Pass.
"Milk is for babies. When you grow up, you have to drink beer" -Arnold
I mean if we're going with Lock this year, he's a reasonable, unthreatening backup. Probably a better backup option than we trotted out last year.
Oh no please no
"I may not be a mathematician, but I can count to a million." - Shannon Sharpe
But seriously, what's wrong with him as the backup? Seems like there are two paths this offseason is going to go down. We're swinging for the fences with guys like Watson and Stafford, maybe Dak, but if all those fall through we're probably rolling with Lock and a capable veteran backup. If we bring in Mitch it's not to replace Lock. He's a guy who can come in and win a game or two if Lock goes down. He'd be an upgrade over Driskel/Rypien.
Did anyone read that tweet thinking they meant as starter? If he's considering Dallas too, who has Dak, that tells me he knows he isn't going anywhere to start. And if for whatever reason Mitch came in and beat Lock out, then that just tells us for sure Lock isn't the guy and it's time to blow it up.
If we don't get Watson, it's time to wrap our heads around the idea that a guy like Mitch is the kind of player we're getting to come in and be a vet backup.
I basically consider all those guys the same tier. It's going to be a career fringe starter/backup type guy if we whiff on the big guns. I don't mind that Mitch would come in with a chip on his shoulder wanting to start. If Lock is really the guy, he'll shrug it off and Mitch will have to live with being the backup.
Don't really think he'll have a choice. No one is bringing him in to start. But from his perspective, Denver does make a lot of sense. Lock is probably seen as one of the more vulnerable starters around the league. I could see Denver being really attractive to vets who still want a chance to start, because they might see Lock as a guy they can beat out.
Yeah I know there is some sentiment here that bringing in a vet to push Lock (some might call it a "competition") is a bad thing, because it splits the locker room or doesn't show confidence in the starter or whatever, but the way I see it Lock will either prove he's the guy and it won't be a competition, or he'll buckle under the pressure and we'll know he's not the guy. Either way we have a plan going forward. Obviously Watson should still be plan A, B, and C, but it's far more likely we're in for Lock + vet to push him.
Bears have a joke of an OLine and have had a much worse situation than us dating back to their Super Bowl appearance. Their scouting department just does not have a clue how to find quality tackles. Trubisky is used to extending plays with his legs, and would easily be in a better situation here than with Chicago. If Trubisky comes here, it will be to compete for the starting job. Should Trubisky beat out Lock, the Broncos would not be in terrible shape. His ability to make plays with his legs adds an extra dimension to the offense.
Trubisky can make NFL throws, but has the same struggles as Drew Lock with turnovers and setting his feet in the pocket. Sutton, Jeudy, Fant, Gordon, Lindsay would easily be the best supporting cast Trubisky has ever played with. Hell, Tim Patrick, Jeudy, Fant would still be an upgrade from his supporting cast of the past few years (Outside of AR15).
Of course, it would be better if Lock just won the starting job. I think Lock is the better pocket passer of the two, and Trubisky's struggles as a pocket passer scare me. Trubisky reminds me of a slightly more talented version Jake Plummer. Lock reminds me more of Jay Cutler.
If the price is right, let's have a competition.
Just stick with Drew Lock. 2020 was his first full season. He didn't play full season in 2019. Season 2021 will be his last chance to prove himself to be an NFL quarterback. IF GM Paton wants a new QB... I am interested in Watson or Trevor Lawrence. That's it.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)