jason

Pertinent: https://bearswire.usatoday.com/2018/08/08/roquan-smith-joins-fraternity-of-infamous-chicago-bears-1st-round-holdouts/

Given the history of early contract negotiations and always being early, not to mention the solid they gave Miller, I’m surprised anyone actually thought this was on the Bears.

I just want to point out that... INT 1 is on Morgan for getting put on skates. INT 2 is on the TE.

I fully realize the scenario in place, and the contract language being discussed. At this point, it's clear Roquan Smith, his agent, or both are to blame for the entire situation. He's quickly losing fans.

Which is pretty much the primary reason I didn't want to see an ILB for the Bears in the first round.

Wow. http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/24045670/ranking-nfl-best-worst-offensive-arsenals-weapons-2018

I like the optimism and the video, but I'm not so sure AR15 translates to Alshon.

I just got wood.

For record, we don't know what Cohen would/could do with a full run as the primary back. He's limited by touches because of what the coaches believe will happen if he gets a full load. He seemed to carry the load pretty well in college for four years. Roughly 20 carries a game. He's small in stature, but he's one of those guys who doesn't take massive hits because of his speed, dexterity, center of gravity, height, etc.

I don't care about the dick measuring contest, because I don't want to cause anyone else inadequacy issues. However, Cohen is a very rare back in terms of skillset. What he can do can't be measured. There is no "puts LB on skates"-measurement. Also, I don't think Nall is very special. He doesn't look fast at all. Much less explosive. I don't think he'll make the team, because Cunningham looked great in limited touches (particularly receptions) last year.

Agree almost entirely. I am just a little higher on McG than some others. I think he'll turn into an above average player with some accolades. He wasn't great value at #8, but he was good value. I think his upgrade over either OT on the Bears would have helped the team more than upgrading ILB, where I think Kwiatkoski has some more upside. (BTW - You could look back and see that I liked Kwiatkoski before he was drafted, so this isn't a shock that I support him.)

You can twist words however you want. Nobody can prove an impossibility. In any situation. Nobody can speak to the true what if of a reorganized draft where McGlinchey is on the Bears and Roquan is on the Niners. Or any other situation. It's stupid because you can't prove it one way or the other. All you or anyone else can do is speak to the player on the team they go to. As for the last sentence, c'mon. You know damn well there are multiple heads in that room, and some are louder than others, and some win the argument. This happened over and over with Lovie ignoring O to grab D.

It wouldn't be pure BPA or pure need. Pure BPA is stupid, because it could potentially have left a team like the Bears picking another QB. But pure need is also stupid, because it causes someone to reach. As for who I would have picked, I would have tried my damnedest to trade back. There were willing teams. If nobody would make a trade, it would have been between Smith, McGlinchey, and Minkah. Gun to my head I would have probably have picked McG. I think Minkah would upgrade either safety spot, but I like Amos and Eddie. So he's out. That leaves Smith and McG, and the upgrade from either is significant. Ultimately, however, the Bears just picked a QB that needs everything possible around him to ensure he succeeds. That includes protection on the edges. McG (who would have been a slight reach) starts day one and is better than either Bears OT starter.

Qualifiers are truths in this situation. Randy Moss drafted by the Bears never turns into Randy Moss.

Just because you don't want to go back and look for something doesn't make it true. What you are mentioning has been done on this board many times over the years. As for your direct challenge, I'll do it, but there is one problem. We don't know what the players would have done on any other team. A player's success or failure has a lot to do with the talent and team around him. If Tom Brady had been drafted by the Bears he would not be married to Giselle or have won the SB multiple times. It's just a 100% guarantee. As for the QBs, here's my best guess as for the current situation. Baker Mayfield - He'll look like a spark plug, energize with some great plays here and there, but ultimately won't amount to much more than average. Mostly because the Cleveland Browns are the Cleveland Browns. Towards his final contract year the team will struggle with the decision to re-sign him or draft another QB. Sam Darnold - I don't think he'll start right away. Their WRs and OL are a mess, and I couldn't tell you who is going to play TE for them. By the time his rookie contract ends he'll have shown enough to be their QB of the future. Josh Allen - Bust. He had problems at a lower level college environment. Josh Rosen - I think he'll be the one who will have the most success. Their talent level on offense is pretty good, and there are already talks of figuring out how to get rid of Sam Bradford. On top of that, the Browns decided against Rosen because of a volleyball player's comments at an airport. Lamar Jackson - I love Ozzie Newsome and his drafting style in general, so I have a hard time doubting him. Flacco is near the end, and I think they'll have sub-packages to put in Lamar Jackson here and there. He'll be electric like Michael Vick. But his success hinges on protection and skill players who make him comfortable enough he doesn't feel the need to run every other down. All of the above is still an uncertainty, mostly because nobody knows what the teams will or won't do with the other several dozen positions over the next few years. If they ignore the OL like the Bears have done, then none of the guys above will likely have a chance at sustained success.

