|
PrinceRandom posted:Requesting write up of OT's please. Bumping this for PrinceRandom Really want to know this too Also, what are considered the strengths and weaknesses of this draft class? Honestly, I am curious how this is evaluated from year to year.
|
#
¿
Nov 19, 2016 07:00
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 2, 2024 16:59 |
|
|
That is unfortunate, because this is the biggest need for the Bears, outside of quarterback. Usually, pretty draft you hear that this year or next year's class is strong. I remember last year hearing that the running back crop was supposed to be one of the strongest classes in years. Am I misremembering this?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2016 02:33
|
|
|
Gumbel2Gumbel posted:I think you can guess which parents were awesome and which were terrible If I were a woman, I would marry into the Steelhammer clan ..... and then be disappointed when we spent all our evenings playing Warhammer.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 4, 2017 15:38
|
|
|
The Glumslinger posted:Never have I been so sad to be completely right about a pick Unless you predicted that he would be hurt his first two seasons due to injury, you were not right.  I still think it is 50/50 that Alshon stays. It sucks that we have no idea what Kevin White is, which is why we need to resign Alshon.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 10, 2017 21:44
|
|
|
Saucer Crab posted:Very good name, but pray he skips the combine. Oh, Geno's jaw got absolutely blown up
|
|
#
¿
Jan 11, 2017 03:37
|
|
|
Doltos posted:I know. He had one bad NCG game, and not even bad considering how elite that front seven of Clemson is. He spent all year perfectly handling top tier DEs and DTs like they were kids. I still have him pegged as an early candidate for the best player in the draft. An award I like to call the Leonard Williams Award in honor of a man who unfortunately went 6th overall to the New York Jets despite clearly being the best prospect in the draft. Is he a LT or RT in the NFL? Isn't there a lot of chatter that he'll be an RT at the next level. That'll impact his stock for sure.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 14, 2017 00:16
|
|
|
extendedsolo posted:I swear to god if the Bears don't draft Jabrill Peppers or Jamal Adams or any other top tier defensive player I may have to find a new team. They need help at so many positions, drafting a QB at 3 isn't going to do much for them. I'm all aboard the Jamal Adams train. I feel like free safety is the mist undervalued position on defense. A top flight guy just makes defenses great. But I have no problem with the Bears drafting a quarterback if they like one of them. You can't have long term success without one.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 16, 2017 19:37
|
|
|
extendedsolo posted:that's how you get teams drafting christian ponder/jake locker/blake bortles. That's just hyperbolic bullshit. These are a different set of quarterbacks and they need to be evaluated on their own merits. Think of what people were saying about Wentz after being picked 2nd and being unheralded as a prospect. If you think the guy at three could be an above average starter for multiple years, you take him, even if a prospect grades higher positiionally. Because quarterbacks are that loving important. Trust your evaluation process, but you can't apply the same rules to quarterback if you need one. Or you end up the Texans at best. Just make sure you are evaluating him based on his skill level, not your own desperate hopes.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 17, 2017 02:02
|
|
|
MY NIGGA D-LINK posted:I mean after the CFB season, into the combine and beyond. Wentz and Goff were neck and neck after the combine He wasn't though. For most of the process, Goff was the clear front-runner. Wentz started making real noise about the month before the draft. For a majority of the process, nobody considered him a top five pick. And assuming he continues to progress, I am more than happy about where I drafted him if I'm an Eagles fan. Which is to say not very happy, because if I am an Eagles fan, I am incapable of experiencing joy. More and more, I adhere to the school of thought that you should draft whoever the gently caress you want in the first round. Just make sure you are right or you're getting fired.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 17, 2017 20:19
|
|
|
extendedsolo posted:Your last line is what most teams do, and I have no hope that the Bears can draft and develop a QB taken in the first any better than one taken in the 3rd or 4th. I'm not sure that is what most teams do. I think some move based on their rating system and I think some let outside factors like job security and media pressure convince them to act against their own best interests. You can't live life scared. I'm not saying that the Bears should take a QB. I am saying that if the Bears think there is a potential franchise QB at 3 and they pick a different position because they have him rated higher, than they are idiots.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 18, 2017 04:56
|
|
|
The Big Jesus posted:So if the Titans take Mike Williams at the 5, who do we take with the later pick? The other Mike Williams, when they realize they accidentally drafted USC Mine Williams
|
|
#
¿
Jan 18, 2017 05:48
|
|
|
Slowpoke! posted:Yeah I remember you disliked him but it did work for an entire year, until we ran into the best defense in a long time in the Super Bowl. I'm not sure it wouldn't have worked again this year too, but injuries on the OL, lack of attention to replacing our tackles since Jordan Gross retired, and Cam regressing and not fixing his mechanics... You do realize that Shula has been there for more than just the past two years. There are plenty of mediocre coordinators that have had a flash in the pan good year. Last year, your offense regressed back to the mean.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 27, 2017 23:23
|
|
|
