2016/17 College Prospects
Moderator: chitownsports4ever
Re: 2016/17 College Prospects
-
- Analyst
- Posts: 3,296
- And1: 518
- Joined: Jun 28, 2016
Re: 2016/17 College Prospects
Was watching the combine...so far from the showings any team that takes any of these QBs in the 1st round is crazy desperate
Sent from my SM-G920T using Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-G920T using Tapatalk
Re: 2016/17 College Prospects
-
- Senior Mod - Bulls
- Posts: 64,451
- And1: 32,206
- Joined: Dec 23, 2002
Re: 2016/17 College Prospects
Trubisky and Watson both run identical 4.67s. The Bears have scheduled meetings with all top QBs besides Watson:
So, yeah, as far as 1st round QBs, Kizer and Trubisky it comes down to for the Bears evidently.
http://bearswire.usatoday.com/2017/03/04/bears-to-meet-with-top-qb-prospects-at-nfl-combine/
Notre Dame’s DeShone Kizer and Miami’s Brad Kaaya were scheduled to have formal interviews Friday night. North Carolina’s Mitch Trubisky and Texas Tech’s Pat Mahomes also confirmed plans to huddle with the team.
The one obvious name missing from this list is Clemson’s Deshaun Watson. He confirmed he has meetings scheduled with 10 clubs, but the Bears weren’t mentioned.
So, yeah, as far as 1st round QBs, Kizer and Trubisky it comes down to for the Bears evidently.
http://bearswire.usatoday.com/2017/03/04/bears-to-meet-with-top-qb-prospects-at-nfl-combine/
Brad Biggs wrote:Fields was in the bottom third of the league in too many key statistical metrics for the Bears to commit to the idea of trading down from the first pick for a bundle of future assets and then building around him.
Re: 2016/17 College Prospects
- molepharmer
- Head Coach
- Posts: 6,508
- And1: 1,122
- Joined: Feb 27, 2002
Re: 2016/17 College Prospects
This seems like one of those years where quite a few of the teams at the top are looking to trade down. Once you're past Garret, and probably Allen, consensus on who's within the next top 5-6 picks is all over the map from what I've seen.
TGibson (1/28/17); "..."a 4 or 5 on a scale of 1 to 10 for drama"...What's the worst? "...yelling matches with Thibs, everybody is just going crazy and I'm just sitting there...like, 'Don't call my name please..."
Re: 2016/17 College Prospects
-
- Senior Mod - Bulls
- Posts: 64,451
- And1: 32,206
- Joined: Dec 23, 2002
Re: 2016/17 College Prospects
Who is more talented than Malik Hooker other than Garrett? The core muscle injury is concerning, but the Bears have lots of time for rehabs
Brad Biggs wrote:Fields was in the bottom third of the league in too many key statistical metrics for the Bears to commit to the idea of trading down from the first pick for a bundle of future assets and then building around him.
Re: RE: Re: 2016/17 College Prospects
- CjayC
- RealGM
- Posts: 11,522
- And1: 1,141
- Joined: Mar 02, 2005
- Location: Hoiball
Re: RE: Re: 2016/17 College Prospects
Axxo wrote:CjayC wrote:Mind_Odyssey wrote:Don't be shocked if Chicago drafts Solomon Thomas over Johnathan Allen.
I heard Bears like Thomas, Jamal Adams, Trubisky, and Kizer.
Thomas or Adams would be amazing. Not as sold on Kizer as those two, but wouldn't hate it. I don't think his flaws are unfixable and he does have the highest ceiling of all the QB's. Trubisky ehhh not sure. He did look great, and looks to have all the tools, but the sample size is definitely something to think about.
It was just reported they like Peterman at QB in the draft.
Sent from my SM-G920T using Tapatalk
I could see him in the 3rd, possibly 2nd. He's a quick climber. Smart, underrated athleticism, quick release, good pocket awareness, pro system, and he has enough arm strength to make it. He should be ready to compete for a starting job Day 1.
