The Breer Report and what can we learn from it(if true)?

[Myles]

Trubisky wasn't as bad with the Bears as it is perceived

29 wins, 21 losses, 64% completions, 64 TD's, 37 INT's, 87.2 rating,   1057 rushing yards with 8 TD's.

All this on a challenged Bears offense.   

 

[stitches]

6 minutes ago, Myles said:

Trubisky wasn't as bad with the Bears as it is perceived

29 wins, 21 losses, 64% completions, 64 TD's, 37 INT's, 87.2 rating,   1057 rushing yards with 8 TD's.

All this on a challenged Bears offense.   

 

Disagree. He's been bad from the start. Even in the 12-4 season he was not good. This team was never winning because of Trubisky, but because of their defense. It was very similar situation to Brissett last year on his 5-2 start. He's had good stats in stretches, but he never played like a good QB consistently. 

[Myles]

20 minutes ago, stitches said:

I personally would rather not. Retread QBs are very VERY rarely successful if they've been as bad previously as Trubisky has been with Chicago. People are mentioning Tannehill but 1. he was much better with Miami than Trubisky has ever been and 2. Tannehill is the exception, not the rule. Now... if they go for a QB from the draft... I wouldn't be completely opposed to getting Trubisky as a reclamation project and backup/competition for the new guy. I doubt he will want to do that though. 

Not really.   

tannehil:

42 wins, 46 losses, 61% completions, 123 TD's, 75 INT's, 87.45 rating, 52 fumbles, 1210 yards rushing and5 TD's.

 

Trubisky:

29 wins, 21 losses, 64% completions, 64 TD's, 37 INT's, 87.2 rating, 27 fumbles, 1057 rushing yards with 8 TD's.

All this on a challenged Bears offense.  

 

 

[stitches]

1 minute ago, Myles said:

Not really.   42 wins, 46 losses, 61% completions, 123 TD's, 75 INT's, 87.45 rating, 52 fumbles, 1210 yards rushing and5 TD's.

 

 

QB wins is not a thing. Especially when one team has one of the best defenses in the league in that stretch and the other one - one of the worst. 

[Myles]

1 minute ago, stitches said:

QB wins is not a thing. Especially when one team has one of the best defenses in the league in that stretch and the other one - one of the worst. 

Remove the wins and their numbers are still very comparable.  Tannehill was not good in Miami.  

[stitches]

10 minutes ago, Myles said:

Remove the wins and their numbers are still very comparable.  Tannehill was not good in Miami.  

He was inconsistent. He wasn't great, but he wasn't bad either. For sure he was much better than Trubisky. 

 

edit: Anyways, lets get back to the topic of the thread, we can talk about options for QBs in the multiple other threads. So what is your feeling about who those players we were willing to trade might be? Who would you trade for a QB or for a jump in the draft? 

[shasta519]

19 hours ago, stitches said:

 

I was wondering if this deserves its own thread and  the more I thought about it, the more it seems like this has ramifications broader than the scope of our QB search so I decided to separate it from the other QB talk and I would love to hear people's thoughts on the report by Breer that the Colts did NOT include no.21 in the discussions for Stafford. The package we were willing to give up was other picks AND PLAYERS!!! 

 

So here we go now. What does that mean? Does it mean anything? For the Colts' plans for no. 21? For our roster? To me it looks like they probably have someone they really like at 21 and didn't want to give that pick away, because the simplest packages on our part start with that 21 pick and for them to not actually want it included in the package, it must mean something... Maybe they like the OT options that are likely to be available there? Or a DE? 

 

The other part is... there are players under contract that Ballard and the FO are willing to give up in their search for a QB. Who do you think those players are? They need to be under contract and they need to have some value to other teams. 

 

If they are willing to give them up for Stafford, are they willing to give them up in a trade up scenario in the draft for the QB of the future? I've mentioned a couple of times before that a scenario I can envision if we want to trade up in the top 5 for our future QB is one when we make 2 consecutive jumps, the first of which by trading a valuable player to get to around the top 10 range and then make another jump for the QB we actually like... Or does that go against the idea that they actually have someone they like at 21 who is likely not a QB(because we were saving 21 in a scenario where we got the QB through other means and resources- i.e. the proposed Stafford trade)? Who are the players you would be willing to give up for us to jump from 21 to about 10 range? 

 

What are your thoughts on that whole ordeal? 

 

My thoughts are the same as they have been all along. Trade up with the NYJ. IF Ballard is willing to part with players...then what team loves the Colts players more than the NYJ?

