well. Its about picking between the lot of the 3 Qb's. So yes my point is you gave up that much, at that time, for what was perceived by most to be a small difference, if any.

My next point is the futility point. Teams that wallow in futility continuously make bad decisions, bad evaluations. Not only did they get the evaluation on trubisky wrong, they made a bad decision on top of it to give up capital to go get him. Thats a two fold F' up.

The comparison of Cousins and Dalton was not made for contracts, draft position or anything else. It was merely here is two qb's who are mediocre. Would you give up THAT much more to get one of them over the other one, assuming theoretically they are the same age etc. Just based on skill

Cousins absolutely was a product of circumstance, good for him. I am no disputing that at all. Im not disputing any part that you are saying of his FA, contract etc, except for the confidence boost part

I dont think they overpaid for him for a confidence boost, thats just me. They were giving him silly money to begin with. The market demanded that because there were no QB's available.

I guess another way for me to say this. Right now If YOU are a team, and you have your choice of dalton or cousins. Dalton you can have. Cousins you have to give up two third round picks and a 4th round pick to get. To me, im just taking Dalton and investing the picks. Cousins is not worth that extra capital.

If you said Ok heres another choice. You can sit put and have Dalton. Now you can give up 2 3rd's and 4th for Carson wentz. I give up the picks.

The bears front office made the assessment , at that time, that Trubisky WAS that much better than the other two quarterbacks. They then doubled down and made a move for it. They were wrong in both evaluation and the move to get him.

I don't know how else I can say it. I very well be making zero sense, because, well I do that.

Its 100% fine if we disagree, thats precisely what makes message board banter fun, and enlightens me to others line's of thought. Especially you, because your thought process is WAY OFF mine usually

well, even the experts knocked the trade up from pick 2 to pick 1.... But WHAT if, someone else got Trub??? he was clearly the bears number one....

QBs are a different position than any other because it is not a next up mentality.... its not a plug a random guy in and compensate elsewhere... and there is only 32 starters... sure there are only 32 starters of other positions... but I am pretty sure we will agree that QB is the most important position on the field...

Point is, if there is 32, every QB you pass on, no matter how close you think they are, are lower on the overall QB ranking...

look at SB winners, when was the last SB where the better QB did not win?? Clearly Foles vs Brady... But wouldn't you agree that the better QB wins the SB much more often... so why would you start off at a disadvantage??


I just think it is stupid to not go all out to get the best QB you can... but of course the best you can get will always be by your own measurements... and will often be proven wrong at the end.... But results dont matter to the actual decision...

 

[SteelersPride]

well, even the experts knocked the trade up from pick 2 to pick 1.... But WHAT if, someone else got Trub??? he was clearly the bears number one....

QBs are a different position than any other because it is not a next up mentality.... its not a plug a random guy in and compensate elsewhere... and there is only 32 starters... sure there are only 32 starters of other positions... but I am pretty sure we will agree that QB is the most important position on the field...

Point is, if there is 32, every QB you pass on, no matter how close you think they are, are lower on the overall QB ranking...

look at SB winners, when was the last SB where the better QB did not win?? Clearly Foles vs Brady... But wouldn't you agree that the better QB wins the SB much more often... so why would you start off at a disadvantage??


I just think it is stupid to not go all out to get the best QB you can... but of course the best you can get will always be by your own measurements... and will often be proven wrong at the end.... But results dont matter to the actual decision...

The bold is my point, thats a two fold f' up.

We 100% agree its the most important position.

I get what you are saying. But also at the same time, We are dealing with "knowns" when they are in the superbowl. Not when they are in the draft process. So is that gamble worth it.....

The i can throw past 10 yards manning beat cam in his MVP season.

Flacco vs kaep is very debateable

Eli over brady

Foles over brady

those are 4 that come to mind in the past decade, but yeah i get what your saying.