NFL Thread 2019-2020

[Jack Parkman]

1 minute ago, Chicago White Sox said:

When did I ever say it should take 3+ years for him to develop?  To me, this is his make or break year.  Most QBs take their big leap in year two, but most high end draft picks also have at least two full seasons of college starts.  Combine that with what was basically a completely wasted rookie season (horrific coaching & lack of weapons) and this is effectively year two for him.  I need to see major growth from him this year or else I will be ready to call him a bust too. 

This is fair, IMO. 

[Chicago White Sox]

10 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

We haven't yet seen enough of him this season to evaluate all of those, but last night his footwork was improved while he also struggled with 3/4 on some important plays. 

Whether that was this defense, rust, or something systematic we need a season to evaluate. But you're 100% right there should be substantial improvement on the others.

100% agree.  We need a much bigger sample size than one game to say he’s the same old Mitch.

[flippedoutpunk]

I am especially invested in Trubisky's development this season since I bought his Jersey during the offseason. Not the screenprinted kind either

Edited September 6, 2019 by flippedoutpunk

[Jack Parkman]

3 minutes ago, flippedoutpunk said:

I am especially invested in Trubisky's development this season since I bought his Jersey during the offseason. Not the screenprinted kind either

I don't buy player jerseys until mid-career, when I'm 100% sure the guy is good. I might break in xmas 2020 with Moncada and Giolito, should they sign extensions. I didn't buy a Toews Jersey until he had won 2 Stanley Cups. I'd buy a Mack jersey. 

Edited September 6, 2019 by Jack Parkman

[Look at Ray Ray Run]

4 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said:

100% agree.  We need a much bigger sample size than one game to say he’s the same old Mitch.

So, he wasn't the same old mitch yesterday? Is that what you're saying?

[Jack Parkman]

7 minutes ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

So, he wasn't the same old mitch yesterday? Is that what you're saying?

He was, but we don't know if it was just rust or if he sucks. If he's still doing this in week 4-5, then we can declare him a bust. The Packers looked awful and out of sync too, but nobody's calling Rodgers over the hill. Also, everyone is underrating GB's Defense. They're probably really good. As good as the Bears? No. But that looks like a top 12 unit to me. The Bears generally are regarded as having one of the best offensive lines in football and they made them look like chumps. 

Edited September 6, 2019 by Jack Parkman

[Balta1701]

1 minute ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

So, he wasn't the same old mitch yesterday? Is that what you're saying?

He was, but a good defensive performance can make a really good QB appear as "Same old Mitch". That was solid defensive work by the Packers and the Bears didn't seem to help with their game plan. 

It was 1/16th of a season. If a guy is hitting .100 after 10 games in baseball you don't declare his season a bust. If a guy is hitting .150 around Memorial day you get concerned and move him to the cleanup spot for the next month. If he's hitting around .150 half way through the season then you release him. 

[Jack Parkman]

1 minute ago, Balta1701 said:

He was, but a good defensive performance can make a really good QB appear as "Same old Mitch". That was solid defensive work by the Packers and the Bears didn't seem to help with their game plan. 

It was 1/16th of a season. If a guy is hitting .100 after 10 games in baseball you don't declare his season a bust. If a guy is hitting .150 around Memorial day you get concerned and move him to the cleanup spot for the next month. If he's hitting around .150 half way through the season then you release him. 

This is POTY material. LMMFAO. 

Edited September 6, 2019 by Jack Parkman

[Look at Ray Ray Run]

3 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

He was, but a good defensive performance can make a really good QB appear as "Same old Mitch". That was solid defensive work by the Packers and the Bears didn't seem to help with their game plan. 

It was 1/16th of a season. If a guy is hitting .100 after 10 games in baseball you don't declare his season a bust. If a guy is hitting .150 around Memorial day you get concerned and move him to the cleanup spot for the next month. If he's hitting around .150 half way through the season then you release him. 

So everyone that said same old mitch yesterday was, in fact, correct and didn't deserve the bizarre blowback from trubisky apologists?

