How do we get the next franchise QB?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GermansbombedPH

I like the idea of finding serviceable QBs late as much as everyone here. I would love him like PHI had Kolb or GB got something for Flinn.

Our priority list is just too long to draft a QB in Round 1, 2 or 4 this year. Instead of wasting a 5th, 6th or 7th on a QB, we can also just sign a UDFA QB out of a not popular and hyped programm. As I'm not mistaken, Kellen Moore was a UDFA and in the end he knows how to win games. Will it translate to the NFL? I doubt it, but I'd have taken him over that Blanchard guy for sure.


Round 1 & 2 has to be OL & LB. We need to add talent. If we fire Smith and go with a 3-4, I think Emery will NOT look at a BU replacement. He will look at another Pass Rushing OLB. Briggs, Roach, DeCicco and even BU again as the MLBs.

We need 2 OTs and better CB depth. Moore is on his way out and the others are aging. We can't look at a QB because we need it.
Need another WR too, but not a FA. The guys that would help will get paid. The guys that won't help are already on the roster. Need to be cheap here and find a WR in Round 4 or 5. Need a Garza replacement in 1-2 years. Draft it this year that he can learn. Here goes your 5th or 6th.
We won't be lucky enough to get the next higher rated OL player like Brown again as UDFA. Guy has shown good potential when on the field. Same with Carimi as RG.

What about the TE? We fucking need to get a good TE and looking at the FA list, those guys will get money too. Even go and get Eifert with our 1st.
We can't expect to draft 2 OTs that will start for us and play good.



Cut Speath, Davis and maybe Hester.
sign 1 of Vollmer, Alberts or Long
sign Cook, Martellus Bennett or Keller

Cap Space would be gone and only room for those Okoye guys that will get cut and brought back.

A line with Garza as C, Brown and Carimi at OG and Vollmer + ? at OT would be better than what we have seen this year for most of the time. Keep Webb and draft a LT with the 1st. Better guy wins or they play in a bit of rotation. READ: 1st round OT would win that spot and Webb would be our swing tackle


would still need to draft a LB starter, Garza replacement, CB depth, WR + the pick we use for the OT in the 1st or 2nd. That's 5 of our 6 picks.

---

I largely agree with what you're saying except a few tweaks. I just can't see how drafting a developmental QB makes any sense priority-wise this year. Maybe a 5th or 6th rounder but then again, what's the point in that? You can sometimes find "hidden gem" players back there for the future at OG for instance but rarely at QB (remember Enderle?). I agree, may as well just go the udfa route most of the time--the quality will be pretty much the same, which is LOW.

It's true that Philly leveraged Cobb for value in trade and so did KC with Carson Palmer. Of course neither of those franchises were able to do anything with that trade value yet. Green Bay actually got nothing for Flynn--he left in FA last year after than that one huge game he had, got big bucks to be Seattle's "starter", and then promptly lost his job in PS to Russell Wilson. Perhaps they tried to trade him and no one bit knowing he was going to be overpaid based on one game and the "GB QB" aura and the fact that he was definitely leaving in FA anyway to escape being forever buried behind Rodgers on the depth chart with little chance to ever start.

As far as offseason moves go, we definitely need to sign an LT in FA and that will be pricey no doubt. We won't be drafting high enough (top 10) to have a shot at a starting caliber rookie LT, so unless you want Webb starting again next year (who would be in favor of that?) his upgrade needs to be a FA vet. Vollmer is damn good but I believe he's a RT only and we aren't going to have the $$ to sign 2 OTs on FA. Especially if we also target a vet TE like Keller, which I'm all for if possible as long as we wrap up an LT first. Carimi is currently a stopgap at RG due to Louis' injury but he's too tall to likely ever be a permanent OG. Next year, after a full offseason to get 100% from that knee, he needs to stap it up and play RT well. That leaves us with spending a high pick (the 1st most likely) on an interior OLman and the 2nd on a LB. I agree that the 4th would be best used to find some small school speedy slot WR with hands to develop as a Knox/Hester replacement on the WR depth chart. Other teams do it all the time...so let's do it too. That's how I see it right now very preliminarily of course.

While it is possible to "develop" a QB and then trade them to another team for draft picks, it is not possible for the Bears to do this. The Bears have not shown an ability to draft and develop a QB But assuming that it is possible, the Bears would still need to be able to get said QB onto the field, prove to everyone that the guy could make all the throws needed, and look good in big games before anyone would want the guy. None of this is possible without an O-Line (maybe not impossible, but highly improbable, like turning a pair of thermonuclear missiles in flight into a sperm whale and a bowl of petunias improbable) to protect said QB. Point blank, there is no point in doing anything to any position that plays behind the OL until the O-Line is fixed.

Why we would actually trade a QB that we were finally able to develop is beyond me. Then what would we do, get another aging vet to be a backup after we trade the guy we just developed?

Someone is going to have to help me with this strategy. I don't get it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by XaosGorilla

While it is possible to "develop" a QB and then trade them to another team for draft picks, it is not possible for the Bears to do this. The Bears have not shown an ability to draft and develop a QB But assuming that it is possible, the Bears would still need to be able to get said QB onto the field, prove to everyone that the guy could make all the throws needed, and look good in big games before anyone would want the guy. None of this is possible without an O-Line (maybe not impossible, but highly improbable, like turning a pair of thermonuclear missiles in flight into a sperm whale and a bowl of petunias improbable) to protect said QB. Point blank, there is no point in doing anything to any position that plays behind the OL until the O-Line is fixed.

---

BIH, perhaps I wasn't clear. I am opposed to the idea of getting rid of cutler at this point, nor do I think the bears can develop a QB (I remain hopeful that Matt Blanchard can prove me wrong, but I can wish in one hand and crap in the other, we both know how that will turn out). How ever the concept is similar to what the Eagles did with Kolb, or the Pats did with Cassel. Leveraging a trade with a franchise that needs a good QB after making a backup look good on a team that has a good/great starter already.

Actually Xaos, we share the same perspective. I quoted your post in my response, but really I more responding to the theme of the thread in general. Misunderstanding.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by XaosGorilla

BIH, perhaps I wasn't clear. I am opposed to the idea of getting rid of cutler at this point, nor do I think the bears can develop a QB (I remain hopeful that Matt Blanchard can prove me wrong, but I can wish in one hand and crap in the other, we both know how that will turn out). How ever the concept is similar to what the Eagles did with Kolb, or the Pats did with Cassel. Leveraging a trade with a franchise that needs a good QB after making a backup look good on a team that has a good/great starter already.

---

Remember this classic:

http://www.bangcartoon.com/2009/special_delivery.htm

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bearsinhouston

Why we would actually trade a QB that we were finally able to develop is beyond me. Then what would we do, get another aging vet to be a backup after we trade the guy we just developed?

Someone is going to have to help me with this strategy. I don't get it.

---

This scenario only plays out in certain circumstances. Usually it is when a team has a plausible starter who gets supplanted when hurt by the #2 guy who looks better than expected. Then some other team wants or thinks it is going to make a playoff run and their starter goes down (w/o an adequate backup) so they get desperate and raped in a trade. That's pretty much what happened when Vick came back strong and took the job from Kolb, who then got traded to Arizona, Same think in Cincy (I mistakenly said KC earlier) when Andy Dalton emerged and took the job from Carson Palmer, who then was traded to Oakland mid-season last year for picks.

Maybe you could see a scenario like you described where you find some young promising QB, develop him, and he sees enough (Good) playing time to get some other team interested enough to give away picks for him when they're needy. Lot of things need to happen for that remote possibility to become reality and, as Xaos pointed out, we don't have any of the elements for that plan to have a snowballs chance in hell of coming to fruition. Nice theory though...

Overall point is, we have a bunch of major frontline needs and holes to fill before we have the luxury of using a draft pick on a boutique selection like a young-QB-in-waiting. If Emery does well over the next 2 offseasons in fixing the OL, adding a real TE, finding a speedy young #4 WR to replace Knox/Hester, and re-stocking key elements of the aging D on the fly, then maybe I could see us looking for a young QB in the 2015 draft. Not realistic before then IMHO.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JustAnotherBearsFan99

Remember this classic:

http://www.bangcartoon.com/2009/special_delivery.htm

---

That documentary PROVES that Lovie has input on players!!! LOL

draft him heck the kid on the squad might be that good

How about we just worry about building a half way decent offense around the franchise QB we have instead of having wet dreams about who comes (cums) next you (to no one in particular) or a new QB.