Mike Glennon Expected To Land 14-15 Mil Per Season

[shoopster]

Hell if he gets that much, we might as well keep Cutler and try everything possible to get a QB in next years draft.
.

Don't worry. That's the Bears' plan.

Everything is working perfectly, and the Cutler purgatory persists . . .

 

[bearmick]

The more I think about what Pace has done in the past this makes sense to me.

For Pace free agency is all about filling holes. Preferably with younger guys that may have upside. Glennon is just filling a hole. He can start. Pace I'm sure feels he still has some upside. Hole filled.... On to the next hole.

Then he is free to draft BPA. Because he is so married to the BPA strategy I don't expect a QB at #3. We'll probably get Allen or Adams. Maybe a surprise like Hooker, Foster or a CB.

Anyone who has read my posts before knows I disagree with this. I think QB trumps all else. But just looking at what Pace has done in the past this fits perfectly with his previous strategy. Oh well. I've been shit on by the Bears enough lately that I'll of course still follow them. But I'm not going to expend any emotional energy on them. :shrug:

I feel exactly the same as you - hate it but realize that's probably what he's doing.

I have always hated strict BPA because it fails to distinguish between the importance of different positions and it fails to account for the specifics of a given roster and its make up. It's a lazy, one-size-fits-all philosophy.

 

[satchice]

Don't worry. That's the Bears' plan.

Everything is working perfectly, and the Cutler purgatory persists . . .

Honestly I would have to say Cutler makes more sense at 14MM then Glennon at 14MM. Rory is 100% right it make no sense to sign Glennon if you are planning on drafting a Franchise QB.

 

[shoopster]

Has anybody here actually watched Buccaneer games? Mike Glennon is awful. Just awful. In 2014 he was beaten out by Josh Mc"Gowan" . . .

Helluva spot "If I'm Lyin' (about drafting a quarterback every year till I get it right) I'm" Ryan Pace has gotten himself in - pay a total stiff $14 million or draft a second stringer.

The pu55y deserves every bit of it . . .

 

[bearmick]

Helluva spot "If I'm Lyin' (about drafting a quarterback every year till I get it right) I'm" Ryan Pace has gotten himself in - pay a total stiff $14 million or draft a second stringer.

Why can he only draft a second stringer?

 

[nc0gnet0]

Originally Posted by nc0gnet0
Does the money/contract predicate or influence the likelihood of the Bears drafting a QB @ 3?

I think any contract over 10 mil a year points to the fact Pace has no intention of drafting a qb @ 3
I think any contract over 14 mil a year points to the fact Pace has no intention of drafting a qb @ 3 or 36

What is everyone's opinion?

Originally Posted by remydat View Post
I think it depends. You guys are trying to come up with hard fast rules but I think the situation is more fluid than that.

1. Garrett
2. Trubisky
3. Allen
4. Hooker
5. Adamas
10-25 - Other players besides Watson and Kizer.

Suppose this is Pace and Fox's board. In this scenario Garrett and Trubisky could be gone by the time the 3rd pick comes up. So what is he going to do here. In a world where he resigned Hoyer, he's going to end up taking a QB in the 2nd or 3rd round and they are going to roll with Hoyer when that may lead to more losses and while Pace may be safe, there is no guarantee those extra few losses he takes with Hoyer aren't going to cost him his job.

So the logical thing to do is sign Glennon and then see how the draft unfolds. If Trubisky or Garrett somehow make it to 3 then **** it you take them. If not you take the prospect you have ranked higher and then get a QB later on.

The flaw in your logic is assuming that Pace and Fox have all 3 QBs graded similarly enough that they are ultimately happy with taking any of the 3 with the 3rd pick. However, it is quite possible they have one of the QBs rated head and shoulders above the rest but have no guarantee that QB is going to be there at 3. In that scenario, the smart thing to do is get the best QB you can afford on a short term deal that only costs money and then see how the draft unfolds.

I answered the question by saying I think it depends.

I then provided an example where the money isn't the issue but rather it's how he has the QBs ranked.

That was my way of saying the money is the main factor here.

If he was rumored to get paid 20 million then the money would matter. Since he's not I think the primary factor here is how he rates the QBs.

You answered, in typical Remy fashion, nothing. Either it does, or it doesn't.

classic remy, is it any wonder?

 

[satchice]

Why can he only draft a second stringer?

