NFL 2021 Season

[nickagneta]

When ESPN showed the graphic of the two other times the QB position was so stacked that QBs went 1-2-3, it tremendously illustrated just how much of a crapshoot the NFL draft can be for not only all players, but especially QBs because of all the responsibilities and skills, both physically and mentally, they need to have to succeed

In 1971 the picks were Jim Plunkett, Archie Manning and Dan Pastorini. Two had successful long careers and won Super Bowls. One was a Hall of Famer.

Then in 1999 it was Tim Couch, Donovan McNabb and Ekili Smith. McNabb was a great QB that choked in his only SuperBowl and the other 2 were complete busts.

It gets really hard to project QBs, even at the very top of the draft. So every guess about who will be great and who will bust, are good guesses. The best QB ever wasn't even taken until the 6th round. It's all a guessing game that you hope and pray your team guesses right playing.

[Roy H.]

When ESPN showed the graphic of the two other times the QB position was so stacked that QBs went 1-2-3, it tremendously illustrated just how much of a crapshoot the NFL draft can be for not only all players, but especially QBs because of all the responsibilities and skills, both physically and mentally, they need to have to succeed

In 1971 the picks were Jim Plunkett, Archie Manning and Dan Pastorini. Two had successful long careers and won Super Bowls. One was a Hall of Famer.

Then in 1999 it was Tim Couch, Donovan McNabb and Ekili Smith. McNabb was a great QB that choked in his only SuperBowl and the other 2 were complete busts.

It gets really hard to project QBs, even at the very top of the draft. So every guess about who will be great and who will bust, are good guesses. The best QB ever wasn't even taken until the 6th round. It's all a guessing game that you hope and pray your team guesses right playing.

I thought Tim Couch was going to be really good.  I do wonder if he would have been better if he'd gone to a different franchise.  A similar guy was David Carr.  Both were dominant in college -- Couch in the SEC -- but college dominance simply doesn't always project.  Actually, there's only one rule that is always true for college:  don't draft an Oregon QB in the first round.  (Here's looking at you Joey Harrington, Akili Smith, Marcus Mariota).

[Redz]

When ESPN showed the graphic of the two other times the QB position was so stacked that QBs went 1-2-3, it tremendously illustrated just how much of a crapshoot the NFL draft can be for not only all players, but especially QBs because of all the responsibilities and skills, both physically and mentally, they need to have to succeed

In 1971 the picks were Jim Plunkett, Archie Manning and Dan Pastorini. Two had successful long careers and won Super Bowls. One was a Hall of Famer.

Then in 1999 it was Tim Couch, Donovan McNabb and Ekili Smith. McNabb was a great QB that choked in his only SuperBowl and the other 2 were complete busts.

It gets really hard to project QBs, even at the very top of the draft. So every guess about who will be great and who will bust, are good guesses. The best QB ever wasn't even taken until the 6th round. It's all a guessing game that you hope and pray your team guesses right playing.

Dude ruined the Pats first home playoff game!  I was there. 

Lame duck Chuck Fairbanks at the helm for the Pats gave the whole day a bad vibe to start.

[Roy H.]

Bears going with quality over quantity.  Two great picks, but that’s going to be about it.

[gouki88]

Two Bama picks for us. Interesting

[RPGenerate]

Barmore is an absolute steal. Was ranked 15th by PFF, and he's the best DT in the draft.

[byennie]

If the Pats end up with the best QB and DT of the draft at 15 & 38 the rest of the league should just quit. Sheesh.

[BitterJim]

Buccaneers with a QB in the 2nd round (albeit barely). Have to wonder if they view Kyle Trask as the future, or if they just want a young backup for Brady's next 5 seasons.

[gouki88]

Buccaneers with a QB in the 2nd round (albeit barely). Have to wonder if they view Kyle Trask as the future, or if they just want a young backup for Brady's next 5 seasons.

Haha, Max Kellerman might have a brain aneurysm if Brady plays 5 more years

[Moranis]

I’m still a little shocked the Bears got Fields.  I don’t trust their front office at all, but I think the experts overthought this one.  The kid can play.  Lazy comparison, but he reminds me of Dak.

