Toggle sidebar

OT: Bears & NFL Talk 93

  • Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
Status
Not open for further replies.
Mrfenn92 said:
Different positions. If you don’t like his contract which is fine you will not like the contracts handed out by this team in free agency to mediocre players. Sanborn while nice isn’t near roquan.
Click to expand...
A: It's a god awful contract, especially for an off-ball LBer, no matter how you spin it.

B. Sanborn does not need to be "near Ro" to be a good and productive player. The fact that Flus, a defensive minded coach, signed off on a Ro trade tells you all you need to know.

C: Rather have the draft pick over an grossly overpaid LB. The defense played well after they got Ro, but that production was based of the Ravens playing a series a shi**y offenses. We don't know if he earned that deal legitimate or was a productive of playing against not good offense.

I'm glad Ro got his but I'm also glad the Bears don't have that contract on their books.
 
A: It's a god awful contract, especially for an off-ball LBer, no matter how you spin it.
HeisenBaez said:
B. Sanborn does not need to be "near Ro" to be a good and productive player. The fact that Flus, a defensive minded coach, signed off on a Ro trade tells you all you need to know.

C: Rather have the draft pick over an grossly overpaid LB. The defense played well after they got Ro, but that production was based of the Ravens playing a series a shi**y offenses. We don't know if he earned that deal legitimate or was a productive of playing against not good offense.

I'm glad Ro got his but I'm also glad the Bears don't have that contract on their books.
Click to expand...
how did I spin it exactly?

Sanborn isn’t close to roquan as a player. Eberflus has no say on a trade. That’s the Gm not wanting to pay the market value.

Welcome to a rising cap going forward every year there will be new $20 million off ball linebackers.
 
Mrfenn92 said:
A: It's a god awful contract, especially for an off-ball LBer, no matter how you spin it.

how did I spin it exactly?

Sanborn isn’t close to roquan as a player. Eberflus has no say on a trade. That’s the Gm not wanting to pay the market value.

Welcome to a rising cap going forward every year there will be new $20 million off ball linebackers.
Click to expand...
Bears opted to spend that cap space elsewhere. Which is perfectly fine. In today's NFL, the premium non QB positions to pay are pass rusher (Edge or Interior), CB, OT, WR.

I mean the Colt's best D player is a LB in Leonard and their best O player is either RB Taylor or OG Nelson. Colts have talent, but not at the premium positions. If you are going to spend money, those premium positions are the place to spend first.

Be interesting to see what they can do in free agency. I don't see WRs itching to sign with the Bears. So, it's OL to get in free agency and defensive players.
 
StreetHawk said:
Bears opted to spend that cap space elsewhere. Which is perfectly fine. In today's NFL, the premium non QB positions to pay are pass rusher (Edge or Interior), CB, OT, WR.

I mean the Colt's best D player is a LB in Leonard and their best O player is either RB Taylor or OG Nelson. Colts have talent, but not at the premium positions. If you are going to spend money, those premium positions are the place to spend first.

Be interesting to see what they can do in free agency. I don't see WRs itching to sign with the Bears. So, it's OL to get in free agency and defensive players.
Click to expand...
Bears tried to sign Smith to a extension. He chose not to sign to sign it. His right. Poles moved on his right. Cap space in the nfl is just basically imaginary year in and out.
You pay good players regardless of their position.
Free agency will not be the answer for the bears. They will find solid players for inflated prices as is every year when teams go nuts in free agency.
 
Instead of participating in this bicker-fest - I'd rather focus on how the Bears are in a wonderful situation and one that is almost fantasyland 'esque. This is the first time in my lifetime the Bears have had the #1 pick in the draft - and I'm 68 years old. On top of that - they have what many/most think is they have a franchise level QB still on his rookie deal - so they don't have to use the #1 pick to draft a QB. On top of that - the Bears have over $100M in cap space which is enough to sign 3-4 difference making starters in free agency.