 

As for the players...who knows. There are three about to get huge 2nd deals. Would Ballard try to cash in and trade one of them before having to give them a monster contract? Not likely...but you never know...Ballard likes his picks.

 

Then again...every GM values his own players...so perhaps he thought a guy like Banogu could replace the value of a future 2nd round pick.

[shasta519]

3 hours ago, stitches said:

Yeah... one of the packages I was thinking about was similar - RYS, Okereke and a pick to move up in the draft. It makes some sense, especially if they are losing hope with someone like RYS(or Banagu)...

 

The problem is RYS and Oke probably have Day 3 pick value in a trade...maybe 3rd round pick value. I don't see why a team would take one of those players halfway through their rookie deals in lieu of an early pick. They aren't proven...and a chunk of their value is gone. I mean...I am sure a team would take them...but it won't move the needle in a trade imo. 

 

With guys like Kelly, Leonard, Big Q and Smith...it's a different story. Teams really value proven talent. It would take some cajones for Ballard to trade one of those players though.

[DougDew]

Hines has value.  He's also a FA after 2021.  He's proven to contribute in many different ways.  Saves a rebuilding team a draft pick.  He's probably worth a 3rd or 4th, with the idea the team can extend him at a reasonable cost mid season.

 

With JT emerging as a multi-use back, I think Hines could be made available.

[Moosejawcolt]

41 minutes ago, stitches said:

Disagree. He's been bad from the start. Even in the 12-4 season he was not good. This team was never winning because of Trubisky, but because of their defense. It was very similar situation to Brissett last year on his 5-2 start. He's had good stats in stretches, but he never played like a good QB consistently. 

Thank u thank u.......!!!

[Moosejawcolt]

18 hours ago, Zoltan said:

 

Makes me think that since they passed on the 8th pick the Lions like Goff as an answer to replace Stafford or they think the rams will crash and burn the next two seasons.

Detroit is in a 5 year rebuild. I dont think they beleive he is the answer. They r accumulating draft picks like crazy. Say in year 3, they could cut Geoff then go after their guy. Its more about Detroit's ability to eat Goffs contract.

[Gigc]

I think we could be in for a backslide. Last year was an anomaly. You don't find QBs with resumes like Rivers or Brady floating around, unwanted, in free agency very often. We were lucky enough to sign Rivers as a 1-2 year high-grade stopgap.

There's nobody like that this year in free agency. You could argue Dak Prescott, but everyone figures he's going to be franchised by Dallas.

Brandt wrote a piece this morning saying the QB carousel has ended with the Stafford deal. And, look at it, the Rams actually included Goff in that deal. The fact is, a lot of teams were interested, and YES, the cost was high --- because the cost of QBs is almost always high. And if we want to move up in the draft, the cost is going to be high as well. We're not going to be able to send our 21st pick and "maybe a third," or "maybe Ben Banougu" and be able to move up high enough to get one of the four "top" QBs in the draft. 

So. We may well end up with a guy like Trubisky. Or, maybe a guy like Winston (who, up to now has pretty much been a walking turnover). We'll see. 

 

[Myles]

49 minutes ago, stitches said:

He was inconsistent. He wasn't great, but he wasn't bad either. For sure he was much better than Trubisky. 

 

edit: Anyways, lets get back to the topic of the thread, we can talk about options for QBs in the multiple other threads. So what is your feeling about who those players we were willing to trade might be? Who would you trade for a QB or for a jump in the draft? 

Not knowing much about Eason makes it a tough call.

If I only had faith in Eason as a backup, I'd kick the tires on a couple free agents before the draft (Trubisky, Winston).   Then inquire about a few trades that shouldn't require lots in return (Darnold,  Ryan).    If none of those work out, I would have to have a plan to draft a starter which would be a bad scenario.  That's when desperation plays a factor.  

[stitches]

34 minutes ago, Myles said:

Not knowing much about Eason makes it a tough call.

If I only had faith in Eason as a backup, I'd kick the tires on a couple free agents before the draft (Trubisky, Winston).   Then inquire about a few trades that shouldn't require lots in return (Darnold,  Ryan).    If none of those work out, I would have to have a plan to draft a starter which would be a bad scenario.  That's when desperation plays a factor.  

I think we see our situation very differently. I'm gonna leave Eason to the side because we don't really know much of value about where he is in his development and even Ballard was reluctant to commit to him being the backup. For the purposes of this QB discussion of ours until I see otherwise I will think of him as just a regular 4th round QB who hasn't shown anything on the field. No hopes whatsoever. 