BlindSite posted:Shula is definitely a big part of the problem, most notably he seems to be incapable of changing game plans and adjusting during games, like at all. I'm not saying he is. The biggest issue is you are still churning over that roster. The fact that you were relying on Tolbert and Ginn is part of the problem. But Shula has only really had one good year and is a significant part of the problems over there. What talent has he really developed? Granted, my point of view is from a distance, so I could be way off.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 28, 2017 04:12
|
|
|
I knew Miami was gonna make out. This is why you take a flyer on Mario Williams instead of a free agent.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 24, 2017 21:23
|
|
|
89 posted:Seems the Eagles might be getting around rules by Wentz working out personally with some WR draft prospects outside of Philadelphia. Word is, Wentz has a big influence on who the Eagles sign and draft because the Eagles are 'all in' on making the best offense possible tailor made for Wentz. This is smart and I am surprised more teams don't do this. Get a feel for who your franchise QB works well with and take it from there.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 25, 2017 17:55
|
|
)
|
evilweasel posted:just think, your favorite team passed on him 5 or 6 times in favor of 4-5 players you've never heard of and, if you're lucky, one you might have Yup, nobody remembers who the Bears drafted in 2000.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 1, 2017 00:19
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:I think people only remember that guy because of Brady. Winner winner. Didn't even go to the link, because I know who you root for 2000 was an awesome Bears draft. Too bad Brown could never stay healthy zimbomonkey posted:Leonard fournette weighed in at 240 pounds, the heaviest RB in the draft. Welcome to Carolina I suppose. If he runs well, I think he locks down the top ten. The Glumslinger posted:So what bust are the Bears gonna draft this year? Have you really hated the last two Bears drafts?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 1, 2017 20:47
|
|
|
warcrimes posted:There's a decent chance he falls to the bottom half of the draft, if not completely out of the first round. Like I said, if he runs well. Fournette is a freak and quite a few people considered him a better prospect than Elliott last year.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 2, 2017 02:00
|
|
|
PrinceRandom posted:Mike Williams in last years NCG was one of the coolest games I've seen from a college WR. It remains cool. The only thing wrong with Mike Williams is that he is named Mike Williams, which makes me scared he'll bust.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 7, 2017 17:16
|
|
|
kiimo posted:As an aside, Malik Hooker has had like one year of football and he's going to go #2 overall as a safety? People went batty when the Chiefs drafted Eric Berry #5 and his college career was an endless highlight reel. Hooker has 7 picks and is a "weak arm tackler". Hooker at #2 is crazy, but does it really matter if a FS wasn't a strong tackler in college. If he has to tackle someone, that means something went wrong. Also, not sure I care how many years a guy has played college ball. Guys have been great or busted hard having no college experience or a ton of it. If you think you have the next Earl Thomas, that is worth the number two pick for sure. (To be clear, I don't think he's the next Earl Thomas or is going #2)
|
|
#
¿
Mar 15, 2017 05:17
|
|
|
Diva Cupcake posted:I would 100% take either Malik Hooker or Jamal Adams at #6 and I don't think it'd even be controversial. There wasn't resistance, but people did speculate that they would drop, because they were safeties and safeties don't go in the top ten.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 15, 2017 16:19
|
|
|
John Brown posted:That's a really dumb outlook (not that it's one of your own). Even before pass-catching TEs became the norm, I always saw a lot of value in having someone who could play centerfielder for your defense. It's honestly the biggest hole in the Cowboys D, and I hope they go DL/DB (in any order) with their first two picks. Yea, this DB class is deep, but I believe that if you're going to address a need through the draft, the earlier the better. I'm night sure it was a dumb outlook. People thought the safeties in that class would drop to the later half if the first round because safeties always dropped to the back of the first round. When was the last time before that draft that a safety went top ten, much less multiple safeties? I'm right there with you on the value of an elite coverage safety. I think it is the second most impactful position on defense, after DE / OLB. An elite safety can mask a lot if weaknesses in your secondary and really elevate the performance of good players. I'm honestly surprised more teams haven't figured out that most elite defenses have a really good FS that's a lynch pin of that defense.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 15, 2017 17:55
|
|
|
BlindSite posted:Every year for the last few years we've rehashed the whole safety and guard in the first or top 10 or top 15 and the argument is always raised that its only "once in an era" talents that go high and its usually wrong. This is an excellent point. The new CBA has really helped those positions out.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 16, 2017 02:13
|
|
|
Doltos posted:I think you guys are lending a little too much legitimacy to testing. I am curious if prospects wearing football pads would impact their testing times equally or not. Because that is the biggest issue I have with the combine. Some guys seem to have a greater dropoff athletically if they are wearing pads.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2017 02:59
|
|
|
