DABEARSDABOMB

This is a really great post. I really agree with your stance on QB.

If Desmond King slips, I'd be all over him. Not really late round as I presume he goes in the 2nd, but it is a deep CB draft, so you never know.

I don't know how it fits in for me, but I don't like the dlineman and prefer the safeties (if we don't go QB). That said, given there are two safeties I'd love to have, I wouldn't be a big fan of taking the safety @ 3 and would prefer trading down to a team looking at those dlineman. Although I know the mock doesn't work that way. If we stay where we are at (and aren't taking QB), I think I go safety, but wouldn't be upset with Garrett / Allen.

Agree. The interesting thing is, why would Fangio go back to San Fran after he already left them the first time (upset he didn't get the head coaching gig). Either way, glad we are keeping Fangio around.

Yeah...I agree with Connor. On a sidenote, it was amazing how good Matt Ryan looks. I always thought Ryan had talent and he showed it. I've always thought the same of Jay (albeit, at this point, he's too far gone for the Bears to keep), but it does go to show how important it is to put quality players and the right coaches around these guys. Ryan isn't Rodgers or Brady, who can do it on his own, but he's good enough that if you give him the right parts, he can be elite (and this year, Matt Ryan has been that). I'm surprised the Falcons aren't opening as favorites. They've looked fantastic. Also, the Packers lost to the superior team and beat a team that was better then them the week before. I don't really call the choking. Yes, they got whooped this week, but they didn't even belong on the same field as the Falcons (who I happen to think will win the superbowl). That said, I'd never bet against Tom Brady.

Great idea to start this Jason and it was fun even looking back at last year's thread. You were clearly all over Dak from day one and while none of us know what he'd look like with the Bears (vs. that Cowboy line), I'd definitely feel better having taken a QB somewhere in last years draft (vs. completely ignoring it). In terms of your first comment, I'm indifferent as to how we get a QB, but I'm a believer that we need to find our QB this year, whether via trade or the draft (and I'm open to picking one at 3 overall).

I still am a proponent of signing Romo and drafting a Qb in the 2nd round (even potentially moving into the back end of the 1st round to draft one). One name we haven't talked about is Phillip Rivers. If he puts himself on the block (given he does not want to play in LA), are people opposed to acquiring him? I presume with him forcing a deal, the Chargers wouldn't have a ton of leverage. He's on the older side, but I'd absolutely take him and would take him over every QB that is realistically available.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap300000077...-romo-to-texans Gil Brandt had the Bears 4th in the worst to 1st list and mentioned that if he were running the team, he'd draft best available @ 3 (I.e., defensive upgrade) and look at Romo, although his preference would be trading for Jimmy G. He is of the belief that with the right QB, we are a lot closer than people think (I agree with this statement...albeit, finding the right signal caller is easier said then done).

On paper, seems like a very meh hire. Lions had some pretty bad olines during his stint (not sure how much was due to coaching). I would have presumed we were going to promote from within.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2017/...ive-line-coach/ Jeremiah Washburn. Was assistant oline coach with Miami (and previously was the head oline coach with Lions for a few years).

I don't see why we would bring in Schaub. If we are going to tank, just stick with Barkley. Hoyer is a better QB than Schaub.

I think he looks at JG and says, I can't pay him (& Tom)the money, so if Tom is going to be here another few years, he views JG as an asset to get better, and probably drafted the new QB for that very reason, that he knew he was going to have to move Jimmy G, so he needed to take a QB who he could evaluate for a year to better understand what value he thinks he has in Brisett. If he doesn't like him, he still probably moves Jimmy G for the vary reasons I mention, anyway, then draft another QB (and by drafting the new QB, it doesn't mean that the player will be better then Jimmy G, it will be that Bill views his value better to his organization vs. paying Jimmy G significant money when he was Tom on the roster). We might end up seeing Jimmy stay, Pats do not have to move him this year, it all comes down to the perceived value. In terms of some of the examples from a previous poster, Montana was done and coming off of injuries and Manning was (but the Colts also had the #1 pick in a draft where Andrew Luck was available, one of the best QB prospects of the last 10 years). Packers decision with Favre was tough, but they moved on from Favre more because they were tired of his "retirement" song and dance (it helped that Rodgers had a few years to be groomed and they thought he was good...but again, not quite similar circumstances). Tom Brady, is still one of, if not the best QB's in the league still.

