Who was a better prospect coming out of college? Mitch or Justin?

[run and shoot]

And yet, Lance got picked before Fields by the QB guru, just like Mitch before more accomplished prospects. If anything, the way this and that draft fell have proven the predraft hype correct. Head scratching for me that Fields wasn't the 49ers' pick but he was the least projected at #3.

What this proves is that projecting QBs is difficult. With that in mind, you'd think teams would put a premium on the body of work and skill set that Fields possesses but for some reason there's still a lot of 'smartest person in the room' syndrome in front offices.

LOL.....now yer going with "And yet, Lance got picked before Fields by the QB guru, just like Mitch before more accomplished prospects." ? Wonder where ya got that from.

 

[Bearly]

LOL.....now yer going with "And yet, Lance got picked before Fields by the QB guru, just like Mitch before more accomplished prospects." ? Wonder where ya got that from.

I'd say that you're playing the fool but you ain't playin. Context is everything. It was comparing drafts. Not an endorsement or slam on individual players. Did ya not read the part where I said, "What this proves is that projecting QBs is difficult."

Not sure your point considering how strongly you were promoting Lance and dumping on Mitch in their respective drafts. I always thought Fields was the guy for us. Better fit for Nagy's O, ready sooner and less of a boom or bust prospect.

The top 5 QBs in this draft had higher draft point grade than any of the QBs in 2017 of which Mitch had the highest and Mahomes the lowest of the 1st rounders (Mahomes didn't have a top 32 grade and both Mitch and Watson were back 1/2 players).
If you check post #29, you'll see that this draft followed their predraft value score exactly and that the only aberration in 2017 was Mahomes before Watson. The other thing that you'll notice is that QBs in this drafts are unusually good values for where they were chosen relative to most drafts.

 

[Bearly]

Who is the better prospect?!?! Really?!?!

I was going to write a long list of things that Justin Fields did and had that made him a better prospect than Trubisky. Instead, I can sum it all up by saying that there is NOTHING that Trubisky did in college that would have made him a better prospect.

Remember all the reports about Mitch's accuracy and arm talent before the draft. Pointing at lack of INTs as a result of that.

 

[shoez90]

Mitch Trubisky and Justin Fields are perfect examples of why all the pre-draft shit can be fucking garbage.

Trubisky needed lots of time to develop. But people got so caught up in his "upside" that he suddenly started to move up everyone's draft board. He had no business being drafted by the Bears at #2 and handed to Fox and Loggains, then being asked to start in game 5 of his rookie season because Glennon was a complete trainwreck.

Justin Fields had no business falling to #11 and being the 4th QB taken in this draft. It still blows my mind that we were in a position to go up and get him. We had built up a lot of QB karma, so whatever. But you could make a case for Fields going #1 overall. Thank fuck for the Dan Orlovskys and other talking heads of the world that suddenly started to make him trend downward.

In my opinion, in a few years, people will look back on this draft and say that 11 teams made a huge mistake not drafting Justin Fields.

I agree with this ?. How many times has Mel Kiper been wrong, plenty. It's like picking stocks. These "experts" resumes are full of Heisman and sleepers that are not anywhere near the NFL right now. So trust your eyes and you can see What the post said was true about the QBz in question.

 

[BearsFan51]

Discuss?

Justin Fields and it's not even close. Better size, better athleticism, better arm, better speed and most important of all better experience.

 

[Bearly]

The things about Trubisky is that he was under the radar until the college season was over. He shot up boards like a shooting star after the season and leading up to the draft. Fields has been more consistently up there the whole time all along, so I personally feel a bit more secure in that he isn't just the latest fad thing.

Ranking The 7 Best Quarterbacks In The 2017 NFL Draft

The 2017 NFL Draft is still roughly four months away, but that doesn't mean we can't take a look at the top quarterback prospec...

www.chatsports.com

Should Pace have taken Kizer?
This happens every year. Once writers get more input from scouts and GMs, the sequence changes. Notice Mitch was still top 3 and ahead of Mahomes in this list from Dec 6th of 2016. He did not fly up the boards after the season. He was a big miss but way too many false narratives about the selection. The biggest aberration here was Kizer and not Mitch.

