Poles obviously outsmarted himself by holding on to Fields for as long as he did. I am not convinced that Poles is any good as a GM. For every good move there is a corresponding bad one, including a head scratcher or two. He HAS to get the right QB in this draft. No more mistakes.

I saw him as just a hair below Lawrence when they came out in the draft.

Glad I don't evaluate players for a living.

It seems most young QBs fail now. If the Bears didn't draft Fields, they would have either drafted Mac, or they wouldn't have drafted a QB, and everyone would have been mad about that

Of these top 3 QBs now, 2 or all could bust. There may be no right QB to take. And all 3 of them will be in a tough situation on bad teams

Part of the reason that many QBs fail, I think, is the rush to get them on the field. As much as it pains me to write this, Green Bay seems to do it right. The new QB sits and learns from a good veteran. A team like the Bears, for example, can't even get a QB to be a good veteran -- their QB decisions have been awful. So they're forced to put their shiny new rookie on the field which hasn't worked out too well to put it mildly.

The last Bears QB to have a chance was Cutler -- who had talent -- but he had an O-line that made a sieve look like the Hoover Dam. Plus they really haven't had a good GM since Jim Finks, and that was a long, long time ago.

The Bears did it to Trubisky with a lame duck coach and a situation where he played too early. They did it to Fields after the plan was to sit him and let him learn. They played him too early. Now, will they play whomever they draft in April too early? You can hope he's more like Stroud and can hit the ground running, but history says he'll need some time. Hopefully that won't set the rookie down a path he can't recover from in 3 years.

The Bears do have a better roster than most #1 picks walk into, one built to give a rookie QB a chance. Let's see if they've learned from history or are doomed to repeat it.

You have to have a good veteran in the first place to be able to do this

And what if there isn't one?

I think we know the answer to my rhetorical question: he's screwed

I think more teams should make sure they have a coach they are willing to ride the rough times out with and a system they trust in place before they draft a QB. You see some young guys that have a different system every season. No one would be able to thrive in that situation.

Tyson Bagent and his 4 starts (3td/6int) doesn't count?

bahahaha

Didn't I write that? "A team like the Bears, for example, can't even get a QB to be a good veteran -- their QB decisions have been awful."

That brings up an interesting question: has there been a draft in which no QB was any good? 2019 was not a great class but Murray's not bad. 2015: Winston was ok overall, and was pretty good one year. 2014: No one great, but Derek Carr and Garoppolo had their moments. 2013: Geno Smith, but who wants to wait 10 years for a QB to figure it out. 2010 was a terrible year with the likes of Bradford, Tebow, Claussen. 2009 had Stafford, at least. '08 had Ryan, Flacco, and the illustrious Matt Flynn lol. '07 was uber bad with JaMarcus Russell and Brady Quinn headlining it.

I'll stop there as the answer to the question is a definitive "Yes" -- there are a few years that have no good QBs and other years that are just meh. For Bears fans, let's hope 2024 isn't one of the no good QB years and that Poles finds the right guy.

QB Draft History

That is not an option, is it? There is always HAS to be the right QB in the draft which is why so many teams HAVE to take a QB in a draft no matter what.

The flaw teams and the league have made for themselves is making it so if you don't have a potential HOFer starting at QB for your team, you have almost no chance at ultimate success. Finding a QB is hard and while I get the whole take a QB whenever you get the chance until you find the one theory and theories similar to that, you still have to build the right team around the QB.

Despite all of us knowing that it was not intentional, a team like the Falcons may have gotten it right. They seemed to have built a pretty team outside of the QB position, tried their luck with a young guy they drafted. When that did not work, they dropped a vet QB as a finishing touch. The Rams, Bucs, Jets and the Broncos seemed to have used a similar strategy to various levels of success. The Steelers are going in that direction as well.

I hope Justin Fields can at least have a Geno Smith like career. I would love to see a controlled experiment where the Bears dropped their new rookie QB into the same team that they dropped Fields into to see who would make the better of that situation. But alas, they have decided to make sure their rookie QB had things like a true #1 receiver, improvements on the O-line and an all round improved defense. Let's see how a rookie QB fits into that sort of team. That is not to dissuade those that say that Fields is among the worst QB prospect in the history of the NFL and would have been horrible no matter the situation he was placed in. It is to say that by not putting their new QB in a similar situation, the Bears are acknowledging that it probably was not the best situation to put Fields in as they did.

Fields would be awesome in the Taysom Hill role. But he's not the guy that can throw it 30+ times and win a game. Either his field vision is bad or his processing time. The reason doesn't actually matter. You can watch the film and see the result. Teams that needed a QB passed on him. Maybe the price was too high. (Poles isn't the brightest bulb.) That says a lot. Mike Tomlin's a very good coach, imo. Let's see if the Steelers pick up Fields' 5th year option by May 2. That will say even more about how the league feels.