 

I think drafting our QB of the future should be THE plan. The priority no.1, not the last resort/desperation move. I think Trubisky/Winston types should be the last resort type of signings rather than priority. People seem to continue trying to be cheap on the QB position. IMO this would be a huge mistake. QB is the premier position in football and requires premier assets and/or money. I don't want us to go bargain shopping. There are 21 positions on the field that I would rather bargain shop at than QB. Retreads, bargain bin QBs, throwaways failures from other teams. This is no way to address the most important position in football. Go scout those QBs and evaluate them and if you like some of them... go get your guys. It's not as simple as that, but it's also not as impossible as some make it seem. 

 

Either way, if we are not getting the QB of the future this year, IMO a good placeholder/bridge option is someone like Fitzpatrickm who won't cost much both money-wise and draft compensation wise. IF you don't like any of the QBs in the draft, keep the powder dry for next year and try to address some of the other important positions we are severely lacking at right now(OT, DE, CB, WR, TE)

[Myles]

9 minutes ago, stitches said:

I think we see our situation very differently. I'm gonna leave Eason to the side because we don't really know much of value about where he is in his development and even Ballard was reluctant to commit to him being the backup. For the purposes of this QB discussion of ours until I see otherwise I will think of him as just a regular 4th round QB who hasn't shown anything on the field. No hopes whatsoever. 

 

I think drafting our QB of the future should be THE plan. The priority no.1, not the last resort/desperation move. I think Trubisky/Winston types should be the last resort type of signings rather than priority. People seem to continue trying to be cheap on the QB position. IMO this would be a huge mistake. QB is the premier position in football and requires premier assets and/or money. I don't want us to go bargain shopping. There are 21 positions on the field that I would rather bargain shop at than QB. Retreads, bargain bin QBs, throwaways failures from other teams. This is no way to address the most important position in football. Go scout those QBs and evaluate them and if you like some of them... go get your guys. It's not as simple as that, but it's also not as impossible as some make it seem. 

 

Either way, if we are not getting the QB of the future this year, IMO a good placeholder/bridge option is someone like Fitzpatrickm who won't cost much both money-wise and draft compensation wise. IF you don't like any of the QBs in the draft, keep the powder dry for next year and try to address some of the other important positions we are severely lacking at right now(OT, DE, CB, WR, TE)

Unless Ballard really likes a QB ranked around 5th or 6th best in the draft, it will be hard to move up to get him.  There are allot of teams drafting in front of us who will most likely take a QB and probably mover up to do it.   If Ballard really like Trask, he can draft him at 21 or move down a few spots and get him.  

[chad72]

Does anyone think moving from No.21 to No.10 with a swap of first round picks with the Cowboys, and giving up a future 1st rounder and current 3rd rounder for Trey Lance would be worth it IF he is available there? It would obviously have to be done on draft day so that no one can smell out the trade till the 9th pick is complete. 

[tweezy32]

Anyone who would want trubisky or saying he’s not a bad qb you don’t know what your talking about and your absolutely 100% wrong. He’s awful. Like I’d rather just play with a rookie qb than trubisky. He’s trash terrible

[stitches]

5 minutes ago, Myles said:

Unless Ballard really likes a QB ranked around 5th or 6th best in the draft, it will be hard to move up to get him.  There are allot of teams drafting in front of us who will most likely take a QB and probably mover up to do it.   If Ballard really like Trask, he can draft him at 21 or move down a few spots and get him.  

I keep seeing people say that, but what's the evidence here? Like... I know it won't be cheap... but it won't be THAT hard... if you are willing to pay the price. Trades up for QBs happen pretty much every year and sometimes multiple of them... all it really takes is... for the GM to fall in love with a QB and to be ready to give the compensation needed to go get his guy. 

 

The last 5 years, 14 QBs have been drafted in the first 12 picks of the draft. For 8 of them their team traded up. 3 more of them were picked no. 1(no need to trade up) and 3 were picked at their teams original spot. Teams trade up for QBs all the time - in fact majority of the QBs taken in the top 10-12 picks are taken by teams trading up to get them. If they love a prospect and they are willing to pay the price, there will almost always be a way to do it. 

[Myles]

10 minutes ago, chad72 said:

Does anyone think moving from No.21 to No.10 with a swap of first round picks with the Cowboys, and giving up a future 1st rounder and current 3rd rounder for Trey Lance would be worth it IF he is available there? It would obviously have to be done on draft day so that no one can smell out the trade till the 9th pick is complete. 

