Camp Weds notes

Discussion in 'Chicago Bears' started by riczaj01, Jul 31, 2013.

  1. Xa0sG0rilla

    Xa0sG0rilla
    Expand Collapse
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2013
    Messages:
    174
    Likes Received:
    85
    Please Register or Log in to Remove this Advertisement!
    At the risk of sounding like an idiot, any NFL team should ALWAYS be in the business of developing a QB. If the team in question can't draft a QB to develop, then the developmental QB ends up being an UDFA (mostly by default).

    Not doing so is how the Bears have ended up having to overpay for an average to average+ QB. It is also how the Bears have ended up with O-linemen who don't have to compete for their starting jobs. Which is how the Bears have ended up with an O-line that ranks in the bottom third (at best) in the NFL.
     
    • Like Like x 4
  2. blinddeafmute

    blinddeafmute
    Expand Collapse
    DaBears Ditka

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2005
    Messages:
    25,007
    Likes Received:
    1,379
    AGREE 100 PERCENT.

    THIS ALL CAPS THING IS GETTING IRRITATING....
     
  3. weneedmorelinemen

    weneedmorelinemen
    Expand Collapse
    Pro-Bowler

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2013
    Messages:
    1,101
    Likes Received:
    615
    Blanchard has not sat for 3 years. He was a UDFA rookie last year and was on our practice squad in 2012. Of course he didn't get reps last year.

    You are talking about cutting the lone vet backup QB and only going with a kid that has not played in a regular season NFL game, and was not on the active 53 man roster. That is stupidly risky. You only have training camp and preseason to judge if he is any good. That's not enough data. He's a #3 until he proves on the field during the regular season that we do not need McCown.

    Campbell playing poorly last year is inconsequential to what is the right decision when it comes to a #2 QB. I'll take the vet over the unproven undrafted rookie any day of the week. It's the right call, we just picked the wrong guy.
     
  4. riczaj01

    riczaj01
    Expand Collapse
    DaBears Ditka
    SuperFan DBS Writer

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2006
    Messages:
    25,320
    Likes Received:
    4,233
    That's all anyone has on their qb before they play them. That's all NE had on Brady before they started him. Most times a team does not have NFL game film on their future starter or backup.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  5. blinddeafmute

    blinddeafmute
    Expand Collapse
    DaBears Ditka

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2005
    Messages:
    25,007
    Likes Received:
    1,379
    MANY BACKUPS TO A VETERAN QB ARE UNPROVEN. IM NOT SAYING THAT BLANCHARD IS THE RIGHT BACKUP TO DEVELOP, BUT THE STRATEGY OF OVERPAYING A PROVEN VETERAN IS A BAD STRATEGY.
     
  6. weneedmorelinemen

    weneedmorelinemen
    Expand Collapse
    Pro-Bowler

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2013
    Messages:
    1,101
    Likes Received:
    615
    Actually, teams should develop players they are good at identifying as being good in the first place.

    We've tried drafting low round and UDFA QB's to develop. Orton, LeFevour, Hanie, and Enderle were poor attempts by our previous management to develop QBs. We'd have been better off focusing that effort on offensive linemen, if we only had the coaching personnel during that time that could coach and identify o-line talent, which they could not do either.

    The only thing Lovie and JA could evaluate better than most teams were lower round, UDFA , or castoff defensive players from other teams, and that success trailed off towards the end of their run.
     
  7. weneedmorelinemen

    weneedmorelinemen
    Expand Collapse
    Pro-Bowler

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2013
    Messages:
    1,101
    Likes Received:
    615
    Brady had a year on the 53 man roster with Belichic in 2000 before he was asked to play in 2001. That's two camps, and he started off as the 4th stringer in 2000 until he worked his way up throughout that year to the 2nd string. And this is Bill Belichick doing the offensive evaluation, and he's an offensive genius.

    Trestman does not know what BLanchard can do. He doesn't know him, and I'd rather have McCown and Blanchard on the roster this year than just rolling the dice with Blanchard and a 7th inactive WR.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  8. riczaj01

    riczaj01
    Expand Collapse
    DaBears Ditka
    SuperFan DBS Writer

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2006
    Messages:
    25,320
    Likes Received:
    4,233
    But McCown and Blanchard are both getting tons of work so that Trestman can know them. And you have to stop w/the historically bad qb thing of the Bears, new GM and new HC, a HC that has proven to be able to get the absolute best of even average qb's.
    And this would be the 2nd offseason for Blanchard. Again it's not that I like Blanchard, team should have traded back and got more picks to get a rookie this year in the 2-4th rounds. They didn't so it's who we are stuck with. Your theory is along the lines of keeping the OL together even though they are all no good b/c they have "chemistry". But Chemistry has to come after actual talent; and McCown has no talent so it doesn't matter that he's played before. W/Trestman here I have complete faith that he'd have Blanchard prepared. The question is then, does he have the talent to play.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  9. JPosh2012

    JPosh2012
    Expand Collapse
    Pro-Bowler

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2012
    Messages:
    1,161
    Likes Received:
    77
    Oh swell..........
     
  10. JPosh2012

    JPosh2012
    Expand Collapse
    Pro-Bowler

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2012
    Messages:
    1,161
    Likes Received:
    77
    That is a good thing IMO that they are giving the #2 and #3 guys reps especially considering Cutler's injury history.

    Regarding the development QB and drafting a guy, here's the problem expect for Barkley the draft class SUCKED this year for QB's. Their wasn't anyone worth taking minus Barkley and only because he will be a good WCO QB I think.
     
    • Like Like x 1

Share This Page