2017 NFL DRAFT

[rah]

They got taken. What a joke. I don't mind the pick, I just don't like how they got it.

[ColdWizard]

Could be worse. Like 2 (2012) for a 2 (2014), 6 (2012), 22 (2013), and 39 (2012).

[rah]

Yeah, not the worst ever, but pretty bad.

So the bears needs at defense get ignored again in the second round. But at least they got another pick, by trading down a few picks. We'd better pick a safety today.

[regexcellent]

I have a video of the redskins' first round pick utterly destroying my high school team at our homecoming game my senior year.

[Lorizael]

Good to know the Redskins could probably take a high school team.

[SlowwHand]

[rah]

We're still not certain the bears can.

[ColdWizard]

I know how this looked Thursday night: The Bears waaaay overpaid for Trubisky, when they could have just sat at three and drafted him. That’s possible, and in fact it’s more likely than not. But as someone who was with San Francisco GM John Lynch for much of the day, and in a planning meeting with cap guy Paraag Marathe and coach Kyle Shanahan 25 minutes before the draft began, and in the 49ers’ draft room that evening, I can tell you that is a false assumption. Ask me my gut feeling, and it is that yes, the Bears would have gotten Trubisky at three without moving. But it was not at all certain. What if the scenario happened that, as of Thursday, was legitimately possible—what if the Browns packed up enough picks to make the Niners move from two to 12? The 49ers had been in touch with Cleveland before the draft, and were anticipating they could get a call from the Browns when they were on the clock at two with Trubisky available. There was also a mystery team that I could not identify that wanted to move to two and wouldn’t say which player the team was targeting.

Understand this also: The Niners were not stuck on drafting Solomon Thomas had they stayed at two. It certainly was most likely, but they would have been fine with moving back for a ransom, or moving back as far as eight and taking Reuben Foster for less of a ransom.

So let’s say you’re Pace, and you’ve determined that you really want Trubisky. You call the 49ers and trying to work out fair compensation if the Browns do not pick him at one. You think Trubisky’s going to be the long-term Bears quarterback, starting in 2018 or later. By late Thursday afternoon, you think there’s probably an 80 percent chance you’re going to get Trubisky at three. Are you willing to take the chance of staying put? Or, for the cost of the 67th and 111th picks this year and a third-rounder next year, are you willing to guarantee you’ll get Trubisky if Cleveland passes on him?

MMQB

[-Jrabbit]

Even in the fairly generous scenario described, making that move is an embarrassment.

Pace is making it very difficult to be a Bears fan.

[rah]

I couldn't agree more. Those that say, well if he's is a franchise quarterback, (no guarantee) that it was worth it, aren't taking into account that there were other quarterbacks that many think have a better chance of being one. One of them would have been available at three. SO even with that small percentage shot that Trubisky was grabbed, there were options.
The bears fell in love and paid a price that the fans can love to hate at the moment.

But then to ignore the defense with their second pick, is criminal.

Just my opinion, but one shared by many fans based on all the comments I've been reading.

[-Jrabbit]

Rotoworld.com actually gave the Bears an F for their overall draft. That says it all.

[rah]

And they were probably graded on a curve.

It is hilarious listening to them try to spin it.

[-Jrabbit]

The NFL announced a bunch of minor rule changes for the coming year, most of which are not incredibly stupid...

NFL owners passed a resolution which will allow two players to return from injured reserve each season. Only one player had been allowed to return in the past.
The owners also voted to shorten overtime from 15 minutes to 10 minutes.
They also have eliminated the 75-man cutdown day which previously occurred after the third preseason game. Teams will now cut directly from their 90-man roster to their 53-man, "final" roster after the fourth preseason game, giving coaches more players to pull from in the meaningless preseason finale.

My only comment is that 10 minute OTs mean a greater chance of a tie. Sounds like the answer to a question no one was asking. I mean, why would you want that?

[SlowwHand]

it just means a change in tactics.

[rah]

I heard the intent was to reduce the number of plays to minimize the chance for injuries. Of course, since this will impact so few plays, why not just eliminate overtime completely.