Sam Darnold

[Wundrbread33]

And @frankw, a quarterback who’s going to “win you games with that arm talent” (I assume you mean be the difference maker, or occasionally carry the team) isn’t what a bridge/backup level QB does.

 

If they do that…then they start and get paid accordingly. 

[MasterAwesome]

58 minutes ago, ForJimmy said:

One is developing with a defensive HC, no OL, and no weapons outside of Moony. Fields is projecting to get better which is why he would cost so much more to acquire. Darnold is what he is (a decent backup who isn’t consistent) and there is nothing wrong with that. Fields passer rating increased as the season progressed while Darnold falls apart that last game. Fields isn’t there yet as a passer, but he has potential to get there. The NFL sets the price to acquire these QBs is one is available as a FA for around $5 million there is usually a reason…

To be fair, Fields also imploded in his last game: 7-21 for 75 yards 1 TD 1 INT.  To an earlier point you made: it's definitely fair to hold Darnold and Fields to a different standard, but what confuses me is how one of them is apparently the worst starting QB of the last 6 years and shouldn't even be worthy of signing to a cheap back-up spot, while the other is already anointed a franchise QB who we were idiots to have passed up.

[ForJimmy]

1 minute ago, MasterAwesome said:

To be fair, Fields also imploded in his last game: 7-21 for 75 yards 1 TD 1 INT.  To an earlier point you made: it's definitely fair to hold Darnold and Fields to a different standard, but what confuses me is how one of them is apparently the worst starting QB of the last 6 years and shouldn't even be worthy of signing to a cheap back-up spot, while the other is already anointed a franchise QB who we were idiots to have passed up.

It's two extremes. I think Sam is who he is at this point after year 5.  He looks to be a decent backup and can play well when everything is going well.  Then looking at Fields he clearly has some growth to do after year two.  If Chicago can get him a decent OL and some weapons next year SHOULD be a big year for him if not then there will definitely be questions around him in the offseason.

Looking at Fields first full season as a starter he average 225 yards a game (very meh and 1/3 of them are from rushing which is fine for now, but not long term) 25 total TDs (so around 1.5 TDs a game) 11 INTS (so .66 a game) with 60.4% completion which was actually higher than Sam last year despite his best year yet....  His leading WR had just under 500 yards and 2 TDs (that's very similar to TMJ who wasn't even used all year).  His TE looked like he was decent with around 500 yards and 7 TDs. With all of these issues in Chicago the Bear's offense still averaged one less PPG than us and more YPG.  He looked more like a one man shows vs Carolina trying to limit their QB play.  

Fields definitely needs to develop as a passer, but there is a reason why the league is high on him and very indifferent on Sam.  Different points in their career with very different ceilings.  

[mrcompletely11]

16 minutes ago, MasterAwesome said:

To be fair, Fields also imploded in his last game: 7-21 for 75 yards 1 TD 1 INT.  To an earlier point you made: it's definitely fair to hold Darnold and Fields to a different standard, but what confuses me is how one of them is apparently the worst starting QB of the last 6 years and shouldn't even be worthy of signing to a cheap back-up spot, while the other is already anointed a franchise QB who we were idiots to have passed up.

I think it’s crystal clear at this point that we were indeed idiots for not drafted him.  I mean for fugs sake it’s 3 years later and we are still looking for a qb.  

[ForJimmy]

1 minute ago, mrcompletely11 said:

I think it’s crystal clear at this point that we were indeed idiots for not drafted him.  I mean for fugs sake it’s 3 years later and we are still looking for a qb.  

Meanwhile it looks like Chicago is going to get a shitload of picks for their top pick because they don't need one.  Having a QB changes everything.

[kungfoodude]

26 minutes ago, CamTheMan said:

Darnold actually has a higher winning % than Brissett and Darnold's winning % is pretty similar to Teddy's in the past 3 years. Brissett went 4-7 with a Cleveland team that isn't too much better or worse than ours. Teddy went 7-7 in Denver and 0-2 in Miami. I'd agree that Teddy is probably better than Darnold in a lot of ways but personally, I'd rather watch Darnold chuck it to the other team than watch Teddy throw 3 yard passes every play and refuse to push it down field regardless of the situation or who is open.

 

Don't disagree. Lots of average quarterbacks to be had, comes down to a value thing and how much they are going to want from us. That is why the argument for Darnold is dependent on a great contract, as has been repeated many times. Regardless of who we get, we still need to plan for a replacement. 

The actual statistics are as follows(career, also threw in a few other QB's mentioned in this thread):

Garoppolo 0.702
Bridgewater 0.508
Carr 0.445
Darnold 0.382
Brissett 0.375
Minshew 0.333

 

A little surprised to see Brissett actually trailing Darnold but I had forgotten about the 4-11 season he had with the Colts in 2017. 