Commentary like this seem to indicate that Fields alone was the problem as if Andy Dalton, Trevor Siemien, Nathan Peterman, Nick Foles, and Tyler Bagent all were not right there to lead the Bears to their deserved glory with a juggernaut team and yet none of them were able to do so. That is my only point. Fields and Fields alone is not the reason the Bears were not successful while he was there.

Because I mentioned Geno, I just googled reasons why Geno failed with the Jets. Here is what popped up.

https://thejetpress.com/2016/01/26/n...-smith-failed/

5. Offensive line
4. Less than adequate wide receivers
3. He did it to himself
2. Bad Coaching
1. It starts at the top

That article was written right after Geno's 4th and final season with the Jets. From what I can tell, that seems like the same exact list Bears fans would have for the Fields era. The only difference is Fields was a first round pick that was traded up for him while Geno was a 2nd rounder. Fields has a great deal to learn in order to have a career like Geno has had. No one would have said that Smith would be a ten year vet and starting games for a playoff contender in year ten back when that article was published. I hope the same can be said for Fields

You can't draw any conclusions about Fields by comparing him to that sad lot of QBs. Do people really think that Burrow, Mahomes, Herbert, or Jackson would look as bad on the same team? Doubtful. All those guys have more talent. In fact, I would argue that Bagent looked better than Fields in running the Bears offense. The problem is arm strength -- Bagent doesn't have much. People always mention the Bears offensive line problems. The line wasn't great but it was at least average. Fields' pocket time was 2.8 seconds, nearly the highest in the league. And his time-to-throw was the highest @3.23. Let's also not forget Fields' slow drop-back time. He waits too long for plays to develop because he can't throw his receivers open -- he doesn't anticipate well.

Fields' supporters are going to use the five Geno Smith reasons as evidence that he's a good QB and it was the team that was the problem. That's simply just being blinded by some unwavering fantasy that Fields is a winning NFL starting QB even in the face of statistical and visual evidence to the contrary.

I wonder how much the lack of interest was also knowing that you're probably going to have to give him the big extension.

No chance that the Steelers pick up the 5th year option, in my opinion. Steelers writers have indicated that Wilson will get a longer deal, for better or worse. He is apparently close with some of the minority owners from another business.

I just read that the 2025 Notre Dame recruiting class has the sons of Jerome Bettis, Plaxico Burress, and Ike Taylor.

They can't not take one in their current situation, I simply don't think there's one that will be a SB QB in this draft.

And that's a pretty low bar, awe inspiring QB-skillz wise, to clear if we look at some QBs that have made it there.

What I mean by "SB QB" is simply one that can, with whatever team around them, get a team to the SB. That's how overhyped I believe this class is.

It's a Wizard of Oz bunch, each lacking some key component(s).

I would agree with most of this except the last part. A lot of people, including myself, that have supported Fields acknowledge that the problem is not binary. Fields had to do better with the chances he had. The team did as well.

And I don't agree that Bagent looked better. He looked fine, but I would not want him in place of Fields.

The Bears line last year was at least above average in nearly any metric you could look at. Fields took a ton of sacks, but that was clearly a Fields problem and not a line problem. Fields took 44 sacks in 370 pass attempts while Bagent only took 5 in 143. That's where Bagent was better and it was a night and day difference with the offense. Bagent was able to make quick decisions and get the ball out of his hand, anticipating openings. For Fields, a receiver had to be wide open if it was anything inside the sidelines.

So you did! I guess reading the first sentence and the last sentence isn’t always the right way to go :p

I am not trying to argue with you but what draft class has a built-in SB quarterback that is known before the draft? The answer is none. It is rare when a team actually finds a "generational" QB, one that lives up to the hype. I think the last one was Andrew Luck and before that Peyton Manning. Stafford won the SB but was he considered generational? I don't remember that draft very well but I think not. Burrow might be on the list with Luck and Manning. My point is that statistically speaking the safe comment regarding the 2024 draft is to say that there isn't an SB QB in the bunch. My feeling is one of these guys is. Which one? I wish I knew, not that Poles would listen to me anyway.

It really is a chicken/egg question as to whether the ‘consensus’ best QBs in the draft(s) are just misidentified or not developed by teams. The fact that guys like Brady, Mahomes, Lamar, and Rodgers have been among the most successful despite being passed on by more than half the league doesn’t make anything any more clear.

Here’s a McShay article from 2018 that does not hold up well.