It'd be worth a shot if they really liked Lance and he was still available.   Still may be tough as the Patriots, Vikings and 49rs can all move up with better draft capital than us.  Giving up 2 first round picks and a 3rd round pick may be the going rate, but it's risky giving up that much to move up 11 spots.   

[Myles]

10 minutes ago, stitches said:

I keep seeing people say that, but what's the evidence here? Like... I know it won't be cheap... but it won't be THAT hard... if you are willing to pay the price. Trades up for QBs happen pretty much every year and sometimes multiple of them... all it really takes is... for the GM to fall in love with a QB and to be ready to give the compensation needed to go get his guy. 

 

The last 5 years, 14 QBs have been drafted in the first 12 picks of the draft. For 8 of them their team traded up. 3 more of them were picked no. 1(no need to trade up) and 3 were picked at their teams original spot. Teams trade up for QBs all the time - in fact majority of the QBs taken in the top 10-12 picks are taken by teams trading up to get them. If they love a prospect and they are willing to pay the price, there will almost always be a way to do it. 

As long as it is done for a QB Ballard is nearly certain of.   Don't give up all the draft capital on a 50/50 guy.  

[DougDew]

30 minutes ago, chad72 said:

Does anyone think moving from No.21 to No.10 with a swap of first round picks with the Cowboys, and giving up a future 1st rounder and current 3rd rounder for Trey Lance would be worth it IF he is available there? It would obviously have to be done on draft day so that no one can smell out the trade till the 9th pick is complete. 

Hey, wasn't Ballard at one of those North Dakota State games?  It could be the start of Love-like rumors for this season......

[jvan1973]

24 minutes ago, stitches said:

I keep seeing people say that, but what's the evidence here? Like... I know it won't be cheap... but it won't be THAT hard... if you are willing to pay the price. Trades up for QBs happen pretty much every year and sometimes multiple of them... all it really takes is... for the GM to fall in love with a QB and to be ready to give the compensation needed to go get his guy. 

 

The last 5 years, 14 QBs have been drafted in the first 12 picks of the draft. For 8 of them their team traded up. 3 more of them were picked no. 1(no need to trade up) and 3 were picked at their teams original spot. Teams trade up for QBs all the time - in fact majority of the QBs taken in the top 10-12 picks are taken by teams trading up to get them. If they love a prospect and they are willing to pay the price, there will almost always be a way to do it. 

When it doesn't work out the team is set back for years

[chad72]

21 minutes ago, Myles said:

It'd be worth a shot if they really liked Lance and he was still available.   Still may be tough as the Patriots, Vikings and 49rs can all move up with better draft capital than us.  Giving up 2 first round picks and a 3rd round pick may be the going rate, but it's risky giving up that much to move up 11 spots.   

 

I wonder how GMs operate. Let us say the Colts call Jerry Jones after the 9th pick is made and Trey Lance is still there, and none of the other 3 teams you mentioned have called him.

 

Does Jerry Jones immediately play us against the Patriots, Vikings or 49ers even though none of them call him by sending messages to the Patriots, Vikings and 49ers by telling them "hey, I have a team that has called me interested in moving up.." without mentioning names? 

 

Where is the line in the sand drawn there? 

[stitches]

11 minutes ago, Myles said:

As long as it is done for a QB Ballard is nearly certain of.   Don't give up all the draft capital on a 50/50 guy.  

Yeah, I don't know what qualifies as "near certain" but of course- you don't do it just for any guy... they have to actually love the guy and think he has what it takes, not just talent-wise but attitude , work ethic and drive -wise. 

[Myles]

2 minutes ago, stitches said:

Yeah, I don't know what qualifies as "near certain" but of course- you don't do it just for any guy... they have to actually love the guy and think he has what it takes, not just talent-wise but attitude , work ethic and drive -wise. 

Remember in 2018 3 of the 4 QBs drafted in the top 10 were busts (at this point anyway).

 

If the Jets move on from Darnold, they would have given up a pretty good ransom for moving up 3 spots.   They gave their 1st round pick (number 6), 2 second round picks (37 and 49) and their 2019 second round pick.   Seeing how their team has performed makes me feel like having those picks would have them in better shape right now.   Certainly has the Colts in better shape for getting them.  