Anybody think the Niners regret paying such a huge package to get up to #3?  They could have gotten a better QB for less than half the cost.

Historically, all teams end up regretting these kinds of "all in" trades to get one player.  Expect Bears will regret it too.  Or at least I can say am glad that the Pats didn't make this kind of trade.  No one knows if Fields will be better than Jones at this point.

Not sure I follow the second half though.  If they thought Fields was a better QB, they would have taken him at 3.  Not sure it can be stated that they could have gotten a better QB if they had picked later.  Maybe the same QB.

That last part is my own opinion.  I think that Fields has a higher ceiling and a higher floor than Vance.  I think the 49ers screwed themselves.

I think that the Bears were in a different situation. Who has been their best quarterback in the past 30 years? Rex Grossman? Jay Cutler? Mitch Trubisky?  They started with the 20th pick, and ended up with a guy who will hopefully surpass anybody they have had.  To me, that’s worth a future first rounder.  That said, if the Giants end up with a top five pick next year, I reserve the right to retract my opinion, ha ha.

I think the Bears had to shoot their shot there after the Mitch debacle and knowing that the Pace/Nagy regime is hanging by a thread.  This is a make or break move.  A wise man once said that "desperation is a stinky cologne".

I think what SF did was a little more needless and unnecessary.  Heck, they're only one season removed from a Super Bowl appearance.  I'm not sure what the mindset was there.  From the outside, it certainly seemed there was a lot of indecisiveness there at #3.   You really only made that trade is you're super locked in on one individual and I don't think they were, IMO.

The Niners should have stayed at 12.  I said when they made the trade it was dumb because they were only ever going to get the 3rd QB off the board and there was a very good chance whoever they wanted wasn't going to get taken 3rd or maybe at all until 12 (and I thought it was weird they would make a move for the 3rd QB at all).  I mean if the reports were true that Shanahan loved Mac Jones, all they had to do was wait and pick him at 12 because no one sitting in any of those positions was going to take Mac Jones.  Now obviously if Miami picks at 3 the whole draft is altered from that point on (they probably would have taken Pitts) starting a ripple effect, but no one was taking Jones.  And some teams could have moved up for QB's throwing it more into chaos, but who was trading up for Mac Jones?  I don't think anyone would have.  And I also don't know who is taking Trey Lance before at least the Carolina/Denver spots.  And we know teams were willing to drop back from that point, because Miami moved back up to 6.  San Fran badly mishandled that whole thing by trading up so early and into the spot they moved into.  Just horrid decision making all the way around.

The Bears had to move up for Fields.  He was widely rated as the 2nd best QB (and around 8th or 9th overall) in the draft.  He has the least potential (outside of Lawrence) to flop, though I do think Lance has a higher ceiling.  Fields is everything you'd want in a QB.  He is big, super fast, has a cannon for an arm, is tough as nails (I mean that hit in the Clemson game was crazy), and is a super duper leader (one of the main reasons the Big Ten even played this year is Fields).  The Bears haven't had a HOF QB since Sid Luckman retired in 1950.  The best QB's they've had since then are McMahon and Cutler.  This is a franchise that needs a QB and needs a QB badly.  Maybe Fields isn't the guy, but he certainly has the skill set, background, and look and feel of a potential franchise QB.  It was absolutely a move they had to make because he certainly wasn't going to be there for their pick.

What’s your take on why he fell? I assume you watch a lot of Ohio State games.  As a Bears fan, he seems like a total package. I was a big proponent of drafting Deshaun Watson over Mitch Trubisky, and I feel the same way about taking Fields over anybody other than Lawrence.  Now, maybe one of the other guys is the next Mahomes for all I know.  But Fields can be a top-6 QB someday.  Am I wrong? 
And if he is as good as I think he is, why are front offices overthinking this?  Is it just the nature of the beast, like we’ve seen from all pros like Rogers, Mahomes and Watson?

It was a short season he had some stinkers games.  Indiana, Northwestern, and Alabama were all poor performances and those were 3 of the 4 biggest games they played.  He was obviously awesome in the Clemson game, but I do think those other 3 games hurt him.  About the only thing I can think of really because he was consistently considered the 2nd best QB in this draft for multiple years.  So maybe that is some of it as well, i.e. he isn't the shiny new object (and Lawrence is just too good to go off of). 

