Stankevitz: I changed my mind on who Bears’ Week 1 starting QB will be https://www.nbcsports.com/chicago/b...rting-quarterback-season-opener-detroit-lions I have to agree with just about everything in this. Foles may have won the job if he had a full off-season of work and competition. Trubisky has an advantage with every aspect of the offense because of limited reps.
Whoever wins the job will need to produce results immediately, otherwise they should get the quick hook. I do agree that because of this messed up offseason/camp/preseason, it gives Trubs the advantage. I'm confident with a full preseason Foles would have easily won the job.
I think Mitch starts Week 1 because Foles has had zero chance to prove he should be the starter. But I think Foles starts within the first 5 games either due to inefficiency on Trubisky's part or because of an injury.
Yeah, no doubt CHI's plans got screwed by COVID. Personally, I don't think we're gonna get a full season (not a legit one, at least). But, presuming we do, Foles should be the eventual starter. Trubisky may get it coming out, but if he's not a winning factor in the first four games, Foles should be in from that point. We know what Trubisky is, and we know he's not the guy.
Yep me too. Trubisky is gonna be on a v short leash. This feels a little similar to Giraffe; almost a dead man walking until they can start the guy they want to start. Sucks to say it but i tend to agree.
I don't understand the leash principle in this case as the Bears should have learned from their mistake from this instance. They didn't target Foles because they believed Trubisky was THE guy they targeted him because they thought he wasn't. Now damn it just go with it.
It's typical of a lot of teams. Here's a guy who's familiar with the system just maybe not all the terminology. It would be one thing if he wasn't familiar with the system but he is. We know, and they know what Trubisky is and what he isn't. This isn't baseball where you can afford to give a couple games away. Why dig yourself into a hole and then have to dig yourself out? If he IS the guy they plan on moving forward with (at least this season) throw him into the fire and let him get used to the offense in the games you were going to give Mitch at least there will be something gained by doing so.
The Bears in a particularly difficult spot. The defense is very good. Good enough that worst case scenario for this team, without extreme detrimental injuries, is probably 6 or 7 wins. That puts you out of contention for a top pick and therefore a top rated QB to draft. Doesn't mean you can't draft that future stud franchise QB....just means you aren't gonna have first choice. So you're left with hoping and wishing Mitch improves enough or a Foles can stay healthy and be just good enough or you actually find some way to sign, trade, or blind luck you way into the guy that can be good enough. There's no 1 way to build a team or find your franchise QB.....but somehow this is the 1 franchise in football that's never been able to do it no matter what.
Just an idea: 1. Stop trading picks away to trade up a few spots 2. Take a swing at a QB every year, even if it's a mid-late round flyer. I hate the Packers, but when Farve was in twilight they had QBs every year even after they had Rodgers for a while. This year they've already started by taking a swing. You miss 100% of the shots you don't take, and put all that much more pressure on getting it right if you swing only once. And hasn't Pace only selected one QB, ever? I agree the odds get lower the further out you go, but the odds are fucking 0% when you know you don't have the guy.