Colts got:

OG Quenton Nelson

OT Braden Smith

DE Kemoko Turay

RB Jordan Wilkins 

CB Rock Ya-Sin

 

Jets got:

QB Sam Darnold 

 

 

[stitches]

2 minutes ago, jvan1973 said:

When it doesn't work out the team is set back for years

Somewhat true, because of the price needed to pay(extra picks), but the alternative IMO is worse and they payoff if you hit is huge! It is risky of course, but so is staying put and going with Jameis Winston or Mitchell Trubisky or trading for Wentz(which again can set you back)... or hell, even trading for Stafford has its risks. Every decision about the QB position has its risks and potential rewards. IMO drafting a QB you love and believe in has the best balance of risk/reward.

[Myles]

11 minutes ago, chad72 said:

 

I wonder how GMs operate. Let us say the Colts call Jerry Jones after the 9th pick is made and Trey Lance is still there, and none of the other 3 teams you mentioned have called him.

 

Does Jerry Jones immediately play us against the Patriots, Vikings or 49ers even though none of them call him by sending messages to the Patriots, Vikings and 49ers by telling them "hey, I have a team that has called me interested in moving up.." without mentioning names? 

 

Where is the line in the sand drawn there? 

I'm guessing the good ones play the game to get the most they can get.  If the Colts offer the 21st pick and this years and next 2nd round picks and the Patriots will give the same (exept their 1st round pick is #15, you'd be doing yourself a disservice by not pursuing it.

[stitches]

4 minutes ago, Myles said:

Remember in 2018 3 of the 4 QBs drafted in the top 10 were busts (at this point anyway).

 

If the Jets move on from Darnold, they would have given up a pretty good ransom for moving up 3 spots.   They gave their 1st round pick (number 6), 2 second round picks (37 and 49) and their 2019 second round pick.   Seeing how their team has performed makes me feel like having those picks would have them in better shape right now.   Certainly has the Colts in better shape for getting them.  

Colts got:

OG Quenton Nelson

OT Braden Smith

DE Kemoko Turay

RB Jordan Wilkins 

CB Rock Ya-Sin

 

Jets got:

QB Sam Darnold 

 

 

The thing with Darnold is... I still wonder if he would have done much better in a different organization rather than the dumpsterfire that has been the Jets with Gase... I firmly believe that very few are the QBs that will succeed in any situation you put them. The Andrew Lucks of the world are rare. He was put in one of the worst situations in the league and he still was stringing great seasons and dragging this team to the playoffs with horrible OL, horrible run game, horrible defense, horrible coaching and playcalling, horrible GM. Most QBs that get drafted even pretty high need a good environment where they can thrive and develop their skill. 

 

I personally believe we have very good structure and very good base for a young QB to work on his craft and improve. And we have a coach and GM that save for some playcalling mishaps, I think can give that QB what he needs to be successful from coaching standpoint and from support and roster standpoint.. 

[richard pallo]

1 minute ago, stitches said:

The thing with Darnold is... I still wonder if he would have done much better in a different organization rather than the dumpsterfire that has been the Jets with Gase... I firmly believe that very few are the QBs that will succeed in any situation you put them. The Andrew Lucks of the world are rare. He was put in one of the worst situations in the league and he still was stringing great seasons and dragging this team to the playoffs with horrible OL, horrible run game, horrible defense, horrible coaching and playcalling, horrible GM. Most QBs that get drafted even pretty high need a good environment where they can thrive and develop their skill. 

 

I personally believe we have very good structure and very good base for a young QB to work on his craft and improve. And we have a coach and GM that save for some playcalling mishaps, I think can give that QB what he needs to be successful from coaching standpoint and from support and roster standpoint.. 

I think this is the reasoning that Ballard and Reich will use that will most likely lead to Darnold being traded to the Colts.  I can see them checking in on the price required to acquire Cousins or Ryan for sure.  But in the end I can see this going down when all the numbers are crunched and the costs to acquire are compared.  It just seems so Ballard like.  And Ballard has that Jets connection as well.  It shouldn't take them long to strike a deal. 

[ColtJax]

I don't buy that at all. If they were offered the 8th pick Detroit could trade that down a few times and pick up more draft picks than they got. They could have traded down for say the WFT 1st round pick and pick up WFT's 1st next year and another high pick, maybe the 3rd this year. They wouldn't have to be saddled with a big contract and a average at best QB.

[PeacefulEasonFeeling]

11 hours ago, stitches said:

I think we see our situation very differently. I'm gonna leave Eason to the side because we don't really know much of value about where he is in his development and even Ballard was reluctant to commit to him being the backup. For the purposes of this QB discussion of ours until I see otherwise I will think of him as just a regular 4th round QB who hasn't shown anything on the field. No hopes whatsoever. 