The best predictor of the future is past success in sports. Mitch was this way last year and continued to be the same way yesterday. So... until mitch shows something, anything, that says he's improved in any of those areas it should be not only safe to assume, but logical to assume that he is the same guy he was. It doesn't mean its physically impossible for him to change... it means it's less likely he will than not based on the fact that he hasnt.

The packers themselves told you mitch isnt a good qb and their game plan was to make him play qb.

[thxfrthmmrs]

Jesus - it was only the first game on the season, NFL opener with no preseason reps. The hot takes are insane.

I still remember all the crap Parkman said about Trub early last season and had to eat a big fat crow at the end.

[Jack Parkman]

6 minutes ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

So everyone that said same old mitch yesterday was, in fact, correct and didn't deserve the bizarre blowback from trubisky apologists?

The best predictor of the future is past success in sports. Mitch was this way last year and continued to be the same way yesterday. So... until mitch shows something, anything, that says he's improved in any of those areas it should be not only safe to assume, but logical to assume that he is the same guy he was. It doesn't mean its physically impossible for him to change... it means it's less likely he will than not based on the fact that he hasnt.

The packers themselves told you mitch isnt a good qb and their game plan was to make him play qb.

Ray Ray, I was with you at the start of last year, but I saw progress throughout the 2018 season from MT. Is he good enough yet? No way. But he's still relatively inexperienced. He was always going to take longer. Why you don't understand that, I have no idea. This is a make or break year for him. We should know one way or the other by the 10th game what he is or isn't. If he still struggles to go through his progressions by then, you're right. Heads should roll in that case. It's close to the end, but it's still too early. Rodgers looked like crap most of last night too, so I'm willing to give Trubisky a mulligan for that one. Also, GB's secondary is EXTREMELY talented. Don't underestimate that. 

Edited September 6, 2019 by Jack Parkman

[Jack Parkman]

4 minutes ago, thxfrthmmrs said:

Jesus - it was only the first game on the season, NFL opener with no preseason reps. The hot takes are insane.

I still remember all the crap Parkman said about Trub early last season and had to eat a big fat crow at the end.

I remember that too. Trubisky made a lot of strides last year. That's why I was so disappointed last night. 

[Chicago White Sox]

3 minutes ago, thxfrthmmrs said:

Jesus - it was only the first game on the season, NFL opener with no preseason reps. The hot takes are insane.

Yup.  Like I honestly don’t care if people think Mitch will ultimately bust, but last night proves absolutely nothing.

[Jack Parkman]

3 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said:

Yup.  Like I honestly don’t care if people think Mitch will ultimately bust, but last night proves absolutely nothing.

Besides Amos, those are 5 top 40 picks in that secondary. It's really talented, and we know Amos is good already. The packers secondary has a chance to be the second coming of the LOB. Kevin King and Jaire Alexander are already really good at the very least. 

Edited September 6, 2019 by Jack Parkman

[Look at Ray Ray Run]

8 minutes ago, thxfrthmmrs said:

Jesus - it was only the first game on the season, NFL opener with no preseason reps. The hot takes are insane.

I still remember all the crap Parkman said about Trub early last season and had to eat a big fat crow at the end.

Eat crow? Lol

He was trash vs good defenses and was the worst player on the field in the first half vs the eagles. If you think trubisky was anything above serviceable last year you are nuts.

[Look at Ray Ray Run]

1 minute ago, Jack Parkman said:

Besides Amos, those are 5 top 40 picks in that secondary. It's really talented, and we know Amos is good already. 

I'll bet you the packers dont give up less than 7 points to a single opponent the rest of the year.

[Jack Parkman]

5 minutes ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

I'll bet you the packers dont give up less than 7 points to a single opponent the rest of the year.

You're probably right. I don't think the Bears will give up single digits the rest of the year either. They might equal last night, but they won't give up single digits. The only difference between the Bears and Packers schedule are themselves and the Bears play the Rams and Saints while the Packers play the 49ers and Panthers. The NFC North has a hard schedule this year. 

