• BobbleBobble@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      Of course we’d rather have Lawrence, but he’s also been pretty underwhelming for the prospect hype he had.

    • Erice84@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      Obviously you’d rather have Lawrence but he was never even close to being on the table for the Bears. He was always going number 1 and they would never have been able to trade up for number 1.

    • Erice84@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      Obviously you’d rather have Lawrence but he was never even close to being on the table for the Bears. He was always going number 1 and they would never have been able to trade up for number 1.

  • chrismatic13@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    Best to Worst is Left to Right and Trevor was unattainable since he was always going 1st. Who else could’ve the Bears drafted that would’ve been better than Fields? The only better QB at that slot was Brock Purdy who went undrafted and let’s be honest…he would not have the success he has in SF on the Bears.

  • Standard_Employee751@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    I’ve said I would’ve took Fields 1OA and I stand by it.

    He’s been out 4 weeks, still more TDs with a lower turnover worthy play % on a much worse team. I’m more than happy with that.

  • Magno83@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    I’d rather we ruined Lawrence because I like Fields more. If we could do it over, fuck up the other guy.

  • OkBoomer6919@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    Why are passing yards not shown? Who are you trying to fool?

    Lawrence - 2,382

    Jones - 2,031

    Fields - 1,370

  • Draker-X@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    I love how we’re now pretending “Rushing Yards” is an important stat for QBs now. They’re not.

    I’d much rather see Justin Fields throw 35 times a game and run 6 times than 23 and 18 like Sunday.

    And I would instantly trade Fields for Lawrence.

  • BrownPapi94@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    Just want to note the pressure percentage %. Trevor Lawrence has basically been pressured on 66 of his 332 attempts while JF1 was pressured on 48 of his 185 passing attempts. This could skew his completion% as well

      • BrownPapi94@alien.topB
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        Yeah Joe tell me. Who was the top quarterback taken last year and the year prior and then the year prior. Is the first quarterback drafted more likely to be a future superstar or a quarterback middling of the pack? Instead of taking the last 3 years let’s take the past 60 years. Please identify all the superstar quarterbacks taken at each position to clarify that the superstar was always taken in the first couple of picks. We can make it even easier and just say the bears drafted in the first 4 rounds.

      • BrownPapi94@alien.topB
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        Historical data isn’t all of probability but a majority of probability in a spectator sport is how it’s calculated. If it isn’t then Tom Brady would’ve been a first round pick, Brock purdy would’ve been a first round pick and even Jalen hurts. If you did the research you would find that most quarterbacks drafted in the first 3 picks of the draft didn’t work out as intended.

        Again, trade back accumulate picks. Pick bpa never said draft a quarterback

      • BrownPapi94@alien.topB
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        Yeah Joe tell me. Who was the top quarterback taken last year and the year prior and then the year prior. Is the first quarterback drafted more likely to be a future superstar or a quarterback middling of the pack? Instead of taking the last 3 years let’s take the past 60 years. Please identify all the superstar quarterbacks taken at each position to clarify that the superstar was always taken in the first couple of picks. We can make it even easier and just say the bears drafted in the first 4 rounds.

    • ubeen@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      Fields has that high of pressure percentage because he holds onto the ball until it’s a sack. The oline is well above average this year.

  • The_Wata_Boy@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    Its obvious Lawrence & Fields are the only QBs from that class that has potential to be a starter in the NFL. I guess Lance never got a fair shot at being a starter, but its not good when Mr. Irrelevant and Sam Darnold beat you so convincingly that your GM trades you to the first team willing to give him a draft pick.

    • ubeen@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      Fields is still a Prospect. I think both Fields and Mac Jones will get another opportunity somewhere else, but both have failed their respective teams who drafted them.