Did the Bears Sandbag Mitchell Trubisky?

[Myk]

Not sure what I just read... But it sure sounds like, I don't care if Trubisky is #2 or #3, but God damnit, I want him to be #2, at least.

Trubisky was ALWAYS considered someone who needed time and experience. That is likely the main reason the Bears were able to get him how they did. If he was considered NFL ready, he would have likely went #1 overall. Yet however, after watching him for a few quarters in preseason, you've declared that he either start week 1 or he was over-drafted and Orton-like. Sweeeet.....

I give zero fucks who Trubisky is behind, it could be Favre or it can be Glennon, he should play when he is ready to play. If it's week 1, great. If it's week 15, great.

I don't get why people get so hung up on Trubisky's position on the depth chart, as far as #2 or #3. The coaches have shown in the preseason games already, they had a higher premium on Trubisky getting playing time than Sanchez. At this point, Sanchez is only #2 as a buffer for Trubisky not to be thrown into a game cold and unprepared. Likely, if Glennon went down, Sanchez would play the remainder of the game, MAYBE the next one and Trubisky would take over from there.

Some fans act like little kids during the weeks leading up to Xmas. Seeing there gift under the tree and asking every day, can I open my gifts now? How about now? How about now? Then pouting when they are told no.

Jesus Christ, it's 2 weeks into preseason, how about calming your tits and see how it plays out first.
Or not. I guess if you want to declare Trubisky Orton-like if he isn't the starter week one, go ahead, can't say I'd be surprised if some Bears fans went that direction...

Yes I want him at #2 so he gets practice with the players who are in the NFL. If you're planning on him never starting then you can give him the Hanie treatment with the practice squad until you have to play him at which point most would expect him to get cut for not panning out. 4th round or UDFA, no biggie, but when you use a #2 pick on that it becomes a big deal.
And I'm not one to go screaming about wasted picks, but a long shot QB at #2 is not who you get at #2.

You are very wrong. It's after watching GLENNON in preseason and his other game tape that I decided Trubisky is the player who gives us the best chance to win. And I've decided Glennon brings nothing to the table to have Trubisky learn behind. That is a huge difference from what you said.
I wanted Trubisky to sit and learn. I hoped Glennon was everything the staff thought he was, but he isn't. Had they kept Cutler or Hoyer or Barkley, sure, sit Trubisky for the year at #3.
Even as it stands I don't know that I would want Trubisky as #1 in the first game, so you're wrong there too.
My possible depth chart at this point would be Sanchez, Trubisky, Glennon. And if Glennon turns around to be who he was last time he started that could become Glennon, Trubisky, Sanchez. Notice that in neither situation is that Trubisky in the #1 spot. I still believe in bringing a QB along slow, just not treating a #2 pick like a UDFA long shot.

You won't know when he's ready to play when he's only playing with the practice squad. That is my point of wanting him at #2. It's not like our present #1 or #2 are going to save a season and if once the emergency QB rule is in place you're either stuck with #3 Glennon/Sanchez or your stuck with #2 Glennon/Sanchez because you don't want Trubisky playing whether he's #2 or #3.

Sanchez at #2 in the preseason to get one series a game seems to be more about keeping the QB controversy at bay than anything. The emergency QB rule does not apply to preseason games so your point doesn't work.

 

[Newblood]

Yes I want him at #2 so he gets practice with the players who are in the NFL. If you're planning on him never starting then you can give him the Hanie treatment with the practice squad until you have to play him at which point most would expect him to get cut for not panning out. 4th round or UDFA, no biggie, but when you use a #2 pick on that it becomes a big deal.
And I'm not one to go screaming about wasted picks, but a long shot QB at #2 is not who you get at #2.

You are very wrong. It's after watching GLENNON in preseason and his other game tape that I decided Trubisky is the player who gives us the best chance to win. And I've decided Glennon brings nothing to the table to have Trubisky learn behind. That is a huge difference from what you said.
I wanted Trubisky to sit and learn. I hoped Glennon was everything the staff thought he was, but he isn't. Had they kept Cutler or Hoyer or Barkley, sure, sit Trubisky for the year at #3.
Even as it stands I don't know that I would want Trubisky as #1 in the first game, so you're wrong there too.
My possible depth chart at this point would be Sanchez, Trubisky, Glennon. And if Glennon turns around to be who he was last time he started that could become Glennon, Trubisky, Sanchez. Notice that in neither situation is that Trubisky in the #1 spot. I still believe in bringing a QB along slow, just not treating a #2 pick like a UDFA long shot.