Todd McShay's NFL draft grades for every first-round QB since 2008, plus 2018's top QBs - ESPN

Of guys over the past 15-20 years, I think I would’ve bet on Burrow, Lawrence, Winston, Newton, and Luck - with no titles and two of them already out

That's the part we differ on, really the only point I was making.

After seeing their college careers I wouldn't want any of this crop playing for any NFL team I cared about unless all I wanted was mediocrity.

I believe we've already seen the ceiling reached for every big hyped name in the class.

Pretty sure there’s an ND@PIT game in 2027

So you are saying I can't draw conclusions from comparing him to Bears quarterbacks who played in the same system that he did but you can draw conclusions based on comparisons to quarterbacks who in different systems with arguably better coaching that have in part allowed them to become

A 2x NFL MVP and 3x SB MVP
Another 2x NFL MVP
A QB who led his team to an AFC title with a Jamarr Chase, Tee Higgins, Joe Mixon and others on the team.
Justin Herbert

You will get no argument from me. Justin Fields is not better than any of those QBs above. I see no evidence that he will ever be at this point. Justin Fields was not a perfect QB who was destroyed by the dysfunction that was the Bears over the last few years. Justin Fields has flaws that he needs to work on and he listen to proper coaching to help him to that. Even with all that Justin Fields may be an absolute bust as an NFL QB

AND

I don't think that anyone believes that dropping any of those QBs you mentioned as rookies into the 2021-2024 Bears would have been good for their development and would have allowed them to succeed at the same rate regardless of their talent. As we can see neither do the Bears because they are not doing the same thing all over again. I do think Justin Fields would be further along in his development if he had the opportunity to sit behind an Alex Smith for a year while being under the tutelage of Andy Reid, or be under the same HC/OC combo while being surrounded by the talent I listed above or even having the team doc stabbed the starter in the chest and take over an offense with a Keenan Allen (where did he just go?), a Mike Williams and a Austin Ekeler. I don't think it is ridiculous to think that if he gets better coaching and works on his flaws, Fields has the opportunity to back up an Eli Manning, then back up a Phillip Rivers, back up a Russell Wilson before getting his another shot and winning the Comeback Player of the Year. I just saw this happened with another quarterback that we all had completely drawn all the conclusions about after he left the Jets.

Ok, I have gone through the same realignment as many on Fields, but let's be pretty clear:

-at this point nobody is considering him "the QB of the future" and assuming they will pick up his 5th year option and/or penciling him in for a fat market-setting contract

-he's getting his shot in PIT likely as a backup and/or change or pace guy... apparently at his request... and that's where he fits right now

-if he somehow plays himself into a Geno Smith situation where he compels this team or his next to reevaluate and pay him, great - but it will be based on stuff he has not yet shown on the field

-and yeah, fantasy points and dazzling runs aside, he's not an intuitive passer, takes too many sacks, and hasn't shown the ability to really read defenses

So, the "one late pick" market underscores all this. I know I was betting the over not long ago, just thinking someone was bound to be a combination of dazzled and desperate... but by now cooler heads have clearly prevailed.

We can play the what-if scenario all day to no real conclusion. I never wrote that guys like Burrow or Mahomes would develop into the players they are today if they were on the Bears. I wrote that they would have better results as a Bears QB in the same system. Why? Because they are better effiing players than Justin Fields! We can play the game of "if only this guy played with this coach and this system" forever. What matters is reality. Fields sucks. Fantastic runner -- one of the best -- but as a passer he only showed brief flashes. Actual NFL football experts in the game having jobs and getting paid have shown what they think about Fields with their (non)actions. I wish you were a GM for one of the QB needy teams - the Bears might have gotten a 1st rounder from you based on your assessment of him.

okay this is bizarroworld...

But Justin Fields WANTED to be traded to the Steelers and vetoed other offers for him.

Justin Fields trade: Steelers were 1 of 5 offers, per Ian Rapoport – NBC Sports Chicago

I just....I just don't get it...

No one was giving him a starting job, so he probably thought Wilson would be his best mentor. The fact Wilson's only other team that showed interest was the Giants and they were only offering him a chance to compete with Daniel Jones for the starting job doesn't say much about where the league thinks he is either.

The thing is, there's likely an offensive systems out there in which Fields and Wilson could perform at an above-average level (likely not the same system, but whatever), but, and this is the hard part, they'd have to buy into the fact that such a system is going to minimize their weaknesses.

I feel like Payton squeezed every ounce out of Wilson he could. His numbers, superficially, look pretty good. He was still largely an ineffective QB if you watched a good bit of Denver play. But I guess we'll see. Perhaps more of it was on Denver's underperforming WR and no real star TE safety blanket. Samaje Perrine was basically the entire passing offense during 2 minute drills.

