Consider the source, but allegedly Watson is plan a, Wilson's plan b.

[Mighty Joe Young]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1368838063397482498

Basically this guy is saying that the Bears will not trade for Wilson until they're absolutely sure they cannot get Watson.

And that George Mccaskey is only willing to give up the farm and everything for deshaun Watson.

Same dude who claimed a Rob would have a contract last year, but he's been right on other things before too.

take it with a grain of salt but it sounds like either way we are getting a top end QB this year.

 

[bamainatlanta]

He is rarely right. When a legit source tweets out info, DBB will quickly tweet out something close to it and try to take credit for it. He's a fucking tool as is his buddy Jonathan Wood.

 

[iueyedoc]

So they are "all in on Wilson" but only if they can't get Watson.
I heard they are "all in" on Foles but only if they can't get Watson, or Wilson, or Carr, or Trevor Lawerance, or Justin Fields, or Zach Wilson, or Kyle Trask. But then they are total "all in" on Foles. Bonus is the wouldn't have to "depart" with any draft picks.

Those are 2 minutes of my life I can not get back.

 

[TezMaKai]

If Ryan Pace loses out on Russel Wilson, who has genuine interest in the Bears, because he's too busy trying to court Deshaun Watson then he should be fired now.

He lost out on Deshaun Watson when he could have had him because he was trying to outbid himself.

 

[Anytime23]

DBB aint it.

 

[Bearly]

If Ryan Pace loses out on Russel Wilson, who has genuine interest in the Bears, because he's too busy trying to court Deshaun Watson then he should be fired now.

He lost out on Deshaun Watson when he could have had him because he was trying to outbid himself.

I think he preferred Mahomes.

 

[Mighty Joe Young]

So they are "all in on Wilson" but only if they can't get Watson.
I heard they are "all in" on Foles but only if they can't get Watson, or Wilson, or Carr, or Trevor Lawerance, or Justin Fields, or Zach Wilson, or Kyle Trask. But then they are total "all in" on Foles. Bonus is the wouldn't have to "depart" with any draft picks.

Those are 2 minutes of my life I can not get back.

You would have wasted them anyway.

 

[ChiGuy]

I’m yet to see him get anything that isn’t obvious, or that he’s done a 180 on from previous.

I just don’t see the logic in putting someone like Wilson on the back burner, and risking missing out on him by doing so, whilst you chase a player that many consider a pipe dream for the Bears.

unless you’re very confident of getting Watson, why would you mess around? I mean, it’s not like passing over Wentz to see if there’s a better option. We’re talking about one of the best QBs in the league.

 

[Mighty Joe Young]

I’m yet to see him get anything that isn’t obvious, or that he’s done a 180 on from previous.

I just don’t see the logic in putting someone like Wilson on the back burner, and risking missing out on him by doing so, whilst you chase a player that many consider a pipe dream for the Bears.

unless you’re very confident of getting Watson, why would you mess around? I mean, it’s not like passing over Wentz to see if there’s a better option. We’re talking about one of the best QBs in the league.

I think it stems from an earlier report from someone else, that when the Seahawks were telling people the price tag on Wilson, the Bears were the ONLY ones who didn't hang up the phone.

 

[TheWinman]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1368838063397482498

Basically this guy is saying that the Bears will not trade for Wilson until they're absolutely sure they cannot get Watson.

And that George Mccaskey is only willing to give up the farm and everything for deshaun Watson.

Same dude who claimed a Rob would have a contract last year, but he's been right on other things before too.

take it with a grain of salt but it sounds like either way we are getting a top end QB this year.

Who knows what to believe. I assume they are going in hard for both QB's. TIme will tell

 

[dabears70]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1368838063397482498

Basically this guy is saying that the Bears will not trade for Wilson until they're absolutely sure they cannot get Watson.

And that George Mccaskey is only willing to give up the farm and everything for deshaun Watson.

Same dude who claimed a Rob would have a contract last year, but he's been right on other things before too.

take it with a grain of salt but it sounds like either way we are getting a top end QB this year.

If it's not from me (Eric Lambert) at Sports Mockery then it's not real right @Milky?

It's the right way to go about it as well. I'm not giving up as much for Wilson at 32 as i am for a 25 year old Watson.

 

[dabears70]

I’m yet to see him get anything that isn’t obvious, or that he’s done a 180 on from previous.

I just don’t see the logic in putting someone like Wilson on the back burner, and risking missing out on him by doing so, whilst you chase a player that many consider a pipe dream for the Bears.

unless you’re very confident of getting Watson, why would you mess around? I mean, it’s not like passing over Wentz to see if there’s a better option. We’re talking about one of the best QBs in the league.

They're both a pipe dream though cause most of CCS says no great player would ever want to come to Chicago to play under this GM and these coaches.....Hmmmmmmmm.

Most of CCS also says we have no offensive talent for any great QB to be able to come here and win with either......Hmmmmmmm.

@WindyCity leads the pack

 

[Mighty Joe Young]

They're both a pipe dream though cause most of CCS says no great player would ever want to come to Chicago to play under this GM and these coaches.....Hmmmmmmmm.

Most of CCS also says we have no offensive talent for any great QB to be able to come here and win with either......Hmmmmmmm.

Conclusion: CCS does not want to have a franchise quarterback so that CCS can continue to bitch that the Bears don't have a franchise quarterback.

 

[dabears70]

Conclusion: CCS does not want to have a franchise quarterback so that CCS can continue to bitch that the Bears don't have a franchise quarterback.

Conclusion: They'll find something else to whine about every day on CCS.

 

[Mighty Joe Young]

Conclusion: They'll find something else to whine about every day on CCS.

I bet it's going to be that our incoming franchise QB isn't franchisey enough...

 

[jtreal3]

I'll be fuckin pumped about either on, BUT Id rather have Watson based on age

 

[tgmxd]

I’m yet to see him get anything that isn’t obvious, or that he’s done a 180 on from previous.

I just don’t see the logic in putting someone like Wilson on the back burner, and risking missing out on him by doing so, whilst you chase a player that many consider a pipe dream for the Bears.

unless you’re very confident of getting Watson, why would you mess around? I mean, it’s not like passing over Wentz to see if there’s a better option. We’re talking about one of the best QBs in the league.

A smart team would be using one as leverage to get the other

I think one of the biggest reasons you might want Watson over Wilson is age. Wilson is probably a top 5 QB for the next 5 years but Watson is for the next 10 years. Even if you trade 3 years of 1st round picks, you still get another window after that.

 

[ChiGuy]

I think it stems from an earlier report from someone else, that when the Seahawks were telling people the price tag on Wilson, the Bears were the ONLY ones who didn't hang up the phone.

Do you think it gets done?

 

[ChiGuy]

They're both a pipe dream though cause most of CCS says no great player would ever want to come to Chicago to play under this GM and these coaches.....Hmmmmmmmm.

Most of CCS also says we have no offensive talent for any great QB to be able to come here and win with either......Hmmmmmmm.

@WindyCity leads the pack

I mean in the way that there’s not even smoke regarding Watson wanting to be here, whereas Wilson actually does. I’m not saying either will be done or are impossible. I’d love either to be a Bear.

 

[Pegger]

This is like me saying having sex with 20 pornstars at the same time is 'plan A' while having sex with 19 pornstars at the same time is 'plan B'.

My wife would concur that bumping something up my list doesn't make it any more likely to happen.