Alaskan Grizzly

Not exactly the big body receiver we need but in considering the comps you show I'd say he's definitely worth a look. Why was he not drafted with those comps is definitley worth asking. But the fact he is a relative non-risk as an UDFA is good. I'm starting to question much of what Pace does but I have liked some of his UDFA choices over the years. Timu, Callahan and Meredith being examples.

No, that would be your point; which is minimizing what I have said. My concern (or point) is that Pace invested 3 other picks for a relative unknown in Trubisky. Thus depleting our chance at more players who could potentially contribute to the team. Then he followed that with four more picks of questionable nature. One of those, Jackson, although a member of the venerable Crimson Tide defense, has a concerning injury history. And all this on the heels of drafting a player two years ago in the 1st round, White, who has yet to contribute to the team due to his own injury issues. The other three draft picks were from second tier schools whose competition is a notch or two above High School in most cases. Again, had he decided to pick one perhaps two players from D2; I might not have been as quite flabbergasted. But with all else I have said paired with the other questionable moves? This reeks of Emery and his smuggy approach to drafting and how he thought he was so much smarter than everyone else. Now did I like Tillman? Absolutely. What did I think of him coming out of college? Probably didn't give it much thought. How many other players were drafted that year and of those, how many were from D2 schools?

You beat me to it but totally agree. I would add that in some of the 'lower level' D1 FBS schools, like University of Buffalo (Khalil Mack and others) they at least competed with the better/well known D1 schools thus allowing them to be evaluated at that level. (More on scouting in just a minute). As you pointed out about D2 and lower tier D1 schools, I would concur that there is no question talent can be found there. But once you mortgage away a number of you lower level picks for a relative unknown in Trubisky and then use the remainder of the picks you have left on other unknowns hoping they'll pan out, that's risky. Ballsy yes but foolhardy (IMHO) if you have a team full of needs and are not yet established of where you're going. In regards to scouting; we all know that is where Pace cut his teeth (I might add that so too did Emery). Anyhow, like you said with all the money that is spent in the NFL I'm sure there is a pretty good budget with scouting. With Pace I have no doubt he invests some of that money into his scouting. But when he chooses his scouts for their assignments (or however they do that) you think he spends all his resources on the talent at the D2 schools or in the more competitive market? His draft would tell us that he bucks conventional wisdom. Again, we won't know how it'll pan out until after a few years. You just have to ask yourself; how much more damage or improvement could happen in that time? And another question to ponder, if it doesn't pan out after this season then we potentially lose a pretty respectable coach in Fox as opposed to the lesser known Pace. When I consider Pace's strategy this year, I can't help but think of Da' Coach when he bet it all on Ricky Williams. Thankfully for Ditka, he had a HOF career to fall back on.

But you're an eternal optimist so I'll lose every time with you. lol!!

One other big difference; Davis played for an FBS in Michigan State whereas Shaheen did not.

Or...remember this guy? http://www.nfl.com/combine/profiles/kellen-davis?id=1066

The context that Jason delivered this, with which I agree, had to do with the overall draft process, not so much the individual picks. Of note, you used Walterfootball as one of your cites which (along with a few other post-draft sites) graded our draft as an overall 'F'. And many here flamed because of it. So should their pre-draft analysis of Shaheen be taken with a grain of salt? As far as some of the others; "Draftcountdown" just last year listed Wentz (#1 QB, #10 overall), Paxton Lynch (#2, #11) and Goff (#3, #14) as the top three QB's. Dak Prescott? Not in the top 32. These things are VERY subjective, especially this early on. Combine the large cost of getting Trubisky with 3 lower tier prospects with just 5 overall picks to choose from, makes me question Pace's choices. Individually they may all do great, or collectively they could all fail. It's too early to tell at this point. But the quality to total number of players chosen ratio is unfavorable, at least on paper.

Wait, now I'm confused. Do I not like Trubisky or do I like him? (Go Watson!!!). oops ?

MEEEOWWW.... ?

Here's a 'what if' (just for the devils advocate perspective). What if Glennon goes Tom Brady on us and becomes Hall of Fame like in his performances? And Trubisky, with limited action looks more like a pedestrian QB (ala Garrapolo) that potentially could be a great back up QB? Do you still keep Glennon long term? Do you try and trade Biscuit while he still has value? In no way do I think this happens, just curious what would happen if it did? (It's a while until any real football action so why not?)

Is it me or are there more Bears alumni in the broadcast booths per capita? Glad to see Jay is going this route. Give him a chance to clean up his public image a little. He's a pretty decent guy deep down. Just never was keen on being forced to talk in front of the media. Pairing with Charles Davis will be good for him. Look forward to seeing him in the booth.

Saw an article that quoted both Ron Wolf and Bill Polian complimenting Pace on his getting Trubisky. I have some huge respect for both those guys so if they think it's good then maybe I can too. I'm warming to the idea. Still want to see it to believe it but, my faith is starting to increase. http://m.chicagobears.com/news/article-1/P...9d-4bf254652af1

Finally!!! Kevin's going back to his old number in college. Call me crazy but now I predict great things for him. http://m.chicagobears.com/news/article-1/W...ec-a6eccf4e7b6f

I'm with you on Shaw. But if he and Sanchez go into a 'competition' for whatever spot it is, I'd say it should be best man wins. (Secretly I'm hoping Shaw would win). I think the 'Biscuit' will get plenty of good mentoring from Glennon and other senior members of the team should Sanchez not make the team.