Re: 2016/17 College Prospects
- CjayC
- RealGM
- Posts: 11,522
- And1: 1,141
- Joined: Mar 02, 2005
- Location: Hoiball
Re: 2016/17 College Prospects
fleet wrote:Who is more talented than Malik Hooker other than Garrett? The core muscle injury is concerning, but the Bears have lots of time for rehabs
He should be ready for OTA's. I'm not that worried about it.
It's hard to quantify talent to me. Athletically he should blow it up, but Adams is my favorite. Not Hooker, but he's quite athletic. Also he brings intangibles; drafting him is drafting a defensive captain Type-A personality that's gonna hold himself and everyone else accountable for the next 10 years+. Hard to put a value on that for me if everything else is close.
Re: RE: Re: 2016/17 College Prospects
-
- Analyst
- Posts: 3,296
- And1: 518
- Joined: Jun 28, 2016
Re: RE: Re: 2016/17 College Prospects
CjayC wrote:fleet wrote:Who is more talented than Malik Hooker other than Garrett? The core muscle injury is concerning, but the Bears have lots of time for rehabs
He should be ready for OTA's. I'm not that worried about it.
It's hard to quantify talent to me. Athletically he should blow it up, but Adams is my favorite. Not Hooker, but he's quite athletic. Also he brings intangibles; drafting him is drafting a defensive captain Type-A personality that's gonna hold himself and everyone else accountable for the next 10 years+. Hard to put a value on that for me if everything else is close.
Btx the two I would pick the guy with out injury issues
Sent from my SM-G920T using Tapatalk
Re: 2016/17 College Prospects
-
- Analyst
- Posts: 3,296
- And1: 518
- Joined: Jun 28, 2016
Re: 2016/17 College Prospects
fleet wrote:Trubisky and Watson both run identical 4.67s. The Bears have scheduled meetings with all top QBs besides Watson:Notre Dame’s DeShone Kizer and Miami’s Brad Kaaya were scheduled to have formal interviews Friday night. North Carolina’s Mitch Trubisky and Texas Tech’s Pat Mahomes also confirmed plans to huddle with the team.
The one obvious name missing from this list is Clemson’s Deshaun Watson. He confirmed he has meetings scheduled with 10 clubs, but the Bears weren’t mentioned.
So, yeah, as far as 1st round QBs, Kizer and Trubisky it comes down to for the Bears evidently.
http://bearswire.usatoday.com/2017/03/04/bears-to-meet-with-top-qb-prospects-at-nfl-combine/
That makes no sense. He is the most versatile of the three. Scheduling a meeting isn't a commitment.
Re: RE: Re: 2016/17 College Prospects
- City of Trees
- Forum Mod - Kings
- Posts: 15,798
- And1: 5,462
- Joined: Dec 23, 2009
- Location: Roseville, CA
Re: RE: Re: 2016/17 College Prospects
Axxo wrote:fleet wrote:Trubisky and Watson both run identical 4.67s. The Bears have scheduled meetings with all top QBs besides Watson:Notre Dame’s DeShone Kizer and Miami’s Brad Kaaya were scheduled to have formal interviews Friday night. North Carolina’s Mitch Trubisky and Texas Tech’s Pat Mahomes also confirmed plans to huddle with the team.
The one obvious name missing from this list is Clemson’s Deshaun Watson. He confirmed he has meetings scheduled with 10 clubs, but the Bears weren’t mentioned.
So, yeah, as far as 1st round QBs, Kizer and Trubisky it comes down to for the Bears evidently.
http://bearswire.usatoday.com/2017/03/04/bears-to-meet-with-top-qb-prospects-at-nfl-combine/
That makes no sense. He is the most versatile of the three. Scheduling a meeting isn't a commitment.
Even if Pace questions the tape there is no way he wouldn't schedule a meeting because Pace always does his due diligence. Makes me think they like him.