You won't know when he's ready to play when he's only playing with the practice squad. That is my point of wanting him at #2. It's not like our present #1 or #2 are going to save a season and if once the emergency QB rule is in place you're either stuck with #3 Glennon/Sanchez or your stuck with #2 Glennon/Sanchez because you don't want Trubisky playing whether he's #2 or #3.

Sanchez at #2 in the preseason to get one series a game seems to be more about keeping the QB controversy at bay than anything. The emergency QB rule does not apply to preseason games so your point doesn't work.

What the hell...

You literally just said you are all for bringing a QB along slowly, but if they bring Trubisky along slowly then he is potentially getting the Hanie treatment. Hanie and Trubisky are in zero shape or form the same situation, and to use that as a comparison is laughable. Hanie got the Hanie treatment because he was NEVER, considered a franchise QB. And there is a hell of a lot of difference between a long shot QB and a QB that isn't ready day 1. No idea how someone can even logically go there...

You do know there exists a world where even 1st round draft picks have to earn there positions right? In fact, most head coaches in the NFL take that approach. So just stop with the #2 draft pick getting treated like an UDFA stuff. Talk about being over-dramatic. Are you a teenage girl?

I said it before and I'll say it again, I give zero fucks about who Trubisky plays behind, be it Cutler, Hoyer, Glennon, Favre or whom the hell ever. Being concerned about that is so far off the real point it's ridiculous. Whomever plays ahead of Trubisky is only a warm body to keep the position warm until Trubisky is ready.

Wrong. The emergency QB situation applies in the preseason also. One of the major points of the preseason is to put players in situations that they could face in the regular season, that way they can be prepared for it. Sanchez being a vet affords them the ability to not have to give him a lot of reps in the preseason games, which is a benefit to Trubisky. However, that doesn't mean that Sanchez doesn't need any reps. There is a reality where Sanchez may need to come in cold and play in the regular season. You may want to take off your tin foil hat if you think Sanchez's only purpose is to keep a QB controversy at bay.

Would I like to see Trubisky move up the depth chart, yes. Is Trubisky the most talented QB on the roster, yes. But that doesn't mean I'm going to start pouting week 2 of the preseason because he hasn't been crowned the starter or the backup.

 

[Myk]

What the hell...

You literally just said you are all for bringing a QB along slowly, but if they bring Trubisky along slowly then he is potentially getting the Hanie treatment. Hanie and Trubisky are in zero shape or form the same situation, and to use that as a comparison is laughable. Hanie got the Hanie treatment because he was NEVER, considered a franchise QB. And there is a hell of a lot of difference between a long shot QB and a QB that isn't ready day 1. No idea how someone can even logically go there...

You do know there exists a world where even 1st round draft picks have to earn there positions right? In fact, most head coaches in the NFL take that approach. So just stop with the #2 draft pick getting treated like an UDFA stuff. Talk about being over-dramatic. Are you a teenage girl?

I said it before and I'll say it again, I give zero fucks about who Trubisky plays behind, be it Cutler, Hoyer, Glennon, Favre or whom the hell ever. Being concerned about that is so far off the real point it's ridiculous. Whomever plays ahead of Trubisky is only a warm body to keep the position warm until Trubisky is ready.

Wrong. The emergency QB situation applies in the preseason also. One of the major points of the preseason is to put players in situations that they could face in the regular season, that way they can be prepared for it. Sanchez being a vet affords them the ability to not have to give him a lot of reps in the preseason games, which is a benefit to Trubisky. However, that doesn't mean that Sanchez doesn't need any reps. There is a reality where Sanchez may need to come in cold and play in the regular season. You may want to take off your tin foil hat if you think Sanchez's only purpose is to keep a QB controversy at bay.