Call me crazy but all that seems pretty positive to me - probably more positive heading into an offseason than at anytime any of us have ever seen before. Does that call for bickering amongst ourselves?
 
  • Like
Reactions: tioelcomoto, QueerGirrl, Space umpire and 3 others
Mrfenn92 said:
Bears tried to sign Smith to a extension. He chose not to sign to sign it. His right. Poles moved on his right. Cap space in the nfl is just basically imaginary year in and out.
You pay good players regardless of their position.
Free agency will not be the answer for the bears. They will find solid players for inflated prices as is every year when teams go nuts in free agency.
Click to expand...

No, free agency will not be THE answer for the Bears - it will be ONE HALF OF THE answer for the Bears. I can see them signing up to 4 new starters - 2 on the O-line and 2 on the D-line. Then the second half of the answer will be the draft.
 
EbonyRaptor said:
Instead of participating in this bicker-fest - I'd rather focus on how the Bears are in a wonderful situation and one that is almost fantasyland 'esque. This is the first time in my lifetime the Bears have had the #1 pick in the draft - and I'm 68 years old. On top of that - they have what many/most think is they have a franchise level QB still on his rookie deal - so they don't have to use the #1 pick to draft a QB. On top of that - the Bears have over $100M in cap space which is enough to sign 3-4 difference making starters in free agency.

Call me crazy but all that seems pretty positive to me - probably more positive heading into an offseason than at anytime any of us have ever seen before. Does that call for bickering amongst ourselves?
Click to expand...
I wouldn't call Fields Franchise Level. Has to show it as a passer. I do think Stroud and Young at the same age are better passers from the pocket. But, it's a massive difference to go from one of the top 3 college programs where there is talent all around you to one of the weaker NFL rosters. See how quickly the shine on them goes away once they suit up for an NFL game.

QB on a rookie deal, you want to be where Cincy, Chargers and Jags (though in a weak division) are. Get to the Playoffs and make some noise. Bears have 2 rookie years plus a 5th year option (at over $20 million when we get there) left on Fields to get the maximum benefit.
 
EbonyRaptor said:
No, free agency will not be THE answer for the Bears - it will be ONE HALF OF THE answer for the Bears. I can see them signing up to 4 new starters - 2 on the O-line and 2 on the D-line. Then the second half of the answer will be the draft.
Click to expand...
One half of a off season on a multi year rebuild.
 
StreetHawk said:
I wouldn't call Fields Franchise Level. Has to show it as a passer. I do think Stroud and Young at the same age are better passers from the pocket. But, it's a massive difference to go from one of the top 3 college programs where there is talent all around you to one of the weaker NFL rosters. See how quickly the shine on them goes away once they suit up for an NFL game.

QB on a rookie deal, you want to be where Cincy, Chargers and Jags (though in a weak division) are. Get to the Playoffs and make some noise. Bears have 2 rookie years plus a 5th year option (at over $20 million when we get there) left on Fields to get the maximum benefit.
Click to expand...
That's the interesting thing about Poles choice. If he believes Young and Fields are similar prospects, he might be willing to re-set the rookie QB clock. It would also give him more job security.

Fields is more athletic and has a bigger arm, but Young might be the better passer.
Just my opinion, Fields has the bigger upside but he has to show that he's close to reaching it by the end of his rookie deal.
 
StreetHawk said:
I wouldn't call Fields Franchise Level. Has to show it as a passer. I do think Stroud and Young at the same age are better passers from the pocket. But, it's a massive difference to go from one of the top 3 college programs where there is talent all around you to one of the weaker NFL rosters. See how quickly the shine on them goes away once they suit up for an NFL game.

QB on a rookie deal, you want to be where Cincy, Chargers and Jags (though in a weak division) are. Get to the Playoffs and make some noise. Bears have 2 rookie years plus a 5th year option (at over $20 million when we get there) left on Fields to get the maximum benefit.
Click to expand...

Stroud is better at nothing than fields.
 