For reference, the guy we always remember as the "best backup QB in the NFL" Derek Anderson had a .500 career record as a starter for Carolina and a .408 career record as an NFL starter.

 

Maybe we don't want Brissett or Minshew in that case, as they really don't have greater success than Darnold despite being far better QB's. In the end, although Darnold is easily the worst player on that list, the results are what actually matters. Floating higher than the sinking turd doesn't make you less of a turd.

Definitely something to think about.

 

[CRA]

22 minutes ago, MasterAwesome said:

To be fair, Fields also imploded in his last game: 7-21 for 75 yards 1 TD 1 INT.  To an earlier point you made: it's definitely fair to hold Darnold and Fields to a different standard, but what confuses me is how one of them is apparently the worst starting QB of the last 6 years and shouldn't even be worthy of signing to a cheap back-up spot, while the other is already anointed a franchise QB who we were idiots to have passed up.

He also added 132 rushing yards on the ground.  So when he sucks as a passer, he compensates in other ways. 

Justin Fields has shown legit elite and special ability.    Largely as a runner.  But there is something special about him.   And only 2 years under his belt.  And the team last year was prepped to be a Andy Dalton O.   The one year they went in with Fields as the starter, he did near historic stuff.  Sam has a half decade in the league and has been given legit opportunity.  And there is nothing special about him that has ever popped in those 5 years.   These two things are not the same.  There is a legit argument to continue the Fields experiment and buy into him developing.  There isn't for Sam. 

[ECHornet]

3 minutes ago, ForJimmy said:

Meanwhile it looks like Chicago is going to get a shitload of picks for their top pick because they don't need one.  Having a QB changes everything.

By the end of 2023, I bet many Bears fans will be wishing they drafted a QB at 1. 

[ForJimmy]

1 minute ago, ECHornet said:

By the end of 2023, I bet many Bears fans will be wishing they drafted a QB at 1. 

Maybe or maybe they continue to develop their previous 1st round QB and put some talent around him.  They should have some extra 1sts to move around and get their guy if they need it.  

[ForJimmy]

4 minutes ago, CRA said:

He also added 132 rushing yards on the ground.  So when he sucks as a passer, he compensates in other ways. 

Justin Fields has shown legit elite and special ability.    Largely as a runner.  But there is something special about him.   And only 2 years under his belt.  And the team last year was prepped to be a Andy Dalton O.   The one year they went in with Fields as the starter, he did near historic stuff.  Sam has a half decade in the league and has been given legit opportunity.  And there is nothing special about him that has ever popped in those 5 years.   These two things are not the same.  There is a legit argument to continue the Fields experiment and buy into him developing.  There isn't for Sam. 

Exactly.  If Fields went on the trade block, what would it cost to acquire him?  Now pretend Sam isn't a FA and do the same thing....  NFL GMs are aware of the potential in Fields vs ceiling of Sam and it's a pretty big gap.  

[CRA]

1 minute ago, ECHornet said:

By the end of 2023, I bet many Bears fans will be wishing they drafted a QB at 1. 

Biggest issues for Fields seems to be the biggest issue Trevor had early on IMO.   Both went to horrible spots and looked bad.   Jacksonville drastically upgraded around Trevor in coaching and talent.  Bears got a lot of issues around Fields and he has way too much on his shoulders for such a young player. 

Talent is there in Fields.  That was evident his rookie year.  Evident last year.  You want growth and consistency? It's about more than Fields IMO. 

[ECHornet]

18 minutes ago, CRA said:

Biggest issues for Fields seems to be the biggest issue Trevor had early on IMO.   Both went to horrible spots and looked bad.   Jacksonville drastically upgraded around Trevor in coaching and talent.  Bears got a lot of issues around Fields and he has way too much on his shoulders for such a young player. 

Talent is there in Fields.  That was evident his rookie year.  Evident last year.  You want growth and consistency? It's about more than Fields IMO. 

He shouldn’t have that issue next season with all they’ll be able to acquire with their cap space. 

[ECHornet]

23 minutes ago, ForJimmy said:

Maybe or maybe they continue to develop their previous 1st round QB and put some talent around him.  They should have some extra 1sts to move around and get their guy if they need it.  

And tons of cap space. It seems to be setting up as a defining year for Fields as far as career trajectory. 

[CRA]

1 minute ago, ECHornet said:

And tons of cap space. It seems to be setting up as a defining year for Fields as far as career trajectory. 

highly paid NFL folks seem to struggle with the most basic stuff sometimes though.   Especially certain orgs. We have seen that here.  It's not a given Chicago will be smart.