 

[modo]

The QBs from 2017 were not anywhere near as touted as this years draft....not even close

 

[run and shoot]

run and shoot said:
LOL.....now yer going with "And yet, Lance got picked before Fields by the QB guru, just like Mitch before more accomplished prospects." ? Wonder where ya got that from.

I'd say that you're playing the fool but you ain't playin. Context is everything. It was comparing drafts. Not an endorsement or slam on individual players. Did ya not read the part where I said, "What this proves is that projecting QBs is difficult."

Not sure your point considering how strongly you were promoting Lance and dumping on Mitch in their respective drafts. I always thought Fields was the guy for us. Better fit for Nagy's O, ready sooner and less of a boom or bust prospect.

The top 5 QBs in this draft had higher draft point grade than any of the QBs in 2017 of which Mitch had the highest and Mahomes the lowest of the 1st rounders (Mahomes didn't have a top 32 grade and both Mitch and Watson were back 1/2 players).
If you check post #29, you'll see that this draft followed their predraft value score exactly and that the only aberration in 2017 was Mahomes before Watson. The other thing that you'll notice is that QBs in this drafts are unusually good values for where they were chosen relative to most drafts.

There's nothing "foolish" about what I said...
Look I've made the same points and verbiage in the past. About Lance & Mitch ( i.e. 1 yr exp.) Now you're using the same talking points.

Go to the Lance-Mitch part>>>#62

 

[Bearly]

Context is everything. You're always in the ozone.

 

[Bearly]

The QBs from 2017 were not anywhere near as touted as this years draft....not even close

Last time QBs went 1,2,3 or 5 in the 1st was in another millennium.

3 of those were Akili Smith, Tim Couch and Cade McNown.

 

[satchice]

It’s a valid question considering Mitch did go 2nd in the draft.

It was a draft that was considered not having any 1st round QB talent vs a draft that was considered to have the most QB talent since 1983.

 

[Discus fish salesman]

It was a draft that was considered not having any 1st round QB talent vs a draft that was considered to have the most QB talent since 1983.

Deshaun Watson was incredibly undervalued. He'd shown no reason not to be a top pick as he had dominated the best competition in college and had everything he needed to be successful. He was another example of overanalyzing prior to the draft.

 

[modo]

these QBs are better than that draft...

I think Fields has a real shot at being the best out of the bunch...

 

[ThatGuyRyan]

Discuss?

 

[Nelly]

Right after the draft Skip Bayless trashed the Trubisky pick saying that when he watched him play, he thought Trubisky might be a good 2nd round pick at the highest. His critique was dead on. Meanwhile, you had one pretty well respected QB guy (O'Sullivan) with Fields at the top of his board and reports that about 8 actual NFL teams did as well.

 

[SD Bears Fan]

Who is the better prospect?!?! Really?!?!

I was going to write a long list of things that Justin Fields did and had that made him a better prospect than Trubisky. Instead, I can sum it all up by saying that there is NOTHING that Trubisky did in college that would have made him a better prospect.

And he couldn't beat out Marquise Williams to actually get on the field. Fields is 1000 times the player Turdbiscuit and Williams ever were.

 

[mecha]

I thought it was well established that Trubisky had little experience in college, he was rated as high as he was due to the potential ceiling/physical ability. I also don't watch NCAA football, I have no idea what his opposition was at that level, but I'm led to believe it wasn't against elite teams.

Fields is different. all the issues with Trubisky, notably the array of question marks, they're not there with him.

I don't understand how anyone on the planet could think Trubisky was a better prospect than Fields.

 

[run and shoot]

Context is everything. You're always in the ozone.

Right.....
Go to the Lance-Mitch part>>>#62 for proper context.

 

[Bearly]