Abugadu posted:Probably not as much as you'd think. McCaffrey is weak as poo poo but still ran amazingly fast in pads when he was on the field. If pads were that big of a gamechanger, his 40 would have to be much lower, imo. I think you missed my point. McCaffrey is equally fast in and out of pads. My question is about what difference there would be between the two. And more importantly, how is that rate of difference measured between players. Aread they all equally affected by wearing pads or does it affect some more than others?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2017 21:43
|
|
|
Chichevache posted:The vast majority of them don't have that option. Maybe 20 or 30 superstars a year could get away with it. The rest of them, the ones who deserve a paycheck because they're loving up their bodies with zero future beyond "Wichita Car Salesman of the Year", will still play for the same reasons they've always played: pride and love of the game. And a paycheck. Because those billions shouldn't all go to line some other cocksucker's pockets. That would be unamerican. I don't know. That sounds about as American as it gets.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 21, 2017 22:09
|
|
|
Spoeank posted:Why would you draft cats into the NFL over dogs? I think you answered your own question
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2017 15:02
|
|
|
I think if the Bears tried signing a basketball player to convert to TE, they'd draft Muggsy Bogues. He'd probably be less injury prone than Zack Miller.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 3, 2017 02:11
|
|
|
My red title came from hifi, because I was being a dick to him and he was being clearly wrong.  I miss my Cutler av, but it was about time to move on from him in true Bears fashion. The best part of the McCaffrey rage is that if you didn't watch football in the 90s, you'd think the guy was just Greg Hardy instead of just being annoyingly awesome at football. If you did watch football in the 90s, it all seems reasonable. So who do I talk to for a cool new Bears avatar?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 4, 2017 22:14
|
|
|
Chichevache posted:You been gaping? I think he should be ready for Cook. All reports indicate he's better at hitting the hole.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2017 05:22
|
|
|
KIM JONG TRILL posted:Yeah it's real easy to say you won't draft him under any circumstances when you're speaking anonymously and not staring him down available in the second. It's especially easy if you are trying to tank his stock so you can spend a late round pick on him for value. If I were a scout, I would publicly hate on anyone everyone hated if I liked him. kiimo posted:What's this about Reuben Foster failing a drug test? Do the Panthers need a linebacker? Is he a viable draft option for them? Is he a SPARQ monster?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 21, 2017 00:20
|
|
|
Anyone else watching Gruden's QB camp?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 21, 2017 14:35
|
|
|
mastershakeman posted:there isn't a single guy projected to go top ten that I want on the bears besides Garrett. You don't like Jamal Adams?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 22, 2017 01:17
|
|
|
sean10mm posted:I like how they can't stop talking about how Kaaya has dead eyes and creeps everyone out. I would think that'd be a plus. Nobody complains about Belicheck's dead eyes when he's bringing home championships. Is this QB class really deep compared to previous years, just lacking in overall top talent? I swear, I like this class more than last years, but I feel crazy because apparently I am the only one. I get why people could love the top seven guys, but they all scare the gently caress out if me.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 23, 2017 18:35
|
|
|
Intruder posted:lol The scout was in a rocking chair on his porch while saying this.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 23, 2017 20:51
|
|
|
I'm just gonna say it. I think this QB class is better than last years. I think you guys are getting down on it, because every prospect has some major flaw, but so did Goff and Wentz and I would honestly take Mahomes over both of them, even though he might be the scariest prospect of them all. I just love watching him, even though I know he needs work. I really didn't expect to like him as much as I do, because of how scary you guys made him. And you are right, but he is still incredible. I think Trubisky has a lot going for him too. While I wish he played more games, I'm not willing to say that there is something wrong with him because he didn't start, when it's just as likely the coach is an idiot. I also think Watson is the safest bet to work his hardest to maximize his opportunity, despite his issues. I think how players deal with adversity is as important as physical ability and he's the only prospect I can feel confident about in his ability to handle this.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 26, 2017 15:42
|
|
|
fsif posted:*Pedantic Man swoops in* Mahomes. He'll also be worse.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 26, 2017 16:58
|
|
|
Grittybeard posted:It's entirely possible and maybe probable that Mahomes isn't as good (well, 'good') as EJ in the NFL because holy poo poo does he need some stuff fixed, but EJ didn't have the arm that Mahomes has. Yeah, I don't see it. EJ didn't look nearly as reckless as Mahomes. Part of me wonders ifor my fascination with Mahomes is the same feeling pyromaniacs get watching things burn.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 26, 2017 18:52
|
|
|
What is the consensus on PFF and their grading system for players?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 26, 2017 21:00
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 2, 2024 16:59 |
|
|
Kalli posted:It's trying to quantify the eye test and sucks at it. I was looking at how they explain it and I think this sums up what I was thinking. I think game tape is the most important factor, but if isn't the only factor. I'm playing around with an idea of making my own standardized grading system, but it seems to me that the way they set their scale just ignores too many important factors.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 26, 2017 21:12
|
|