I don't think he is the 2nd best player in the draft, but I do think he is the 2nd best QB.  No idea why others fell away from him unless he just didn't interview very well (though you usually hear about that).

[tazzmaniac]

I’m still a little shocked the Bears got Fields.  I don’t trust their front office at all, but I think the experts overthought this one.  The kid can play.  Lazy comparison, but he reminds me of Dak.

Anybody think the Niners regret paying such a huge package to get up to #3?  They could have gotten a better QB for less than half the cost.

Historically, all teams end up regretting these kinds of "all in" trades to get one player.  Expect Bears will regret it too.  Or at least I can say am glad that the Pats didn't make this kind of trade.  No one knows if Fields will be better than Jones at this point.

Not sure I follow the second half though.  If they thought Fields was a better QB, they would have taken him at 3.  Not sure it can be stated that they could have gotten a better QB if they had picked later.  Maybe the same QB.

That last part is my own opinion.  I think that Fields has a higher ceiling and a higher floor than Vance.  I think the 49ers screwed themselves.

I think that the Bears were in a different situation. Who has been their best quarterback in the past 30 years? Rex Grossman? Jay Cutler? Mitch Trubisky?  They started with the 20th pick, and ended up with a guy who will hopefully surpass anybody they have had.  To me, that’s worth a future first rounder.  That said, if the Giants end up with a top five pick next year, I reserve the right to retract my opinion, ha ha.

I think the Bears had to shoot their shot there after the Mitch debacle and knowing that the Pace/Nagy regime is hanging by a thread.  This is a make or break move.  A wise man once said that "desperation is a stinky cologne".

I think what SF did was a little more needless and unnecessary.  Heck, they're only one season removed from a Super Bowl appearance.  I'm not sure what the mindset was there.  From the outside, it certainly seemed there was a lot of indecisiveness there at #3.   You really only made that trade is you're super locked in on one individual and I don't think they were, IMO.

The Niners should have stayed at 12.  I said when they made the trade it was dumb because they were only ever going to get the 3rd QB off the board and there was a very good chance whoever they wanted wasn't going to get taken 3rd or maybe at all until 12 (and I thought it was weird they would make a move for the 3rd QB at all).  I mean if the reports were true that Shanahan loved Mac Jones, all they had to do was wait and pick him at 12 because no one sitting in any of those positions was going to take Mac Jones.  Now obviously if Miami picks at 3 the whole draft is altered from that point on (they probably would have taken Pitts) starting a ripple effect, but no one was taking Jones.  And some teams could have moved up for QB's throwing it more into chaos, but who was trading up for Mac Jones?  I don't think anyone would have.  And I also don't know who is taking Trey Lance before at least the Carolina/Denver spots.  And we know teams were willing to drop back from that point, because Miami moved back up to 6.  San Fran badly mishandled that whole thing by trading up so early and into the spot they moved into.  Just horrid decision making all the way around.

The Bears had to move up for Fields.  He was widely rated as the 2nd best QB (and around 8th or 9th overall) in the draft.  He has the least potential (outside of Lawrence) to flop, though I do think Lance has a higher ceiling.  Fields is everything you'd want in a QB.  He is big, super fast, has a cannon for an arm, is tough as nails (I mean that hit in the Clemson game was crazy), and is a super duper leader (one of the main reasons the Big Ten even played this year is Fields).  The Bears haven't had a HOF QB since Sid Luckman retired in 1950.  The best QB's they've had since then are McMahon and Cutler.  This is a franchise that needs a QB and needs a QB badly.  Maybe Fields isn't the guy, but he certainly has the skill set, background, and look and feel of a potential franchise QB.  It was absolutely a move they had to make because he certainly wasn't going to be there for their pick.

What’s your take on why he fell? I assume you watch a lot of Ohio State games.  As a Bears fan, he seems like a total package. I was a big proponent of drafting Deshaun Watson over Mitch Trubisky, and I feel the same way about taking Fields over anybody other than Lawrence.  Now, maybe one of the other guys is the next Mahomes for all I know.  But Fields can be a top-6 QB someday.  Am I wrong? 
And if he is as good as I think he is, why are front offices overthinking this?  Is it just the nature of the beast, like we’ve seen from all pros like Rogers, Mahomes and Watson?

