Justin Fields

I don't buy it. Most of the time just change makes it hard for a team to play against someone they don't have game tape on. Its like when Tennessee Qb 1st came in 4 tds, or some such in the 1st game, and not much since. Dobbs....every time He goes to a new team....instant success, and then nothing. Another example. Fire Canada....We moved the ball excellent because they had no idea what we were going to do. We see this all the time....new coach comes in 1st year awesome....next once they get a key on Him....not so good.

 

Yeah but just think how exciting it will be when he takes off and runs.

 

LoL. I think You are just trying to provoke Me with that. LoL.

 

That's true, and can remember it many times going way back. Colin has been on the O coach train for a while now, this is just another spin to it. There might be a bit of truth, like San Fran, where the system is so well run and surrounded by great talent, that that a credible (even marginal) QB can step in and have some success, though by the time you get to the 4th QB who only has a week to prepare even that will can fall apart (last years play off run).

 

LOL

 

If the Bears don’t want him that’s your first clue. What Bears QB left the team and played great somewhere else. Hell his backup looks as good or better

 

Which is perfectly fine to me. I'd rather tank next year than get some QBs that are going to fail anyways. This club needs a massive reset and I'm sick and tired of bandaids that are barely better than the players they've replaced. The scheme sucks, Fields sucks... wtf can go right here, and throwing away draft picks for a failure when we should be stocking up on capital makes this even less palatable. If the Stillas was just a QB away from competing, I'd say by all means go for it. This squad is 2-3 years away from anything sort of competing.

 

Did you look at yourself naked in a mirror as you typed that??

 

Hey, I know let’s get another ineffective quarterback from the Bears. What a wonderful idea

 

They are a QB away from competing. I am just not 100% sold that Fields is that guy. He could be good enough for us to compete, but is he good enough for us to have a shot at winning it all? I think Cousins is, but that is a very short term answer. Kyler is coming off injury and is overpaid, but he might be good enough too. More risk in that scenario than there is in either the Cousins or Fields scenario. All I know is that we can't have Pickett be the week 1 starter if we are serious about winning games.

I think with the current roster it is impossible for us to tank. The roster is just too good for us to be bad enough to get a top 5-10 pick. Kenny Pickett has started 24 games, thrown for less than 180 yards a game, and has 13 career TD passes and we still won 14 of those games.... The roster is too good to lose even with the worst QB play in the entire league. We'd probably have to trade a number of guys if want to tank and I will lose a lot of respect for the organization if they go that route.

 

I don’t want the guy either but if we did I would get the the OC from Baltimore last year that built a high powered run offense and just let fields run the ball and throw a few times a game with the RPO and Play action. I wouldn’t give up more than a third for the guy.Honestly I would prefer they draft Daniels out of LSU but he will be long gone by the time we pick. At the very least we should have our fair share of former failed first round QB’s to choose from in free agency next year.

 

The new OC will determine a lot of what we do. I think Fields could potentially be the "poor man's Jalen Hurts", but it IS a bit of a leap of faith. He has struggled a bit in his first few years in Chicago, but that is a team that is worse across the board than we are. Their line is trash and they had no weapons for him until they acquired Moore this past offseason. He might be able to flourish a bit on a team that can run the ball and has a few weapons for him to throw to. He's also be a big part of the rushing attack. This year he has improved too, so we'd be banking on his arrow pointing up and putting him on a team that has superior weapons.

Prior to exiting early in the Detroit game via injury, he was averaging like 230 yds a game throwing, 40 yards rushing, threw for 11 TD's vs. 5 INT's and added a rushing score too. All of that and they were averaging 23 PPG. Not a bad start. Since he's been back (3 games) he's cooled off a bit averaging 203 ypg throwing, but they've used him more extensively in the run game with nearly 75 ypg. They are getting nearly 100 total ypg out of Fields than we are out of Pickett right now, and Fields has as many TD throws in 9 games as Pickett does in his 24 game career... Fields may not be the answer, but he would certainly be a huge upgrade over Pickett.

The only downside is that we would potentially put ourselves in the same category as the Ravens in terms of WR talent. We'd struggle to get good FA's or keep any of our young talent due to not being a traditional offense that benefits WR play. We'd likely have to go the trade route like Philly and the Bears did with Brown and Moore. I think this is fine since we do a good job drafting the position, but it is something to think about. In terms of back ups, I think it would be fine since more and more QB's coming out of college are in a similar style to Fields. The college offenses and how they operate has completely ruined the NFL QB position. We wouldn't have a hard time finding guys that play a similar style to Hurts or Allen.

It would be at the very least an interesting route to go. We'd have less money tied up in the WR position and could spend on the OL, TE and RB positions. This is effectively cheaper due to those positions (outside of LT) being far less expensive than paying a big time WR or two. I'm a bit undecided on it, but we'd at least be a lot better offensively than we were this year if we choose that route. I am sure we will probably just hire Faulkner as the OC and roll Pickett out there, as that's the "Steeler way"... but speculatively, the Fields thing might be a decent thing to try.

 

Daniels is a bit of a wildcard in the draft. Lots of people thought Lamar Jackson would go higher, but he fell to the second round. Daniels is a bit more polished passing the ball out of college (and a bit less of a rushing threat), but I could see a similar fate. Someone could fall in love with him and take him top 10, or he could slide to late round 1/early round 2. His size is a question mark too, idk. He's electric. I'd be fine taking the Jaylen Daniels plunge.

As for Fields, I think if we build the offense correctly he can be effective. He's an upgrade over Pickett anyways, so why not? As long as the cost to acquire him is low, I'd be for it. Seems like a low risk maneuver since he'd be easy to dump if it didn't work out and we'd have a low amount of money tied into it.