I think DBDB is right. We need RR/Bullard to step up. This deficiency should have been addressed in the draft. Dorance Armstrong or Josh Sweat in the 4th would have made more sense given their college production/positioning. Hopefully Iggy can make the transition from ILB to OLB like the rumors say.

I think the Lions did pretty well. 1/20 C Ragnow - Makes Stafford more comfortable in the pocket. 2/11 RB Kerryon Johnson - I've seen this guy since middle school. He's a stud. I've been saying he'd be a pro since he was in 9th grade. I hated seeing him to go a division rival. He could be special. 3/18 S Tracy Walker - I didn't get this pick as much. Didn't know much about him. 4/14 DE Da'shawn Hand - Great value. Potential to be a stud if he produces to talent level. 5/16 G Tyrell Crosby - Great value here. Makes Stafford more comfortable in the pocket. 7/19 RB Nick Bawden - A camp body.

Ditto. The interior looks strong, but the OTs are not. There's also the flip-flop of a natural OG playing C (Whitehair), and a natural C playing OG (rookie). That hasn't traditionally worked in the past. Throw in Kyle Long's injury history, and the OL could derail any of the skill position players picked up...just like it has over and over for the past 20 years or so.

Roquan. I didn't want an ILB in the first, and I think going a different direction would have benefited the team more overall, but I think he can do great things for the team. I'm predicting 100+ tackles rookie year.

We've done that for years on this board. The post draft analysis where we say what we would have done with the Bears picks. Maybe not in an official "This is the thread where we..." manner, but it's been done. It's just a matter of tracking back the details to see what the hit percentages are.

Very well said. This isn't the 1980s where only the teams hold information. If a fan wanted to, they could read and watch information about hundreds of players back to their high school days. Good comment on Jarron Gilbert, who I called a "pool jumping dickhead" a few years back. It would be a fun exercise to point to a move or selection each year that each poster believes was a bad move. Personally, I think the Saints WAY over-reached on what they gave up to get Marcus Davenport.

What I'm saying is, these guys are human as well. They have more resources at their disposal, but they are still prone to the same prejudices we have. Tice proved that when he got a boner after Jamarcus Webb chipped his tooth. And because of all that, they don't have a very high success rate. They're put on a pedestal because they chose a career path we probably all wish we had chosen years and years ago, but they started out just like everyone else. They were fans of football. It's entirely possible, in fact even probable given the failure rate, they are overwhelmed by the information and it muddies the waters. It clouds their vision. What's the saying? Can't see the forest for the trees?

I could easily maintain the friendship. Typing loses lots of the interaction, and at our core we are all devoted Bears fans. We follow the team because we love them. Those picking for the team do so because it's their current job, or even a stepping stone for their ideal job. We will always love the Bears and have the Bears best long term interest in mind.

I don’t think anyone on a message board knows more about coaching defense than Fangio, or most others that are in the NFL for that matter. But their presence in the NFL doesn’t make them experts at picking talent. They are experts, or are supposed to be experts, at coaching. The best ever (Polian) said even the NFL folks are 50/50 at best when drafting. Furthermore, Fangio has been here three years and only last year was the D good. He definitely knows who he wants for his system more, but that doesn’t mean the collective opinion here is necessarily any worse at picking talent. And until the Bears have sustained success, the “they’re in the NFL and know more”- line is BS. After all, that same line was used when we had the last 20+ years of coaches and horrible draft picks. It’s nearly unfathomable to think we could have done much worse over that stretch. It kills me how people will use that line while a guy is in chicago, then dog the dude and call him a moron when he gets fired. The guy can’t be an amazing talent evaluator and coach while in Chicago and simultaneously be incompetent when he gets canned. Last but not least, if someone had the time It would be easy to go back through this board’s history and see many, many times when we were right and the coaches/GM were wrong. Probably hundreds of times among all of us.

I definitely agree with this.