I think the Packers could get away with it vs. the Raiders. That's about it. The Packers probably score more than 10 points in every game the rest of the season as well, including at Lambeau vs. the Bears. 

Edited September 6, 2019 by Jack Parkman

[Look at Ray Ray Run]

5 minutes ago, Jack Parkman said:

You're probably right. I don't think the Bears will give up single digits the rest of the year either. They might equal last night, but they won't give up single digits. The only difference between the Bears and Packers schedule are themselves and the Bears play the Rams and Saints while the Packers play the 49ers and Panthers. The NFC North has a hard schedule this year. 

I think the Packers could get away with it vs. the Raiders. That's about it. The Packers probably score more than 10 points in every game the rest of the season as well, including at Lambeau vs. the Bears. 

I'll bet you that the bears hold at least one opponent (I'd argue 2+) under 10 points. 

The Bears defense is better than last year. It's a historically good unit.

Injuries can destroy a team in the NFL - just adding that disclaimer as they need to stay healthy to be that good.

Edited September 6, 2019 by Look at Ray Ray Run

[Jack Parkman]

Just now, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

I'll bet you that the bears hold at least one opponent (I'd argue 2+) under 10 points. 

The Bears defense is better than last year. It's a historically good unit.

Have you seen the QBs on the Bears schedule? It's the Who's Who list of good QBs. They play: Rodgers(x1) Brees, Mahomes, Wentz, Rivers, Goff

They play in the average category: Stafford(x2) Cousins(x2) Prescott, Flacco, hell, even Derek Carr and Eli Manning are average. The only cupcake on their schedule is Washington. It's going to be mentally taxing playing that many good to average QBs week after week. The Bears only chance to hold a team to single digits is Washington, IMO. 

 

[Soxfest]

I don’t have any confidence in Mitch Bears barely have scored 20 points in half his games. He has not improved 1% and may have regressed in year 3.

Edited September 6, 2019 by Soxfest

[soxfan49]

15 minutes ago, Jack Parkman said:

Have you seen the QBs on the Bears schedule? It's the Who's Who list of good QBs. They play: Rodgers(x1) Brees, Mahomes, Wentz, Rivers, Goff

They play in the average category: Stafford(x2) Cousins(x2) Prescott, Flacco, hell, even Derek Carr and Eli Manning are average. The only cupcake on their schedule is Washington. It's going to be mentally taxing playing that many good to average QBs week after week. The Bears only chance to hold a team to single digits is Washington, IMO. 

 

Of course predicting a team to score <10 is a far greater risk than >10 but the Broncos OL is horrible & Flacco probably isn't good either. I could see that final being 9-6 or 9-7 

[Jack Parkman]

4 minutes ago, soxfan49 said:

Of course predicting a team to score <10 is a far greater risk than >10 but the Broncos OL is horrible & Flacco probably isn't good either. I could see that final being 9-6 or 9-7 

Depends on the turnover situation. Last night, neither team turned the ball over until Trubisky tried to make something happen late. 

Edited September 6, 2019 by Jack Parkman

[pcq]

Uhhhh no. Go Mitch. Maybe the Pack is too smart for Mitch and the Bear offense. Pretty much expect the same from Josh Allen against the Jets. You have to be an accurate passer first and foremost. 

[thxfrthmmrs]

43 minutes ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

Eat crow? Lol

He was trash vs good defenses and was the worst player on the field in the first half vs the eagles. If you think trubisky was anything above serviceable last year you are nuts.

Rodgers passed for 70 yards and 0 TDS in the 1st, 3rd and 4th quarter combined. I love cherry picking stats to write your narrative.

[Dick Allen]

31 minutes ago, Soxfest said:

I don’t have any confidence in Mitch Bears barely have scored 20 points in half his games. He has not improved 1% and may have regressed in year 3.

 My friend who knows more about football than me, is absolutely convinced the league is catching up to Nagy’s offense.