Not front line Bears related but it will have an impact on the first seven picks. The Jets seem to definitely declared themselves as QB buyer here. I can't imagine trading two 2nds and 2nd round pick in 2019 for any other position.
So now we have;
1-Cleveland 2- New York Giants 3- New York Jets 4- Cleveland 5- Denver 6- Indy 7- Tampa Bay 8- Chicago
Any thoughts on this?
I still believe that CLE should select Barkley w/ their first pick overall. Hue Jackson already stated that there won't be any competition this year - Taylor is the starter. Why miss out on prospect considered to be the next great RB (even better than EE) when you already have a starting QB?
1- CLE - Barkley (IMO this is a no-brainer, even for the Browns) 2- NJG - Nelson (seems like they really wanted Norwell and now Nelson could be their guy) 3- NJJ - Rosen (a smartass who will be Eli's successor in next year) 4- CLE - Darnold (big and strong QB, should be ready for 2019) 5- DEN - Mayfield (Elway likes him a lot; Keenum will have an entire season to teach him) 6- IND - Ridley (Luck needs weapons in order to succeed) 7- TAM - Fitzpatrick (Bucs desperately need to upgrade their D) 8- CHI - ? (Chubb, Edmunds or Vea IMO)
Because if you don't have one, you aren't winning championships.An elite QB on a rookie deal gives you 5 cheap seasons of QB play before you have to pay the piper. Get that QB and he covers a multiple of problems, getting you to the playoffs and giving you a shot every year (see Rogers, Aaron and Green Bay.) Without the QB you waste your DEF (see Broncos, Denver), you waste your OL, you waste your skill position players (see every WR/TE/RB that ever jumped from a franchise without a QB to one with a QB)....
Despite all the hot takes, without a QB you won't win. Pure and simple. All the exceptions only prove the rule.
Yep, that's become universally true as is the wisdom of drafting one if possible. One look at the price tags marginal starters and backups are getting tells the rest of the story. We're able to do what we just did in FA because we have a $7 mil per year QB instead of a $27 mil per year QB.
And if he pans out, no one (except for unnamed poster who still believes that Eagles and Rams paid too much for their QBs) complains. Its the hot takes at the moment that drive discussion and clicks. Not one single writer/broadcaster/poster will ever admit that the Bears deal was a good one of Mitch pans out. Its old news at that point.