Because cutting any player only makes sense if 1) you save money or 2) you sign a better player. The Bears didn't save any money and I don't think Siemian is a better player.
How many better backup QBs are available. They got a backup QB who has starting experience. That’s all you could ask for at this point.
They save $1-2m by signing siemian and cutting foles.
He should know every system
I'm not following this. What would he be unhappy with where keeping him solves it?
Don't worry. Foles is unhappy because he still hasn't been traded to the Bucs where he would have won the QB competition during training camp and been named the starter. Tom Brady is his bitch.
Brady is the President of Football Operations, GM, and QB 1. He will refuse to bring in someone that can easily take his QB position.
and what he don't fit.
Siemian is not a better player but he's a much better fit to spell Fields without changing the scheme if needed. It's not like he's fast but he's shown mobility and some ability to make plays on the move.
Perhaps the President of Football Operations and GM will get together and do what is best for the team.
69 career rushing yards? It just seems like with all the personnel needs on this team, swapping backup QBs should have been down the list of things that the Bears needed to do.
Who cares? It's not like this kept them from something else
I'm not someone that wants his QB to run. He has enough mobility to find time to throw, at least compared to Foles who is leaving at some point regardless of what else we did. I don't understand why you see this as an either/or vs other positions type of move.