Sent from my SM-J700T using RealGM mobile app
Re: 2016/17 College Prospects
- City of Trees
- Forum Mod - Kings
- Posts: 15,798
- And1: 5,462
- Joined: Dec 23, 2009
- Location: Roseville, CA
Re: 2016/17 College Prospects
M. Lattimore ran a 4.36 sec 40. Showing he has speed confirms for me he's the Best CB in this class.
Sent from my SM-J700T using RealGM mobile app
Sent from my SM-J700T using RealGM mobile app
Re: RE: Re: 2016/17 College Prospects
-
- Analyst
- Posts: 3,296
- And1: 518
- Joined: Jun 28, 2016
Re: RE: Re: 2016/17 College Prospects
City of Trees wrote:Axxo wrote:fleet wrote:Trubisky and Watson both run identical 4.67s. The Bears have scheduled meetings with all top QBs besides Watson:
So, yeah, as far as 1st round QBs, Kizer and Trubisky it comes down to for the Bears evidently.
http://bearswire.usatoday.com/2017/03/04/bears-to-meet-with-top-qb-prospects-at-nfl-combine/
That makes no sense. He is the most versatile of the three. Scheduling a meeting isn't a commitment.
Even if Pace questions the tape there is no way he wouldn't schedule a meeting because Pace always does his due diligence. Makes me think they like him.
Sent from my SM-J700T using RealGM mobile app
Isn't there a maximum number of interviews that can be scheduled with prospects?
Re: 2016/17 College Prospects
-
- Head Coach
- Posts: 7,480
- And1: 1,093
- Joined: Jan 22, 2012
Re: 2016/17 College Prospects
City of Trees wrote:M. Lattimore ran a 4.36 sec 40. Showing he has speed confirms for me he's the Best CB in this class.
Sent from my SM-J700T using RealGM mobile app
Daniel Jeremiah of NFL network had him going to us in one of his mocks.
Tabor, on the other hand had a pretty bad combine. Bad 40 and I think he only did 8 reps on the bench. I think this guarantees him being there for us in the 2nd.
Re: RE: Re: 2016/17 College Prospects
-
- Senior Mod - Bulls
- Posts: 64,451
- And1: 32,206
- Joined: Dec 23, 2002
Re: RE: Re: 2016/17 College Prospects
City of Trees wrote:Axxo wrote:fleet wrote:Trubisky and Watson both run identical 4.67s. The Bears have scheduled meetings with all top QBs besides Watson:
So, yeah, as far as 1st round QBs, Kizer and Trubisky it comes down to for the Bears evidently.
http://bearswire.usatoday.com/2017/03/04/bears-to-meet-with-top-qb-prospects-at-nfl-combine/
That makes no sense. He is the most versatile of the three. Scheduling a meeting isn't a commitment.
Even if Pace questions the tape there is no way he wouldn't schedule a meeting because Pace always does his due diligence. Makes me think they like him.
Sent from my SM-J700T using RealGM mobile app
best believe if they draft him, he will have been interviewed. There's no question. There is no chance they are trying to play games with other teams on that. Another position, maaaaybe it could happen. Not with a quarterback in the first round.
Brad Biggs wrote:Fields was in the bottom third of the league in too many key statistical metrics for the Bears to commit to the idea of trading down from the first pick for a bundle of future assets and then building around him.
Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: 2016/17 College Prospects
- City of Trees
- Forum Mod - Kings
- Posts: 15,798
- And1: 5,462
- Joined: Dec 23, 2009
- Location: Roseville, CA
Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: 2016/17 College Prospects
fleet wrote:City of Trees wrote:Axxo wrote:
That makes no sense. He is the most versatile of the three. Scheduling a meeting isn't a commitment.
Even if Pace questions the tape there is no way he wouldn't schedule a meeting because Pace always does his due diligence. Makes me think they like him.
Sent from my SM-J700T using RealGM mobile app
best believe if they draft him, he will have been interviewed. There's no question. There is no chance they are trying to play games with other teams on that. Another position, maaaaybe it could happen. Not with a quarterback in the first round.
No doubt.
Sent from my SM-J700T using RealGM mobile app
Re: 2016/17 College Prospects
-
- Forum Mod
- Posts: 22,522
- And1: 3,953
- Joined: Jan 30, 2002
- Location: southside of chicago
Re: 2016/17 College Prospects
I think at this point the pick is gonna be Adams . The key here is how many guys do they think they can reel in via free agency to allow for a trade for Jimmy G . The more slots they can fill via free agency the the lessor the blow from losing a pick or two will be .
With that 40 times and and overall quickness he showed I think Adams has shown that he is more than the box safety everyone had him pigeon holed as .