Payton got to the playoffs with Brees unable to throw past 15 yards.

And he made Trevor Simian look competent and Jameis Winston look decent.

I think that it speaks volumes that he gave up on Wilson.

Stepping back a bit to take in the bigger picture, it looks like every team has gotten smarter. 5 or 10 years ago, someone would have traded a first or second for Justin Fields. And someone would have given (oft-injured and questionably-motivated) Chase Young a 5-year deal with heavy bonus money. Now 31 teams (not counting Panthers) are operating at at least a C+ level.

As a Steelers' fan, I am pretty pleased with he two transactions together (three really, when you consider jettisoning Pickett).

The QB room needed a makeover because it was terrible. They collectively have only had 25 passing TDs over the past two seasons (and one was thrown by Chase Claypool of all people!). People can say Pickett never had a chance, but he was billed as a high floor/'low' ceiling first rounder that was already 24 years old in his rookie season. He got 24 starts, with some pretty solid offensive skill players, and had one game with a passer rating over 100 and only four with a rating over 90 (there were 18 QBs last year that averaged higher than 90 and 6 that averaged over 100).

Wilson at a minimum salary and no compensation was a no brainer, since Mitch Trubisky and Mason Rudolph had already left the team. Whether as a starter or backup, they needed bodies and there is little risk there.

With Fields, I don't think anyone is under the illusion that he is more than he is or that the Steelers got a steal. With that fifth year option lingering and making him have essentially a one-year deal, with the hope that he and the team work together well enough to see some signs of development. The hope is that the year together makes it worthwhile enough to stick, but not so much that he gets really good and leaves or forces their hand with a bigger deal.

Now, with 4 top 100 picks, I assume they will either take another QB to develop or sign another veteran QB (Tannehill? Would've liked Huntley at the right price, but he just signed), and treat Fields as the developmental QB without the pressure of him needing to work out.

At worst, they continue to have shitty QB play and are around .500 with their defense and run game and the only sacrifice is that they don't have a 26-year old, Pickett with the risk of him showing just enough to make them question the decision on his fifth year option next offseason.

So, unless Pickett were to inexplicably breakout in a huge way this season, they are likely looking at a QB reboot in 2025 anyway. This way, they may catch something with Wilson for the next few years (coinciding with prime TJ Watt and Minkah Fitzpatrick) or Fields (unlikely) or they start over from scratch anyway.

Reading Albert Breer's tic-tock on the Cousin's deal, it sounds like Minnesota are all in on getting JJ McCarthy. They also have some hope in Darnold, but they are not banking on him being the future.

This is hilarious:

Kyle Pitts not getting targets, confirmed. pic.twitter.com/EEUoR4JsVK

— DraftKings (@DraftKings) March 18, 2024

Where else could he really have gone and be in a better situation? He can basically draw his paycheck for the year without having to do a whole lot (or at least Pittsburgh better hope he can).

At this point even he realizes that an immediate extra year of being a failed starting QB isn't going to help him much.

I'm not saying that. I'm saying why would a team make a worse trade for themselves for a guy thst did nothing but trashtalk the staff

Ohhhh ... well that's kinda like bad relationships "it'll be different when he's with me"

Betting that Wilson is washed and he'll get a shot by midseason.

Its time for the annual Draft prediction.

Said last year that Jack Campbell was a Lion over a month in advance of the draft.

There are many hardcore Detroit fans on FOFC and this forum is far from a bunch of fanboys.

My man Brad is all in. We just signed a 34 year old guard from the Ravens. Great pickup, but a one year rental.
Dont care.

Do yourself a favor. Google/YT this guy. Hes got Honolulu Blue on already.

Cooper Beebe. Could even drop OUT of the 1st round and pick him while snagging a future 2nd.

Im really high on JPJ but so is everyone. Would take the right deal for the Lions to move up in Rd1 and snag him.

The Lions have set themselves up to be pretty flexible in this draft. They still have needs at edge, corner and interior line, but they aren't as glaring as they were before free agency.

I agree, Cooper Beebe, does very much look like a Lion. If they could get him in the second round, that would be fantastic.

Magical mystery Josh Dobbs tour continues in SF where he will back up Brock Purdy, and no doubt get into the Cards games and win.

I'll add a Lions prediction:

The Saints trade Marshon Lattimore and a mid-round pick to the Lions for their first round pick this year.

Lions need a CB and, smartly, want to go all-in. Saints need to get younger and cheaper.

I am insanely pleased with the job Grier has done this offseason. Given the cap situation and free agent losses, he has far exceeded my expectations.

Is Josh Dobbs the modern day Charlie Batch?

I think he's one level up. ;)