Would I like to see Trubisky move up the depth chart, yes. Is Trubisky the most talented QB on the roster, yes. But that doesn't mean I'm going to start pouting week 2 of the preseason because he hasn't been crowned the starter or the backup.

Do you have a reading comprehension problem?
There's slow for a long shot, there's slow for someone you had to get at #2. You even say it yourself, "never considered a franchise QB", and that's how they're treating Trubisky.

Part of bringing a QB along slow is to have a QB who can play in front of him. Someone screwed up. So that QB you had to have at #2 should be able to play. There is no proof that hurts any top prospect.
So either Bears screwed up drafting him (which I don't think) or he would be able to start sooner rather than later.

You do realize earning the #1 QB spot on the Bears shouldn't be that difficult this year, right?

Emergency QB rule in the preseason? LOL That must be an issue for teams playing 4 QBs in the preseason (like the Bears just did) or showing up with more than 45 players on the active list. Someone needs to alert to Commish.

Teams will be permitted an Active List of 45 players and an Inactive List of eight players for each regular-season and postseason game. Provided, that if a club has two quarterbacks on its 45-player Active List, a third quarterback from its Inactive List is permitted to dress for the game, but if he enters the game during the first three quarters, the other two quarterbacks are thereafter prohibited from playing.[3]

As you can see it is literally impossible for the Emergency QB rule to apply to preseason.

 

[Newblood]

Do you have a reading comprehension problem?
There's slow for a long shot, there's slow for someone you had to get at #2. You even say it yourself, "never considered a franchise QB", and that's how they're treating Trubisky.

Part of bringing a QB along slow is to have a QB who can play in front of him. Someone screwed up. So that QB you had to have at #2 should be able to play. There is no proof that hurts any top prospect.
So either Bears screwed up drafting him (which I don't think) or he would be able to start sooner rather than later.

You do realize earning the #1 QB spot on the Bears shouldn't be that difficult this year, right?

Emergency QB rule in the preseason? LOL That must be an issue for teams playing 4 QBs in the preseason (like the Bears just did) or showing up with more than 45 players on the active list. Someone needs to alert to Commish.



As you can see it is literally impossible for the Emergency QB rule to apply to preseason.

Jesus Christ...

Yeah, you are right Trubisky is totes getting the long short treatment...

The only reason it would matter who plays in front of Trubisky is if the Bears were planning to go somewhere this season. So for the 3rd time, it doesn't fucking matter who is front of him. They are only a place holder.

No one said it was going to be difficult for Trubisky to earn the starting spot. In fact, I've pretty much stated the opposite... But alas, reading is hard. The only thing keeping Trubisky from the starting spot is his own progression. Again, WHO IS IN FRONT OF TRUBISKY IS MEANINGLESS!

Try not to go full derp. First, the Bears haven't played 4 QBs. Unless you call Shaw kneeling on the last play, "playing". Second, you don't have to abide to every nuance of the situation in order to practice it. A QB can come in and get playing time to be prepared for the situation, without going through the the whole formality of saying, OK, now no other QB can come in. A 3rd string QB, who may be inactive on game day, can come in to play during the preseason so he can be prepared if he is called upon as an emergency QB. I mean seriously, is it that hard to grasp?

Listen, it's obvious you are going to cry and pout until you get your way. Week 2 in the preseason and ZOMG, Trubisky is getting the Hanie treatment! The teenage girl thing may be how you go about things, but it's not for me. So the only advice I can give you at this time is, grab a hold of your hello kitten pillow, squeeze it tight for comfort and be prepared to not get everything you want when you want it.

 

[r1terrell23]

So if Mitch's progression is keeping him from starting than why is a QB worse than he starting? Shouldn't a veteran qb progressing at a much slower rate be riding the bench in favor of Sanchez? Also how does anyone know if he actually is progressing if he's not playing against first string talent? As I said in another thread, it's not just about "going anywhere this season". The Bears are asking fans to pay more cash than ever and people actually want to be entertained after 4 seasons of shitty football. That is why I think people are frustrated and they have every right to be when a better and more exciting option is on the team. The Bears biggest problem is signing Mike Glennon. Had they brought in a decent qb we wouldn't be having this discussion.