It was a short season he had some stinkers games.  Indiana, Northwestern, and Alabama were all poor performances and those were 3 of the 4 biggest games they played.  He was obviously awesome in the Clemson game, but I do think those other 3 games hurt him.  About the only thing I can think of really because he was consistently considered the 2nd best QB in this draft for multiple years.  So maybe that is some of it as well, i.e. he isn't the shiny new object (and Lawrence is just too good to go off of). 

I don't think he is the 2nd best player in the draft, but I do think he is the 2nd best QB.  No idea why others fell away from him unless he just didn't interview very well (though you usually hear about that).

The poor performances against Indiana and the dreadful performance against Northwestern  where OSU has a huge talent advantage are especially concerning.  He did put up big numbers against Clemson but the Clemson secondary was terrible in that game. 

The big question I've heard on Fields is on his ability to process data quickly and go through his progressions.  Supposedly one of the NFL teams reviewed all his 200+ pass attempts and Fields threw to his primary target on all but 7 attempts. 

Personally I find his sack numbers interesting.  In 2020, 21 sacks in 8 games including 5 sacks by Indiana.  In 2019, 31 sacks in 14 games but 5 each in the two games against Wisconsin and 4 in the Clemson game.  That's a lot of sacks for a QB whose athleticism and mobility are so hyped. 

As a Bama fan, Manzel scared me.  Watson scared me.  Even with the dreadful Oklahoma defense, Kyler Murray scared me a bit.  Fields didn't scare me. 

[chicagoceltic]

The poor performances against Indiana and the dreadful performance against Northwestern  where OSU has a huge talent advantage are especially concerning.  He did put up big numbers against Clemson but the Clemson secondary was terrible in that game. 

The big question I've heard on Fields is on his ability to process data quickly and go through his progressions.  Supposedly one of the NFL teams reviewed all his 200+ pass attempts and Fields threw to his primary target on all but 7 attempts. 

Personally I find his sack numbers interesting.  In 2020, 21 sacks in 8 games including 5 sacks by Indiana.  In 2019, 31 sacks in 14 games but 5 each in the two games against Wisconsin and 4 in the Clemson game.  That's a lot of sacks for a QB whose athleticism and mobility are so hyped. 

As a Bama fan, Manzel scared me.  Watson scared me.  Even with the dreadful Oklahoma defense, Kyler Murray scared me a bit.  Fields didn't scare me.

Nothing for nothing but Indiana had the 5th ranked defense in the country and Northwestern was the #1 ranked defense. Yes he played poorly against them but it is not like it was against bums.

[Phantom255x]

Buccaneers with a QB in the 2nd round (albeit barely). Have to wonder if they view Kyle Trask as the future, or if they just want a young backup for Brady's next 5 seasons.

It's like Jimmy G all over. Once the 4-5 years are up, Trask will get traded 

[tazzmaniac]

The poor performances against Indiana and the dreadful performance against Northwestern  where OSU has a huge talent advantage are especially concerning.  He did put up big numbers against Clemson but the Clemson secondary was terrible in that game. 

The big question I've heard on Fields is on his ability to process data quickly and go through his progressions.  Supposedly one of the NFL teams reviewed all his 200+ pass attempts and Fields threw to his primary target on all but 7 attempts. 

Personally I find his sack numbers interesting.  In 2020, 21 sacks in 8 games including 5 sacks by Indiana.  In 2019, 31 sacks in 14 games but 5 each in the two games against Wisconsin and 4 in the Clemson game.  That's a lot of sacks for a QB whose athleticism and mobility are so hyped. 

As a Bama fan, Manzel scared me.  Watson scared me.  Even with the dreadful Oklahoma defense, Kyler Murray scared me a bit.  Fields didn't scare me.

Nothing for nothing but Indiana had the 5th ranked defense in the country and Northwestern was the #1 ranked defense. Yes he played poorly against them but it is not like it was against bums.

According to whom?  I'd suggest those B10 defensives were overrated in the stats because they faced weak B10 offenses.  That supposed #1 Northwestern defense allowed Sermon to rush for 331 yards. 

