Some QB Needy Teams Will Wait Until Next Year

[Probie2429]

GMs aren’t as smart as you make them out to be. In fact, most are total imbeciles and their only goal is to make money for their boss (owner). Winning is secondary. That means marketing players to sell tickets. QB is the easiest position to market. There will be a trade if the Bears have the second pick and make it available.

 

[Pretzel Logic]

I know these things can change drastically in a year, but right now 2024 QB class looks pretty strong. Caleb Williams (USC) is the likely Heisman winner this year. Drake Maye (UNC) is very highly thought of as well. He has potential to be in NYC for the Heisman ceremony this year as well. Quinn Ewers is a former top recruit who has shown plenty of flashes at Texas this year. Then the wildcard is Shedeur Sanders, Deion's kid. Super athlete who has improved as a passer each year. Same for JJ McCarthy for Michigan. Both of those guys are probably similar to a Jalen Hurts type and may be more developmental 2nd round picks, but if either take a 2nd big leap, all bets are off.

Typical, the year the Bears are vying for a top 5 pick in the draft the year after is rich for QB's where teams get itchy trigger fingers to move up ...

 

[playthrough2001]

Also, some team will convince themselves that they can develop Will Levis.

 

[Marley's Liberality]

teams are always interested...always

 

[nc0gnet0]

Caleb Williams is a great QB, but with last years draft class not that great at QB, I think some teams will talk themselves into selecting mid tier guys this year over waiting. In fact, I think teams planned last year on hopes they would draft a QB in 2023. (Lions, Falcons, Panthers, etc) Maybe someone trades for Rodgers/Love or Jimmy G/Lance. But the 2024 draft is too far away.

Add Geno Smith and Mike White to that list.

 

[iueyedoc]

If the Bears remain at #2, every QB needy team, not named DET, if they remain at #3, is going to be calling CHI to see what it would take to get to #2.

What I really like is that Young and Stroud are 1/1A depending on your flavor of choice with many teams being happy with either, and with #3 being at least a tier lower, sets up for a potential SF to Dolphins type haul with plenty of time for teams to bid against each other.

 

[vabearsfan15]

Typical, the year the Bears are vying for a top 5 pick in the draft the year after is rich for QB's where teams get itchy trigger fingers to move up ...

Take projections with a grain of salt. The next QB class is almost always overhyped the year before.

Personally outside of Williams, In not impressed with next year's class. Drake Maye has great stats but how much is that due to Mack Browns offense at UNC. I haven't watched him closely, but could he be perceived like Max Duggan and Hendon Hooker this year. As in they manage prolific offenses well but not great pro prospects.

And from watching Quinn Ewers vs TCU he looked gawd awful. Not even draftable. If he didn't have the recruiting stars he should have been benched that game. I dont see the fans supporting his struggles next year with Arch Manning on the bench. Could very well be entering the transfer portal rather than the draft this time next year.

 

[rawdawg]

Also, some team will convince themselves that they can develop Will Levis.

Nobody convinced themselves with Malik Willis last year. IDK if teams got smarter or what, but Levis does have the prototypical things that NFL teams drool over (6'4", 235, white, big arm, athletic, white). You'd think teams had learned their lessons from the Jake Lockers of the world, but Josh Allen had to go and give them hope again.

 

[rawdawg]

Take projections with a grain of salt. The next QB class is almost always overhyped the year before.

Personally outside of Williams, In not impressed with next year's class. Drake Maye has great stats but how much is that due to Mack Browns offense at UNC. I haven't watched him closely, but could he be perceived like Max Duggan and Hendon Hooker this year. As in they manage prolific offenses well but not great pro prospects.

And from watching Quinn Ewers vs TCU he looked gawd awful. Not even draftable. If he didn't have the recruiting stars he should have been benched that game. I dont see the fans supporting his struggles next year with Arch Manning on the bench. Could very well be entering the transfer portal rather than the draft this time next year.

Maye is legit. Of course, so was Trubisky and Sam Howell. Ewers looked good in other games (Bama til he got hurt, Oklahoma), but yeah he needs to put it together for a full year next year and hold off Arch.

 

[Myk]

Have you ever paid any attention to an NFL draft before?

You seriously think a QB needy team won't trade to the #2 spot as they "dare" the Bears to draft a QB?

This is mind-numbingly ignorant.

What??? I said teams WILL trade for #2 if they want the QB and there is 2 QBs worth taking.
Betting Poles wasn't planning on QB in '23 all along when he went top 2 in '22 on defense would be a bad bet. He could want a QB for no other reason than he isn't who drafted Fields.

I would take the QB if other teams refused to move up thinking we wouldn't. We're out nothing and have a backup cheaper than what we usually pay. And we still have time to trade either one.

What's hilarious is you call me ignorant when you can't comprehend what you read. Try reading things in context instead of picking out one sentence you want to take offense at.

 

[bears51/40]

I'm eyeing Carolina who are #5 right now as the trade down target if we end up #2(My assumption is Young goes #1 to the Texans). It's a tough sell to the team and the fans going into another year with the bullshit they have at QB.

Also, the Panthers being so desperate for a potential franchise QB may give up the most to get him.

 

[Noonthirtyjoe]

You shouldn't be paying 2 big QB salaries when there are so many other holes on this team.
2 QBs with no line or receivers is not any better.

We would be paying rookie scale for both and one would be traded anyway.

 

[jive]

We would be paying rookie scale for both and one would be traded anyway.

I'd rather be spending rookie scale on a pass rusher or 3 tech than a backup QB that every team knows we want to trade.

 

[Myk]

You nailed the 1st part but completely blew the 2nd. If you don't trade that QB pick immediately after making it, you've decreases that value exponentially. You want some of this year's #1s etc to make that a smart move. How do you maintain the value of both your QBs by not playing one, especially when a future pick isn't worth as much as a current one.