 

[Myk]

Holy shit, you say not to go full derp and then go full derp. Playing 4 QBs is playing 4 QBs. Yes you cannot pull your #3 QB who goes in before the 4th to even have a QB take a knee except for injury. Not having ONLY 45 active players makes the Emergency QB rule impossible to apply to preseason. They're not pretending it applies by playing Sanchez one series or by having Trubisky #3.
And as I pointed out it really doesn't matter if Trub is #2 in the regular season. If you don't want him to play you've already limited yourself to Sanchez no matter what position he is.

If Trubisky's progression was what was holding him back he would be the starter, he's the best one period, he has progressed above the two veteran bums they brought in. Glennon's check is what's holding him back otherwise Glennon would be cut. I could accept that, it's how the Bears work. The problem is Trubisky is not being groomed to start.
If he starts game 1, he's been groomed to fail. If he starts from #3 at any point this year he's been groomed to fail. And after this year of wasted time being groomed to fail he gets anointed #1 he will still be groomed to fail because now he's learned it's not how you play it's how much your check is or what your draft position is. Rex is out QB, Jay is our QB, Mike is our QB, Mitch is our QB. That's the way of the Bears.

You should read your posts if you want to see the teenage girl thing. The least a man would've done would've admitted he was wrong about the Emergency QB rule not tried to rationalize his idiocy away by claiming they were pretending.

I could see their sandbaggng of Trubisky was to put him in situations but having him at #3 is not pretending there's an emergency rule in place.

 

[Myk]

Had they brought in a decent qb we wouldn't be having this discussion.

Had they done that I would be first in line saying to bring Trub along slow.

 

[Newblood]

So if Mitch's progression is keeping him from starting than why is a QB worse than he starting? Shouldn't a veteran qb progressing at a much slower rate be riding the bench in favor of Sanchez? Also how does anyone know if he actually is progressing if he's not playing against first string talent? As I said in another thread, it's not just about "going anywhere this season". The Bears are asking fans to pay more cash than ever and people actually want to be entertained after 4 seasons of shitty football. That is why I think people are frustrated and they have every right to be when a better and more exciting option is on the team. The Bears biggest problem is signing Mike Glennon. Had they brought in a decent qb we wouldn't be having this discussion.

Give zero fucks if Sanchez starts or Glennon starts. Both are place holders and a means to an end.

There is an area of progression between college QB and playing with the starters. If you want to know his progression for sure then go watch the practices or ask John Fox.

Who is the bigger fool, the ones asking for more money for their shitty product or the ones handing over more money for the shitty product. Because no one is making you give more money.

A child will also say, why should I eat my vegetables when I have cake that I can eat instead. Because sometimes children don't know what is best for them and need to be convinced to do what is best, even though they don't like it. Life is hard sometimes.

 

[Newblood]

Holy shit, you say not to go full derp and then go full derp. Playing 4 QBs is playing 4 QBs. Yes you cannot pull your #3 QB who goes in before the 4th to even have a QB take a knee except for injury. Not having ONLY 45 active players makes the Emergency QB rule impossible to apply to preseason. They're not pretending it applies by playing Sanchez one series or by having Trubisky #3.
And as I pointed out it really doesn't matter if Trub is #2 in the regular season. If you don't want him to play you've already limited yourself to Sanchez no matter what position he is.

If Trubisky's progression was what was holding him back he would be the starter, he's the best one period, he has progressed above the two veteran bums they brought in. Glennon's check is what's holding him back otherwise Glennon would be cut. I could accept that, it's how the Bears work. The problem is Trubisky is not being groomed to start.
If he starts game 1, he's been groomed to fail. If he starts from #3 at any point this year he's been groomed to fail. And after this year of wasted time being groomed to fail he gets anointed #1 he will still be groomed to fail because now he's learned it's not how you play it's how much your check is or what your draft position is. Rex is out QB, Jay is our QB, Mike is our QB, Mitch is our QB. That's the way of the Bears.

You should read your posts if you want to see the teenage girl thing. The least a man would've done would've admitted he was wrong about the Emergency QB rule not tried to rationalize his idiocy away by claiming they were pretending.