Northwestern did beat a pretty poor Auburn team that played without their top RB.  But Bo Nix
put up reasonably good numbers against Northwestern while Fields numbers against NW were dreadful.   

Nix         25/42   292    1 TD   0 INT    125.8  Rtg
Fields      12/27  114   0 TD   2 INT      65.1  Rtg     

Even if Northwestern's defense was actually the #1 defense, Fields performance was dreadful in this era which heavily favors the offense.  If Fields performance drops off so much against better college defenses, how is he going to perform against NFL professional defenses?  Fields won't have the huge talent advantage in the NFL that he does at OSU.   

[Moranis]

The poor performances against Indiana and the dreadful performance against Northwestern  where OSU has a huge talent advantage are especially concerning.  He did put up big numbers against Clemson but the Clemson secondary was terrible in that game. 

The big question I've heard on Fields is on his ability to process data quickly and go through his progressions.  Supposedly one of the NFL teams reviewed all his 200+ pass attempts and Fields threw to his primary target on all but 7 attempts. 

Personally I find his sack numbers interesting.  In 2020, 21 sacks in 8 games including 5 sacks by Indiana.  In 2019, 31 sacks in 14 games but 5 each in the two games against Wisconsin and 4 in the Clemson game.  That's a lot of sacks for a QB whose athleticism and mobility are so hyped. 

As a Bama fan, Manzel scared me.  Watson scared me.  Even with the dreadful Oklahoma defense, Kyler Murray scared me a bit.  Fields didn't scare me.

Nothing for nothing but Indiana had the 5th ranked defense in the country and Northwestern was the #1 ranked defense. Yes he played poorly against them but it is not like it was against bums.

According to whom?  I'd suggest those B10 defensives were overrated in the stats because they faced weak B10 offenses.  That supposed #1 Northwestern defense allowed Sermon to rush for 331 yards. 

Northwestern did beat a pretty poor Auburn team that played without their top RB.  But Bo Nix
put up reasonably good numbers against Northwestern while Fields numbers against NW were dreadful.   

Nix         25/42   292    1 TD   0 INT    125.8  Rtg
Fields      12/27  114   0 TD   2 INT      65.1  Rtg     

Even if Northwestern's defense was actually the #1 defense, Fields performance was dreadful in this era which heavily favors the offense.  If Fields performance drops off so much against better college defenses, how is he going to perform against NFL professional defenses?  Fields won't have the huge talent advantage in the NFL that he does at OSU.

Northwestern did hold Auburn to 19 points (only Alabama and Georgia held them lower than that).  Indiana held Ole Miss to 26, their second lowest total on the season (Bama let them score 48 and Florida 35, as a point of comparison).

Fields had 300 passing yards and 78 rushing yards against Indiana.  He had 3 INT's which has been the focus, but it isn't like he had a super poor game and as we all know INT's often aren't the fault of the QB (at least one of those wasn't his fault).

Against Alabama (who basically crushed everyone), Fields was clearly still injured from that nasty hit he took in the Clemson game.  And Alabama crushed everyone last year. 

The prior year, the Buckeyes only loss was to Clemson, in which Fields once again had an awesome game.  He was also excellent against Michigan and Wisconsin the two biggest games of the year before Clemson. 

This was a weird season.  I have a hard time putting much stock into anything that happened.  I mean Trey Lance didn't even play a season last year. 

I will also leave you with this stat line 19-30, 240 yards, 1 TD, 1 INT, and a QBR of 68.1.  That folks, is Zach Wilson's game against Coastal Carolina, which BYU lost and cost them a potential New Years 6 bowl birth (probably would have gone to Cincinnati anyway, but that game eliminated BYU putting them firmly behind unbeaten Coastal Carolina and unbeaten Cincinnati).  Against Indiana Fields QBR was 82.4 and against Bama it was 87.2.  He was awful against Northwestern at 33.4, of course Ohio State won that game by 2 scores. 

The nitpicking of Fields is irrational.  It doesn't make sense.  Everyone has flaws (even Lawrence), yet everyone seems to be ignoring the flaws of everyone else.  Only Fields seemed to be hurt by his.