With that 40 times and and overall quickness he showed I think Adams has shown that he is more than the box safety everyone had him pigeon holed as .
Got a Gold Name Plate that says "I wish you would"
Re: 2016/17 College Prospects
-
- Senior Mod - Bulls
- Posts: 64,451
- And1: 32,206
- Joined: Dec 23, 2002
Re: 2016/17 College Prospects
chitownsports4ever wrote:I think at this point the pick is gonna be Adams . The key here is how many guys do they think they can reel in via free agency to allow for a trade for Jimmy G . The more slots they can fill via free agency the the lessor the blow from losing a pick or two will be .
With that 40 times and and overall quickness he showed I think Adams has shown that he is more than the box safety everyone had him pigeon holed as .
I thought he had a meh 40 time. At number 3 overall as a safety, I want all boxes checked.
But Adams underwhelmed in his athleticism-based drills Monday. His 40-yard dash time was around league average, his 31.5 inch vertical leap was well below average and his 60-yard shuttle time of 11.92 seconds was the worst among all safeties in the combine this year.
He'll be able to function fine, but at #3 overall in a very good draft, highest safety ever. All boxes you might want to insist on checking, if there are other options, and there are.
https://www.seccountry.com/lsu/jamal-adams-combine-performance
Brad Biggs wrote:Fields was in the bottom third of the league in too many key statistical metrics for the Bears to commit to the idea of trading down from the first pick for a bundle of future assets and then building around him.
Re: 2016/17 College Prospects
-
- Head Coach
- Posts: 7,480
- And1: 1,093
- Joined: Jan 22, 2012
Re: 2016/17 College Prospects
In the beginning of the season I thought that Garrett and Allen were the two best prospects of the season and the rest weren't even close. I still feel that they are the two best but the gap has closed significantly. So much so that if a team takes a certain guys over Allen you can't really hate on the decision.
With that in mind, I think that it would be best for the bears to trade down 3 or 4 spots. This way we accumulate picks to use as trade pieces for Garoppolo or moving up in next years draft or just bulk up our depth with legit talent in this years deep draft and still draft a guy like Hooker or Lattimore.
With that in mind, I think that it would be best for the bears to trade down 3 or 4 spots. This way we accumulate picks to use as trade pieces for Garoppolo or moving up in next years draft or just bulk up our depth with legit talent in this years deep draft and still draft a guy like Hooker or Lattimore.
Re: 2016/17 College Prospects
-
- Head Coach
- Posts: 7,480
- And1: 1,093
- Joined: Jan 22, 2012
Re: 2016/17 College Prospects
Davis Webb is my pick for QB in this draft. I thinks he's the best one. Problem is that he was flying under the radar and now I'm getting the feeling he's flying up boards. The earliest I take a QB is the third but I think he might go in the second or even the first.
Re: RE: Re: 2016/17 College Prospects
-
- Assistant Coach
- Posts: 4,403
- And1: 325
- Joined: Jul 16, 2008
Re: RE: Re: 2016/17 College Prospects
fleet wrote:chitownsports4ever wrote:I think at this point the pick is gonna be Adams . The key here is how many guys do they think they can reel in via free agency to allow for a trade for Jimmy G . The more slots they can fill via free agency the the lessor the blow from losing a pick or two will be .
With that 40 times and and overall quickness he showed I think Adams has shown that he is more than the box safety everyone had him pigeon holed as .
I thought he had a meh 40 time. At number 3 overall as a safety, I want all boxes checked.But Adams underwhelmed in his athleticism-based drills Monday. His 40-yard dash time was around league average, his 31.5 inch vertical leap was well below average and his 60-yard shuttle time of 11.92 seconds was the worst among all safeties in the combine this year.
He'll be able to function fine, but at #3 overall in a very good draft, highest safety ever. All boxes you might want to insist on checking, if there are other options, and there are.
https://www.seccountry.com/lsu/jamal-adams-combine-performance
I agree. If you're the higheSt pick ever at your position then you need to clearly be the best safety at least in the last few years. He's not even the consensus best safety in this draft. Not to mention the sub average athleticism
Sent from my SM-G920P using RealGM mobile app