 

I think drafting our QB of the future should be THE plan. The priority no.1, not the last resort/desperation move. I think Trubisky/Winston types should be the last resort type of signings rather than priority. People seem to continue trying to be cheap on the QB position. IMO this would be a huge mistake. QB is the premier position in football and requires premier assets and/or money. I don't want us to go bargain shopping. There are 21 positions on the field that I would rather bargain shop at than QB. Retreads, bargain bin QBs, throwaways failures from other teams. This is no way to address the most important position in football. Go scout those QBs and evaluate them and if you like some of them... go get your guys. It's not as simple as that, but it's also not as impossible as some make it seem. 

 

Either way, if we are not getting the QB of the future this year, IMO a good placeholder/bridge option is someone like Fitzpatrickm who won't cost much both money-wise and draft compensation wise. IF you don't like any of the QBs in the draft, keep the powder dry for next year and try to address some of the other important positions we are severely lacking at right now(OT, DE, CB, WR, TE)

Seriously. You don’t know, yet, damn the torpedoes, Eason can’t do it. Because, you don’t know? How does this make sense?! Annnnnd you somehow think Chris Ballard is just gonna lay out his hand. Ok. Everyone gives CB props for everything but Eason. Lol. Ok. In case you missed it, we have our “quaterback of the future”. Sorry. I don’t mean to be aggro, but it seems like a lot of you are in denial. Rest in peace and go Shoe. All love. I know my ‘handle’ makes me look like a homer. 

[stitches]

4 hours ago, PeacefulEasonFeeling said:

Seriously. You don’t know, yet, damn the torpedoes, Eason can’t do it. Because, you don’t know? How does this make sense?! Annnnnd you somehow think Chris Ballard is just gonna lay out his hand. Ok. Everyone gives CB props for everything but Eason. Lol. Ok. In case you missed it, we have our “quaterback of the future”. Sorry. I don’t mean to be aggro, but it seems like a lot of you are in denial. Rest in peace and go Shoe. All love. I know my ‘handle’ makes me look like a homer. 

Oh believe me, I would love nothing more than Eason to be the guy, simply because it will save us sooooo much trouble and assets trying to address the position... BUT... Let's be clear about what exactly we know about Eason - he's a 4th round QB who never suited up for game day his rookie year. We have seen zero from him. Not in training camp, not in preseason, not during the season. I personally don't know how anyone can say he's our QB of the future based on that alone. And then... At exit interviews Ballard not only didn't commit to him fighting for the starting spot, but he also couldn't commit to him being even the backup. How can you listen to that coming out of Ballard's mouth and think "Oh yeah, we definitely don't need to draft/sign/trade for a QB. Eason is the guy". This is not a reasonable conclusion to come to based on available information. I'm sorry. And again, I would love nothing more than for him to actually become our franchise QB. I personally was one of the people highest on him here in the draft process and I loved the pick in the 4th. Still, let's not get ahead of ourselves.

[PeacefulEasonFeeling]

On 2/3/2021 at 2:39 AM, stitches said:

Oh believe me, I would love nothing more than Eason to be the guy, simply because it will save us sooooo much trouble and assets trying to address the position... BUT... Let's be clear about what exactly we know about Eason - he's a 4th round QB who never suited up for game day his rookie year. We have seen zero from him. Not in training camp, not in preseason, not during the season. I personally don't know how anyone can say he's our QB of the future based on that alone. And then... At exit interviews Ballard not only didn't commit to him fighting for the starting spot, but he also couldn't commit to him being even the backup. How can you listen to that coming out of Ballard's mouth and think "Oh yeah, we definitely don't need to draft/sign/trade for a QB. Eason is the guy". This is not a reasonable conclusion to come to based on available information. I'm sorry. And again, I would love nothing more than for him to actually become our franchise QB. I personally was one of the people highest on him here in the draft process and I loved the pick in the 4th. Still, let's not get ahead of ourselves.

Fair enough. I mean, regardless if he starts or not, we still need another QB. Also, I’m not saying CB is infallible. There’s been handful of oopses. It just seems there’s a bunch of people on here and elsewhere that equate Eason to Uncle Rico which I think is unwarranted. All Ballard has done is protect him on the roster and tell the media the org loves Jacob but he has to earn his job. Last year made evaluation pretty impossible.