I could see their sandbaggng of Trubisky was to put him in situations but having him at #3 is not pretending there's an emergency rule in place.

Oh God...

Here, I got something for you:

I hear it's super comfy.

 

[Myk]

Oh God...

Here, I got something for you:
I hear it's super comfy.

I'm sorry you're such a whiny bitch and can't own up to your idiocy.
But that sure does put your stance of throwing a season before you've even had the first game in the bag so you can then turn around and blow next year too into perspective.
At least 3 years of high picks should cost Fox his job. Hopefully the next coach can work with a rookie QB and keeping Trubisky working as a scrub won't cause it to stick.

 

[CaliBearFan]

I've always been interested in that narrative because there is another aspect to it that doesn't get talked about as much, and because of my lack of familiarity with the in depth mechanics of the current cap, I have a hard time saying it it is "real" or not.

Basically,

In a cba where you can carry over cap from year to year, wouldn't one year deals still have multi year impact? So while the bears weren't planning on paying up for whatever higher tier FA this year, it still may impact ability to re-sign players in coming years, or inhibit ability to sign a higher tier FA when the bears are better in the next couple of years.

Am I missing something on this?

Yes, the rule you are referring to is that teams have to spend a certain amount over a 4 year period or be penalized. But as far as the cap you cannot roll over money not spent in a year to exceed the cap the next year. The Bears cap next year is not effected in any way by the Glennon signing except that they can spend less if they want to and not be penalized. The 4 year rule is about making sure teams spend enough.

Edit - I'm wrong. They are seperate rules. The money spent on Glennon is money that could have otherwise been carried over. That contract seems absurd for many reasons big picture is a small price to pay if the overall gameplan nets a franchise QB in trubinsky. Im not going to waste any time bitching Glennon.

 

[Newblood]

I'm sorry you're such a whiny bitch and can't own up to your idiocy.
But that sure does put your stance of throwing a season before you've even had the first game in the bag so you can then turn around and blow next year too into perspective.
At least 3 years of high picks should cost Fox his job. Hopefully the next coach can work with a rookie QB and keeping Trubisky working as a scrub won't cause it to stick.

Holy shit... An idiot is someone crying like a little girl about the rookie QB being treated like a late draft pick 2 weeks into the preseason. Pic of a baby eh? Talk about irony. Remind me again who is the one saying, calm the fuck down and let it play out first and who is the one being a little girl, throwing a fit because they aren't getting what they want now? Have you ever considered growing some balls? Or nah?

And you shouldn't type angry, because half of what you typed didn't even make sense.

 

[Bearly]

Had they brought in a decent qb we wouldn't be having this discussion.

Had they done that I would be first in line saying to bring Trub along slow.

Who would that be?

Cousins? Not

Romo? If we didn't get our QB in the draft we probably don't have a starter after a few games.

Cutler? Not the best mentor and it was time to go.

Hoyer? Lots of wimpy losses while having good stats. Whenever he tries to actually do anything, he shits the bed. People forget that after 3 preseason games last year he had a rating in the 40s with 2 int and no TDs. No TDs the entire pre. This year, he's also below the 50 mark for the preseason. He hasn't been better than Glennon who should shake off some rust. At least we can thank him for his part of acquiring trubisky. He's also getting $7m this year with 10 guaranteed overall so cheaper but not nearly as cheap as many assume.

Kap? Make it up as you go along is not good mentoring plus another reason for a frustrated fan base to hate on the Bear.

In what reality do we have a genuinely better as opposed to possibly a parallel option?

 

[r1terrell23]

Give zero fucks if Sanchez starts or Glennon starts. Both are place holders and a means to an end.

There is an area of progression between college QB and playing with the starters. If you want to know his progression for sure then go watch the practices or ask John Fox.

Who is the bigger fool, the ones asking for more money for their shitty product or the ones handing over more money for the shitty product. Because no one is making you give more money.

A child will also say, why should I eat my vegetables when I have cake that I can eat instead. Because sometimes children don't know what is best for them and need to be convinced to do what is best, even though they don't like it. Life is hard sometimes.