I think Belicheck also views players as assets and in general pieces. I think the reason they drafted Brissett is they know that either Brady will go shortly and they'll need two QB's (jimmy G and Brissett) or that they think Brady has a couple more years in him, which means, he knows the best use of an asset like Jimmy G is to deal him for multiple picks to keep the rest of the team good, while believing in Brissett (or finding another guy). I think Bill is so confident in the process he looks at everyone (with exception of Brady) as replaceable and that if the right value is there and it helps his team he'll do it. If Brady is around a few more years, you absolutely can not give Jimmy G a big contract (and that is what he'll want / get.

With Brady I agree, he's always had pretty good lines, but I also think he makes those lines good and helps them in terms of getting the ball out fast, etc. Rodgers has typically had pretty pourous olines. He also doesn't exactly help them out as he tends to hold onto the ball and rely a lot on his athleticism...he's just so freaking athletic that he can get away with it. Rodgers is physically the most talented QB I can ever remember seeing.

If they do that, I'd be all over Lynch. I wanted the Bears to draft him last year. I think the Broncos like what they have in Lynch (and Siemen, for where they drafted him, looks solid too).

Totally deserves it. Hopefully this is the first of many probowls and of course hopefully pretty soon he becomes ineligible because he's playing and then winning the superbowl(s)!!!

I think the Bears draft a QB or trade down. That said, if we waited, I think I'd go after Romo and draft that Mahomes kid and I'd reach on him (to ensure I got him). He doesn't look like the typical "spread" QB, but I presume being a spread QB he'll take a bit more time, which is why I'd make an aggressive push for Romo for a year or two (and I'd spend a lot of money on the defensive side of the ball). Then with the 1st pick, I'd probably move down and grab a safety or LT + other picks or if the Bears thought one of the dlineman was going to be a 15 sack a season type guy (pass rushing menace)...then I'd go after them (never ever ever can you have too much pass rush).

He has talent. I never figured out why he was out all of last year. Did he have injury issues or anything? I love our wide receiver coach and I don't think this is a bad move. At worse, good to have depth.

At first glance, I was surprised, given how good the Raiders offense was when Carr was healthy. When you read the article, I can kind of understand some of those beefs, albeit I don't watch enough Raider football to have an opinion. That said, given Fox's pendance for running the football, I can't see hiring Musgrave, who was knocked for ignoring the ground game too much. Now the getting conservative with lead part...that style is right up Fox's alley (vs. Del Rio who is about as aggressive as it gets).

Watson looked good. I still can't ignore his inconsistent accuracy, but he clearly has the NFL arm strength and plenty of moxy and obviously he's a good athlete. I'd still argue with Jason that he isn't Cam, I think his body & build is much more akin to Dak then say Cam. Like I have said all along, at least 2 QB's are going in those top 3 picks and I wouldn't be shocked if the top 3 picks were all QB's.

I think he did a lot to cement that he goes in the top 3. I could easily see all 3 QB picks going 1-3.

If we don't think there is a QB worthy of a top 3 pick (and by we, I mean the Bears brass), then I think we are absolutely better off moving down. I think there are 2-3 safeties worthy of being top 10 picks (just not #3 overall picks) and I think we'd be able to get a difference making safety if we drop back a bit and then address corner early in the second round while also looking at offense. That said, some of this depends on what we do via free agency. I am a big fan of who you have getting drafted (Peppers is #3 on my list of safeties as I'd much rather have Hooker / Adams, but if both were gone, I'd have no problem at Peppers..talented and fills a need), although I doubt Watson falls that far. I think when push comes to shove, at least 3 QB's go in the 1st round and Watson will be one of them. If we move down from #3, I could also see us looking at OT...while I think Bama's tackle has top 3 talent, there are other issues that prevent me from being willing to invest that high in him.

Adams and the Ohio State safety (Malik Hooker) are both safer picks then Peppers, imo. That said, Peppers clearly has a ton of athleticism that he could become great, but I just didn't' see enough out of him when it mattered. Adams and Hooker both showed it on the field. I would love to have them on the Bears and I'd pick them over most everyone else, but as I've said numerous times, I can't justify a safety at 3...to me we take QB or trade down.

Agree with your sentiments...that said, if somehow McCoy wants to come here as an assistant head coach, great. I would think he'd want a spot where he had better upside. I could see if we had a young QB, who he could come in and spend a lot of time with and get credit that way, but otherwise, seems like the upside is more limited. Unless of course Fox tells him that we intend to bring in a young QB, etc. Developing a young QB is one of the quickest ways to get a head coaching job again. McCoy would be a fantastic hire, I just don't see him coming here (would think there were far better places to go).

Sounded like it has to do with the fact that he wants to go back to the line. IIRC, we blocked him from taking a position a year ago (think it was to go join Gase in Miami, but maybe it was a college job), so I presume he had other opportunities that were more interesting to him. I agree with you though, he is a good coach.