If (big if with the Bears) they build the offense I don't see Fields lowering his value and I don't see that value being less than an #11. The risk is in the rookie not being able to play in real games and showing it to the world. But that's always a risk in drafting any player.

You shouldn't be paying 2 big QB salaries when there are so many other holes on this team.
2 QBs with no line or receivers is not any better.

We literally paid a giraffe $18,000,000 to suck for a year. Fields' contract is that much for 4 years. Even if you add his signing bonus he would be a steal compared to what we normally give never have beens to hopefully not play.
They're rookie salaries not big contracts. The big contracts wouldn't start until the 5th or 6th years.

A #2 would probably be a big-ish salary as a backup but keeping either of them as backup wouldn't be the plan. That would be a 1 year or less trial to pick one and trade the other.

 

[Myk]

I'd rather be spending rookie scale on a pass rusher or 3 tech than a backup QB that every team knows we want to trade.

Because 1QB is better than "2 QBs with no line or receivers is not any better"?

You seem to know there's a problem but keep losing focus.

 

[jive]

Because 1QB is better than "2 QBs with no line or receivers is not any better"?

You seem to know there's a problem but keep losing focus.

Because the salary on a premiere pass rusher will be much higher than a top OL or WR.

The thing that is keeping us from being competitive this year isn't the offense. It is absolutely the defense where we have much less talent now.

 

[Mdbearz]

Every year a QB or two comes out of the post season or workouts or combine and grabs some attention, so it would not surprise me if more than just Stroud or Young make it into the first round.

In a dream situation the Bears are able to trade back because someone want one of the two, and then another team falls in love with another QB and we trade back twice in the first and load up on both current and future picks...

 

[Myk]

Because the salary on a premiere pass rusher will be much higher than a top OL or WR.

The thing that is keeping us from being competitive this year isn't the offense. It is absolutely the defense where we have much less talent now.

You want a high salary or was that sarcasm?
If the goal is to have a high salaried pass rusher why didn't we keep Mack? At least we knew he was good.

The thing keeping us from being competitive is the team. We have a lot more holes than one #2 player can fill. That is why I would want to trade down, preferably out of the top 10 where it would double our draft and probably add to future drafts.

I only said to grab a QB if the ludicrous claim that no other teams would want to move up to #2 for a QB happens. Even if we want to spend #2 on a pass rusher to hamper ourselves with another Mack contract on a player the refs will allowed to be held freely we're going to get offers for #2. I'm sure even #1 will get offers no matter how obvious it is they want the top QB pick of the litter.

 

[jive]

You want a high salary or was that sarcasm?
If the goal is to have a high salaried pass rusher why didn't we keep Mack? At least we knew he was good.

The thing keeping us from being competitive is the team. We have a lot more holes than one #2 player can fill. That is why I would want to trade down, preferably out of the top 10 where it would double our draft and probably add to future drafts.

I only said to grab a QB if the ludicrous claim that no other teams would want to move up to #2 for a QB happens. Even if we want to spend #2 on a pass rusher to hamper ourselves with another Mack contract on a player the refs will allowed to be held freely we're going to get offers for #2. I'm sure even #1 will get offers no matter how obvious it is they want the top QB pick of the litter.

I think you're not understanding...

If I were to get a rookie contract, which is going to be the cheapest, I'd want it at a premium position like pass rusher rather than OL, WR, or backup QB. I am addressing the idea of drafting a QB in hopes of forcing a trade. I am all for trading down if it doesn't cost us a top pass rusher or 3-tech. The way the draft is shaping up, we would need to stay in the top 5-7 in order to do that.

 

[Myk]

I think you're not understanding...

If I were to get a rookie contract, which is going to be the cheapest, I'd want it at a premium position like pass rusher rather than OL, WR, or backup QB. I am addressing the idea of drafting a QB in hopes of forcing a trade. I am all for trading down if it doesn't cost us a top pass rusher or 3-tech. The way the draft is shaping up, we would need to stay in the top 5-7 in order to do that.

Well the #2 pick isn't for what you want in a year with allegedly 2 top QB prospects. It's a QB position so you trade down or you get the QB if nobody will pay (and somebody will pay). You don't let someone (especially not a division rival) take that QB for free when you have the spot to draft them and aren't sure the QB you have is the GOAT. That QB isn't to be a backup, that QB is hopefully the GOAT or you trade him before letting everyone know he isn't. If he is the GOAT then you trade our known commodity at QB who still has 2 years left on contract. Either way we make out better than resigning another bloated high pick pass rusher contract like the one we just got out of.
The point of calling them a backup was to point out the rookie contract is cheaper than prices we've paid for backups and the talent likely higher.

Pass rusher is absolutely equal to protecting the QB against a pass rusher. In fact protecting your own QB is more important than sacking the opposing team's QB by orders of shit tons. Sack another QB you might win a game, lose your QB and you lose the season. But I'm not the one saying to spend #2 on oline or dline.

That you think you need #5-#7 to get a pass rusher shows how deep of a black hole that thinking is. It's why the Bears have been losers for so long. We just spent the top 2 picks on defense. Now you want a top 10 pick on defense. And next year it will be the same thing. Lather rinse repeat just like repeating being a loser team for so long.
Every freakin time we get a top 10 pick it has to be for defense because only defense is worthy of that talent. If that was the play why aren't we winning more than Pats? Why are we down here with the Browns if this is the winning recipe?

We needed Smith because he can tackle. Same year we needed to trade for a pass rusher and traded that QB's chances for an offense away for the rest of his rookie contract. Where has this great defense been and why did we just give them away for a song if that is the solution to this team?
You act like this has ever worked and it hasn't. If it was the solution we would be the Patriots, we would be Packers.