At #3 you take best player and that's Allen and it's not even close.
Wonder how much correlation and carry over there is. Matt Ryan threw A TON of picks his last two years at BC and has done alright in the department as a pro. Jameis Winston is another guy, who while still interception prone has improved a bit as a pro. All accounts I read about Watson say he has the type if work ethic and drive to improve his game.
He's got enough height. And bulk can be worked on, especially if you don't rush him into a starting roll. Let him bulk up and learn a pro offense for a year. Cutler, or if you prefer to move on immediately, a Hoyer or Glennon type can be a one year bridge.
I wouldn't call William Perry a bust by any means. He had some pretty good years with the Bears unlike a few of the recent number one picks.
Its also totally irrelevant considering how long ago and how specific it is. Neat bit of trivia though!
No chance to get Kizer 2nd Rd. Of the big 3 his ceiling is the highest but there is also fairly significant bust risk. With that said he'll be taken in first 12 picks.
No chance, he doesn't have a position in Bears D. Bears played an insane amount of Cover 6 this past year, historical Fangio is a 2 high safety DC and that's all he's showed with Bears. You don't see many 3-4 defenses that walk their SS up in the box often. Peppers cover skills are lacking. He needs to go to a creative DC that can create a position for him in a 4-3 base, ala Buchanon in Arizona or Shaq Thompson in Carolina. If Peppers plays a modified WLB role for a coach that can utilize his strengths he can be a solid player but under no circumstances do you take a player like that, that is scheme dependent, at #3. Safety isn't good value at a pick like #3 but with how good Malik Hooker and Jamaal Adams are I don't think you care about going a little high on one of them. If you could get a guy like Ed Reed at #3 would you take that or pass because of positional impact? To me at this point there are 4 acceptable picks:
Agreed, so many similar type QB's have struggled to come close to replicating their college success. I guess Mariota is best case comparison but he always took much better care of the football. Is Mariota a franchise QB? Doubtful. Watson's accuracy issues put very serious doubt in his ability to be a franchise QB, at that point why on earth would you consider drafting him there when you can select potential multiyear pro bowlers at other need positions? The Bears had zero playmakers at DB this year, couldn't create a turnover to save their lives and the front 7 is actually shaping up nicely, what good is pressure when you can't take advantage of it?
I have no problem with this sentiment at all. I think that can be our calling card, with a solid run blocking OL, a very good young RB and lots of pieces toward an elite defense in tow there is no problem winning games on the ground and on defense with an efficient QB. Look at the Chiefs, Texans (don't even have the QB) etc. The issue is their is no OL worthy of the 3 pick. I have serious questions about them even in middle of 1st. That said your defense contingency still holds water.
You simply can't afford to miss on another high pick, can't miss at #3 and can't miss with another QB. If you think Watson is a franchise QB that's another story, I disagree but doesn't mean I won't be wrong. If Pace sees things how I do, no sure franchise QB, only Kizer really with that ability albeit very risky and far from realizing it then I will shoot him if he takes a QB that high. If Pace truly believes one of them is a franchise QB than you have to take that guy.