The Sanchez vs Glennon angle was to show the hypocrisy of saying Trubs isn't starting because of progression when the opposite is happening at the top of the pecking order. And yes we give fucks about who starts at qb because the Bears begged us to hand them tens of millions of dollars after raising prices to come watch them. Would you be happy if gas lasted half as long but you had to pay 3 bucks more a gallon?

As for your child reference that is true but doesn't apply here. There is no evidence that our coaching staff knows what's best on the offensive side of the football, especially at the QB position. None of them have any major accomplishments at the NFL level to warrant such blind support. Until they prove otherwise, their decisions should always be questioned.

 

[Newblood]

The Sanchez vs Glennon angle was to show the hypocrisy of saying Trubs isn't starting because of progression when the opposite is happening at the top of the pecking order. And yes we give fucks about who starts at qb because the Bears begged us to hand them tens of millions of dollars after raising prices to come watch them. Would you be happy if gas lasted half as long but you had to pay 3 bucks more a gallon?

As for your child reference that is true but doesn't apply here. There is no evidence that our coaching staff knows what's best on the offensive side of the football, especially at the QB position. None of them have any major accomplishments at the NFL level to warrant such blind support. Until they prove otherwise, their decisions should always be questioned.

Bears are trying to build a bridge and you are worried about what color they are going to paint the columns.

If I had a new top end Tesla on order, and gas was $3/gallon for half the miles, I'd say, meh, just have to live with it for a little longer, until my Tesla gets here. Wouldn't be that big of a deal to me.

You mean the coach that went to a superbowl twice. Or the coach that benched the starting week 6 to start the rookie QB? Mkay.

 

[Myk]

Who would that be?

Cousins? Not

Romo? If we didn't get our QB in the draft we probably don't have a starter after a few games.

Cutler? Not the best mentor and it was time to go.

Hoyer? Lots of wimpy losses while having good stats. Whenever he tries to actually do anything, he shits the bed. People forget that after 3 preseason games last year he had a rating in the 40s with 2 int and no TDs. No TDs the entire pre. This year, he's also below the 50 mark for the preseason. He hasn't been better than Glennon who should shake off some rust. At least we can thank him for his part of acquiring trubisky. He's also getting $7m this year with 10 guaranteed overall so cheaper but not nearly as cheap as many assume.

Kap? Make it up as you go along is not good mentoring plus another reason for a frustrated fan base to hate on the Bear.

In what reality do we have a genuinely better as opposed to possibly a parallel option?

Cutler not being a mentor doesn't hold any water when you paid Glennon even more as the mentor.
Either way it's, "Watch that guy and do the opposite."
And it's even quite possible Glennon has a chip on his shoulder about Trubisky getting drafted.

 

[The Hawk]

The Sanchez vs Glennon angle was to show the hypocrisy of saying Trubs isn't starting because of progression when the opposite is happening at the top of the pecking order. And yes we give fucks about who starts at qb because the Bears begged us to hand them tens of millions of dollars after raising prices to come watch them. Would you be happy if gas lasted half as long but you had to pay 3 bucks more a gallon?

As for your child reference that is true but doesn't apply here. There is no evidence that our coaching staff knows what's best on the offensive side of the football, especially at the QB position. None of them have any major accomplishments at the NFL level to warrant such blind support. Until they prove otherwise, their decisions should always be questioned.

Absolutely correct.

 

[modo]

Glennon is not a mentor. Cutler could not stay healthy and was ineffective last year. Glennon is and always was a place holder until Trubisky is ready. Sanchez is the mentor.

 

[Bearly]

Cutler not being a mentor doesn't hold any water when you paid Glennon even more as the mentor.
Either way it's, "Watch that guy and do the opposite."
And it's even quite possible Glennon has a chip on his shoulder about Trubisky getting drafted.

Had nothing to do with their on field stuff and how was it not time for Jay to go?

 

[Bearly]

Glennon is not a mentor. Cutler could not stay healthy and was ineffective last year. Glennon is and always was a place holder until Trubisky is ready. Sanchez is the mentor.

True but he won't turn the team against the rookie or snub him if he asks a question. We all know that Glennon has enough on his plate but he's a better fit than Jay was at this point. When he's not starting, he can help... like he did with Winston.