I could see a player like Forte more as a 'change of pace' back especially to Howard's style of running. Someone who's a bit more finesse and able to catch out of the backfield. I think that was/is their intent with Langford. It so far hasn't worked. But there's still time. Besides that, we know Fox is a big proponent of RBC so I expect he'll want to get more folks involved in the backfield. As much a fan as I am of true 'north/south' running those guys don't generally last all that long. And if they get injured, especially down low, things start to deteriorate quickly after that.

Out of respect to you and the rest of the Talkbears gang (and to avoid hurting Stingers sensitive proclivities) I'll do the best I can and not gloat if it happens as you suggest. I promise. In fact I'm serious when I say I hope Trubisky does well. I mean he is OUR QB now right? Well that is until Glennon proves he isn't the one. And realistically both he and Watson seem like stand up guys so if for nothing else I wish them both the best of luck in their new careers. Now about Sanchez. Somebody here said they see him as the QB whisperer to Dak last year (almost threw up when I saw that). Pretty sure Romo was still there and Dak said on numerous times how much help Romo was to him as a mentor. Please with respect to all that is good get rid of Sanchez!! (Ok to bash him right?)

*edit* Upon further review; would rather not 'bet' against the team. I'm pulling for Trubisky. Still don't understand your "unabashed" comment, but c'est la vie.

No, you mistake negativity with a difference of opinion.

Again, I would assume that if we were to mine that player (QB in this case) it would not have been in the first round necessarily. And not 3 of our 5 total draft picks. Don't get me wrong, I like the idea of getting D2 players; if you have done your homework and due diligence. Just not all of them. I should point out that I qualified the earlier post by saying I was more a fan of Watson's. Who was not a small school candidate; but in my mind much more legitimately a top of the draft pick at QB than was Trubisky. But as Stinger so eloquently pointed out, Pace forgot to ask me. Strangely enough, I would have been ok (or better) with Watson or even Trubisky at 3. That way I wouldn't have been as discouraged by the loss of picks.

In this sense, I would have been making the comparison after each has played in the NFL. I would be more interested to see what I had to say before Wentz was drafted. No doubt based on his performance last year Wentz proved himself worthy as the starter, thus legitimizing (to me) his pick at 2. Who knows, maybe this time next year I'll be saying the same about Trubisky? I'm skeptical but it could happen.

I was going to stay out of this string so as to avoid hurting anyone's feelings of my "negativity" and the general good vibes you guys were sharing but then I saw this... (bolded) Before I go into what it was I said a year ago and how I don't see this as similar, I'd like to see what I actually wrote...so as to get a good context on the conversation. I tried searching and can't find it.

Let me just say, for what it's worth, this is an excellent, well thought out editorial. I totally get the message of 'internal conflict' you describe and how you feel cautiously optimistic (which is a phrase I use to describe myself with the current situation). Although I'm happy that our team picked a QB (finally), it's bittersweet (in a sense) because a) it wasn't the one I wanted (lol) b ) I don't know enough about him to form a favorable opinion and c)like you said, feel that 'we' gave away too much for him. Because of that last reason is why I'm most discouraged. We entered the draft knowing we had many holes to fill. Had a decent number draft picks in order to address many of those needs. Yet gave up as many as 3-4 current and future spots to get Trubisky. Again, a guy who has no concrete track record other than an 8-5 college record. And what's more, of the remaining positions we had (the other four draft picks) our GM chose to fill three of them with small-school prospects. Granted, any or all of them could work out and be star(s) for our team but not only did we limit our chances of more rookies succeeding, we limited it to lesser known 'talent'. I agree that Pace's "strength" in the past is/was finding some quality players with relative unknowns (Howard being the prime example) especially in later rounds, but the fact that we lacked more 'later rounds' to choose from didn't allow him to plant more of those seeds. And at the end of the day I still can't help myself from thinking we (Pace) were bested by San Francisco and Cleveland in this last draft cycle.

Something else to consider and to Jason's point about picking a QB in the later rounds; how many times leading up to the draft did we hear this year's QB class didn't have one "Franchise quality QB" in them? Yet three ended up being picked within the first 12 picks. Yes there has been much discussion about the QB class of 2018 and (allegedly) how much better it will be, yet three teams 'swung for the fences' this year. Did we 'luck out' in getting Trubisky this year? Who knows? But no matter how you slice it, the 'price' to get him seemed absolutely ridiculous.

Thank you Jason for putting a fine point on my concerns. I'm willing to wait and give it the benefit of the doubt but the guarded optimist in me says 'same tune, different conductor'. Here's to unexpected success.

Not so sure I believe this. Even in the video that was linked in your story, Schefter was speculating an awful lot about what he thought happened. Here's another perspective from some other beat reporters: http://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2017/4/28/1547...rade-2017-draft And then there's this. A perspective from the 49ers draft room. They were nearly incredulous of Paces want for Trubisky: https://mmqb.si.com/mmqb/2017/05/01/san-fra...ster-peter-king For what it's worth, perhaps Trubisky will be the QB we've needed all this time. But I feel that this trade up one spot (from 3 to 2, and a bunch of other 'commodities' to do it) was poorly executed.