  • Like
Reactions: EbonyRaptor, ChiHawks10 and Pez68
StreetHawk said:
I wouldn't call Fields Franchise Level. Has to show it as a passer. I do think Stroud and Young at the same age are better passers from the pocket. But, it's a massive difference to go from one of the top 3 college programs where there is talent all around you to one of the weaker NFL rosters. See how quickly the shine on them goes away once they suit up for an NFL game.

QB on a rookie deal, you want to be where Cincy, Chargers and Jags (though in a weak division) are. Get to the Playoffs and make some noise. Bears have 2 rookie years plus a 5th year option (at over $20 million when we get there) left on Fields to get the maximum benefit.
Click to expand...
...why? What is this obsession with QB rookie deals by some people here?

Maximum benefit of what this is, is such a weird ovession. If you have the Qb to pay, you should be glad then
 
  • Like
Reactions: hawksrule, Pez68 and Idionym
ClydeLee said:
...why? What is this obsession with QB rookie deals by some people here?

Maximum benefit of what this is, is such a weird ovession. If you have the Qb to pay, you should be glad then
Click to expand...

Seriously. Especially considering how the cap works in the NFL. Paying a franchise QB top dollars has never prevented a team from winning it all. This isn't the NHL.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Idionym and Mrfenn92
EbonyRaptor said:
No, free agency will not be THE answer for the Bears - it will be ONE HALF OF THE answer for the Bears. I can see them signing up to 4 new starters - 2 on the O-line and 2 on the D-line. Then the second half of the answer will be the draft.
Click to expand...
No reason for teams to let good LT hit the market. Plenty of G and C change teams in free agency. That’s what you’d expect to fix in free agency.

Sarava said:
Orlovsky says the Bears should start the discussions at 3 1sts

Click to expand...

These some of the same analysts that said Malik Willis should be a first rounder last season?
 
ClydeLee said:
...why? What is this obsession with QB rookie deals by some people here?

Maximum benefit of what this is, is such a weird ovession. If you have the Qb to pay, you should be glad then
Click to expand...
Because the Bears wasted 2 offseasons with Fields not building anything around him. Because they had no first round picks and didn't spend money.

Having your roster bottom out as your young QB enters year 3 of their deal is not ideal.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Panzerspitze
HjamSandwich said:
Because the Bears wasted 2 offseasons with Fields not building anything around him. Because they had no first round picks and didn't spend money.

Having your roster bottom out as your young QB enters year 3 of their deal is not ideal.
Click to expand...
But he wasn't even ready for it. They still should of stuck to it and had Fields not focusing on playing but on reads, footwork, and mechanics his rookie year.

The rush to get success is something I don't get. Qbs being mentally elite is what takes time
 
ClydeLee said:
But he wasn't even ready for it. They still should of stuck to it and had Fields not focusing on playing but on reads, footwork, and mechanics his rookie year.

The rush to get success is something I don't get. Qbs being mentally elite is what takes time
Click to expand...
That's not the point. The point is it takes time. It's impossible to turn a roster around in one offseason. So you need to string together several good offseasons in a row to go from bad to genuinely good.

So even if he wasn't ready for it, it's a big failure (mostly due to how Pace positioned the team) to not improve the roster in step with Fields developing.

Now we're in a very good but somewhat awkward spot.
 
At end of day no natter what you think of Fields at this point the reality is next year is essentially make or break for him

This is where trades could also be huge for Bears because if they get additional picks in 2024 draft it potentially could potentially be used on QB if Fields doesn't appear to be working out
 
Blackhawkswincup said:
At end of day no natter what you think of Fields at this point the reality is next year is essentially make or break for him

This is where trades could also be huge for Bears because if they get additional picks in 2024 draft it potentially could potentially be used on QB if Fields doesn't appear to be working out
Click to expand...
I've heard this floated around but it seems kind of ridiculous to me.

There is not a realistic scenario where we can draft Caleb Williams or Drake Maye next year.

If you want a new QB, it needs to be now. We have the #1 overall pick.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom