Thread: "Which quarterback should the Chicago Bears draft?"

I checked out some scenes of Scott and like his play style very much, but overall I just don't think that the Bears should draft a QB this year. Matt Blanchard looked very good in the Preseason and can learn behind Cutler, too. As a backup he's maybe a little bit too inexperienced, but the same goes for any Rookie. So I hope that the Bears sign a veteran like Matt Moore or Chad Henne, take a closer look at Blanchard and maybe draft one in two to three years.

Originally Posted by JustAnotherBearsFan99

One of the things that I couldn't understand, regarding young QB's during the Angelo/Lovie years, was that we never seemed to commit to any of the young guys. Angelo would sign a "project" and he'd be here a short while (very brief time) and then the next youngster would be signed. I understand that projects are a roll of the dice, but we often didn't keep them long enough to develop them.

At some point, I think you identify a guy who has all of the attributes you want in a prospect, and you commit to developing him. But that takes two things we didn't have:

1. A solid talent evaluator.

2. A coach who had the skills to develop a QB.

If Trestman truly is a solid quarterback developer, then I'm hoping he identifies the raw youngster that he believes in - and then he commits to making him, at the very least, a rock solid backup to Cutler. And who knows, maybe even a guy who can step into Cutler's role, once he is past his prime, and we need a new guy.

If you look at history in the NFL, you see that a lot of great QB's were not high draft picks. And many top draft picks, including Heisman winners, and #1 overall draft picks too - were busts.

I want to see Trestman focus on fixing Cutler. After that, sign a vet backup or even keep McCown if we have to, and keep Blanchard as the #3 if we keep three QB's. I do not want to see the Bears pick a QB in any round of the draft with the needs we currently have elsewhere on the team.

I don't want Trestman to start looking beyond Cutler until after this year. We can franchise Cutler and not sign him long term if necessary. Blanchard is a raw player with some good attributes that we did not have to spend a pick on. Let him watch and learn.

Originally Posted by JustAnotherBearsFan99

Matt Blanchard is one of a long line of practice squad QB's we've brought in and cut. Matt was cut in December and then re-signed about 30 days later. He's had a grand total of 1 rookie mini-camp, and after a real solid pre-season, he was signed to the practice squad.

Here's my frustration.

At some point the Bears need to actually develop one of these young kids we bring in each year, and that takes a multi-year commitment. There's no magic here.

I'm fine if it's not Blanchard, although, certainly, to me, he looks like he has the physical and mental gifts to be developed into a solid QB. But if Blanchard isn't the guy, then fine, GET a guy and COMMIT to actually DEVELOPING him.

The musical chairs approach will never develop anyone. I don't care if it's Andrew Luck - if you cut these guys as soon as you add them to the roster, it = epic fail. Again.

It reminds me of fishing. Sometimes you fish with a guy who can't sit still for a minute. He's constantly fiddling with his gear and screwing around instead of actually fishing. And then he wonders why he's a crappy fisherman. At some point you have to actually, you know, FISH. Same with the Bears. If you want to actually develop a young QB, then you need to invest time in SOMEBODY.

If it's not Blanchard, then get whomever you deem worth developing and, DEVELOP him. Hopefully Trestman is smarter than Lovie on these things.

^^ yes

Look, Cutty isn't getting any younge and his concussions are a worry.

Over 30+Concussion history+one more major one=career cut short

Do I expect it? No. Is it possible? Yes.

Lets get a real guy for Trestman to select and develop and have a plan b. ill say it again we need to be proactive not reactive. Do we really want to be scrambling to find a qb if something happens? No.

I agree 100% we need to develop our own QB, but I don't think we need to start this year. We have way too many other needs to address in this off season.

Originally Posted by JustAnotherBearsFan99

Matt Blanchard is one of a long line of practice squad QB's we've brought in and cut. Matt was cut in December and then re-signed about 30 days later. He's had a grand total of 1 rookie mini-camp, and after a real solid pre-season, he was signed to the practice squad.

Here's my frustration.

At some point the Bears need to actually develop one of these young kids we bring in each year, and that takes a multi-year commitment. There's no magic here.

I'm fine if it's not Blanchard, although, certainly, to me, he looks like he has the physical and mental gifts to be developed into a solid QB. But if Blanchard isn't the guy, then fine, GET a guy and COMMIT to actually DEVELOPING him.

The musical chairs approach will never develop anyone. I don't care if it's Andrew Luck - if you cut these guys as soon as you add them to the roster, it = epic fail. Again.

It reminds me of fishing. Sometimes you fish with a guy who can't sit still for a minute. He's constantly fiddling with his gear and screwing around instead of actually fishing. And then he wonders why he's a crappy fisherman. At some point you have to actually, you know, FISH. Same with the Bears. If you want to actually develop a young QB, then you need to invest time in SOMEBODY.

If it's not Blanchard, then get whomever you deem worth developing and, DEVELOP him. Hopefully Trestman is smarter than Lovie on these things.

Originally Posted by JustAnotherBearsFan99

I completely agree, and that's why I was thinking we could see what we have in Blanchard. We already have him signed. He sure looks like he has considerable talent. He's 25-0 as a starter. Two National Championships. His last loss as a QB (I think) was his 7a Championship game in high school. He's big, fast and intelligent - with a strong arm.

His only downside is that he wasn't from a division-1 school. But there have been great athletes from non-Div-1 schools. And, if the guy doesn't pan out, then we can pursue another guy (in a year where we are not desperate to fill holes left by Jerry Angelo).

Only problem I see is that he was cut by us. And he didn't make division one not even as a transfer in his later years.

There has to be a reason for both.

I hope he tirns out good, but those are red flags for me