If we lose out...

[Mongo_76]

It's a statistical accuracy. When you deem a point is success for an NFL player, look at players who hit it and the probability will show you it happens more with players drafted higher.

It will prove it versus later rounds. Maybe...

I'm not saying give up our first round pick. I'm saying don't lose to move up.In fact I'm saying play to win - period.

So now that you're throwing out "statistical accuracy" as if you have a fact or stat to back this up. Show it.

 

[bearmick]

Look up straw man. You mis-used it here.

No, I used it correctly. Your argument that my opinion about drafting a qb in the first round is fine as long as I can guarantee the next Aaron Rodgers is precisely what a straw man argument is.

 

[bearmick]

Let me ask you this. What would you suggest if by some miracle Clowney and Bridgewater both fell to us? Unrealistic, I know. But who do you think would give us the better chance of winning a superbowl? Consider, Cutler and a top 5 offense, plus a revamped defense vs. Bridgewater sitting on the bench for the first year or two and a defense that still sucks. My point is that while the first round can be a crapshoot, there is still a great chance to find a gamechanging, bluechip defensive player. Quarterbacks bust all the time. Teams are stupid enough to draft the overhyped guys like Jmarcus Russle, while smart teams draft a quarterback that fits their system.

I want a QB who fits the system. The ideal QB for this offense is a cerebral technician. A patient QB who goes through his reads quickly, takes what the defense gives him, and takes care of the ball. Cutler is the polar opposite of that in just about every way. He's a gunslinger. The last thing you want in a controlled west coast offense.

 

[sarcastik]

The


Prove this. You said it Now back it up.

I 100% guarantee that for every early pick success you name, I can name many many many more early round misses.

I am telling you that the only thing that helps you make good picks is doing your diligence, navigating the draft properly, focusing on holes and being a good evaluator of talent - period.


You win nothing by losing. You only lose.

Picking early increases nothing.

Are you seriously disputing the fact that drafting higher increases the probability of getting a better player?

 

[Nail Polish]

I want a QB who fits the system. The ideal QB for this offense is a cerebral technician. A patient QB who goes through his reads quickly, takes what the defense gives him, and takes care of the ball. Cutler is the polar opposite of that in just about every way. He's a gunslinger. The last thing you want in a controlled west coast offense.

Like Brett Favre was? A controlled technician?...lol

 

[bearmick]

Like Brett Favre was? A controlled technician?...lol

No, Favre was a gunslinger too. What does he have to do with this?

 

[ClydeLee]

It will prove it versus later rounds. Maybe...

I'm not saying give up our first round pick. I'm saying don't lose to move up.In fact I'm saying play to win - period.

So now that you're throwing out "statistical accuracy" as if you have a fact or stat to back this up. Show it.

I can't post links from my tapatalk... But even a week ago people were posting threads about the success rate of drafting a player position in the draft based in how many came out.

Looking up 1St round pick success rates in different ways will lead to finding the data of showing that there's a difference even in 1St rounders from too 10 and top 20 and beyond each having a shift.

Why must I be Saad? Via Tapatalk

 

[Nail Polish]

No, Favre was a gunslinger too.

and he was very successful

 

[sarcastik]

It will prove it versus later rounds. Maybe...

I'm not saying give up our first round pick. I'm saying don't lose to move up.In fact I'm saying play to win - period.

So now that you're throwing out "statistical accuracy" as if you have a fact or stat to back this up. Show it.

So, what's the benefit of winning meaningless games?

 

[ClydeLee]

and he was very successful

At throwing a lot of ints. He didn't have much playoff success without Reggie now did he?

Why must I be Saad? Via Tapatalk

 

[bearmick]

and he was very successful

 

[Nail Polish]

you saying he wasnt?

 

[Mongo_76]

Cutler has 13 tds 8 interceptions (11 turnovers total) in 7.5 games in this offense.

A career backup has 9 tds and has been picked once in 4.5 games.

If a career scrub runs this offense better than Cutler, why do you think a first round rookie under Trestman's wing couldn't ?

Cutler is 38 and 21 as a starter in games he's finished with the Bears. McCown is 3-3.

Not saying McCown is a bad QB. Your label of him is just not applicable... He will likely be a starter for some team next year if we don't keep him (which we should or we have another hole...)

Also, stop Cherry picking....

 

[Nail Polish]

No, Favre was a gunslinger too. What does he have to do with this?

You said the WCO needs a controlled technician not a gunslinger...Im pointing out that favre was a gunslinger yet very successful in the WCO...You disagree??

 

[BearsWillWin]

What kind of system did Favre spend nearly his whole career in?

 

[bearmick]

you saying he wasnt?

Here again is what I said .....

"I want a QB who fits the system. The ideal QB for this offense is a cerebral technician. A patient QB who goes through his reads quickly, takes what the defense gives him, and takes care of the ball. Cutler is the polar opposite of that in just about every way. He's a gunslinger. The last thing you want in a controlled west coast offense."

WTF does Brett Favre have to do with that?

 

[Nail Polish]

What kind of system did Favre spend nearly his whole career in?

Thats what I just pointed out to mick, and he has no answer

 

[Mongo_76]

So, what's the benefit of winning meaningless games?

Ummm... Winning...???


No real fan thinks any game is meaningless. Period.

 

[Nail Polish]

Here again is what I said .....

"I want a QB who fits the system. The ideal QB for this offense is a cerebral technician. A patient QB who goes through his reads quickly, takes what the defense gives him, and takes care of the ball. Cutler is the polar opposite of that in just about every way. He's a gunslinger. The last thing you want in a controlled west coast offense."

WTF does Brett Favre have to do with that?

Cause favre was very successful in the WCO and he was definitely NOT a cerebral technician..he was gunslinger like Cutler

 

[ClydeLee]

Here again is what I said .....

"I want a QB who fits the system. The ideal QB for this offense is a cerebral technician. A patient QB who goes through his reads quickly, takes what the defense gives him, and takes care of the ball. Cutler is the polar opposite of that in just about every way. He's a gunslinger. The last thing you want in a controlled west coast offense."

WTF does Brett Favre have to do with that?

He was in a controlled West Coast Offense... Then Holmgren left and Farve went into his natural state more than not.

Farves success was maligned by all time mistake creating football.

Why must I be Saad? Via Tapatalk