I think he is implying that if you think the rookie cant beat Mike Glennon then he is destined to be a 2nd stringer.. At this point in their careers I'm not sure Mike Glennon is better then Matt Barkley.

Mike Glennon has flashed in moments of games but he has NEVER been consistent thought out an entire game, like Matt Flynn. He has never had a series of good games like Josh McCown or Brian Hoyer.

The more I think about this the more I think this whole story is just Smoke.. The only team I actually read linked to Glennon was the Jets saying he is not worth 14MM. If the Bucs actually offered him 8MM (which I don't believe) he would be a fool not to take it. I wouldn't offer him any more then 5MM. Mike Glennon is NOT a starting QB.

 

[bearmick]

There's no justification to take a QB with the #3 pick. You draft those type of guys to step in immediately and start and this team does not have the weapons to bring in a rookie QB. Your going to bring in a guy like Watson to have him throw to who? Cam Meredith? Kevin White who can't stay healthy? Jeffery isn't worth the money he thinks he's worth so let someone else overpay for him. The rookie QBs available in the draft will not succeed in the current state that the Bears are in.

Wait, so, don't draft a top QB until you have a team good enough where you can't draft one?

We FINALLY have the opportunity to make a clean break from Cutler and a fresh start with a top rookie QB... But no... **** that... let's yet again kick the can down the road and overpay for some FA bum so we can get "good BPA value" with another David Fales type mid/late round project QB. Brilliant!

It's simply incredible.

 

[Broc]

What if the resolution is not taking a QB that would be nothing better than a 3rd round... bah... pick in any normal year with pick number 3.

Unfortunately that logic results in the Bears perpetually kicking the can down the road. Literally every fucking year we hear people make the same argument about how this is a bad year for a QB we're better off waiting for next year. Then next year comes and we're told the same fucking thing. It's a bad year, wait for next year. Next year comes and again it's wait for next year. Ever. Fucking. Year.

I'm so beyond sick of listening to people make excuses year after year. You'd think after 30+ years people would be tired of being an irrelevant franchise but apparently not. This meatball fanbase can talk themselves into anything! We've already got people rationalizing signing goofy ass Glennon for **** sake. Unreal.

 

[bearmick]

What if the resolution is not taking a QB that would be nothing better than a 3rd round... bah... pick in any normal year with pick number 3.

That's just crazy. Whether you're sold on any QB or not, saying guys like Watson and Trubisky are 3rd round picks is just absurd. Why? Because you heard someone in the clueless media say so?

This is probably the best QB class since 2012.

 

[nc0gnet0]

As opposed to Glennon where I won't even bother turning on my TV at all lol.



I couldn't disagree more. If 2017 is expected to be a wasted year anyways then what better time for a rookie to start then when there are literally zero expectations. Might as well get him on the field learning right away in a year that doesn't mean anything that way when the team actually is ready to compete the QB has already taken his lumps and developed alongside the rest of the team.

We FINALLY have the opportunity to make a clean break from Cutler and a fresh start with a top rookie QB... But no... **** that... let's yet again kick the can down the road and overpay for some FA bum so we can get "good BPA value" with another David Fales type mid/late round project QB. Brilliant!

A fucking men!​

 

[Raskolnikov]

we survived this dreadful season only to be extended the turkey neck joke we have been sarcasticly pawning for entire off-season.

new heights of wtf. good job op

 

[bearmick]

The more I think about this the more I think this whole story is just Smoke

I hope so. As much as I'm trying to be positive, if they don't take a top QB early I will be pissed.

 

[BaBaBlacksheep]

I'm seeing some tweets suggesting his market may not be as high as previously posted. Maybe this won't be as bad as we think it's going to be.

 

[remydat]

This is all absolute nonsense.

First, you complain that the situation is 'fluid', then you base your opinion on some completely delusional 'draft board' that you created out of thin air.

Second, you claim that people have flaws in their logic, then you outline a scenario in which the Bears have only 2 of the top 3 QBs on their radar, and those exact 2 QBs are the players taken before they pick at #3....do you know the odds against that happening?

Third, even if all 2 of the QBs the Bears like are drafted before they make their pick at #3, how on earth do you then draw the conclusion that "Well, we weren't able to draft one of the guys we wanted, so Mike Glennon is our franchise QB now".

Fourth, if your 'logical' scenario has all the QBs drafted before the Bears pick at #3, what point is there so saying "and then see how the draft unfolds". How many ways can it 'unfold' at that point? If you can't find a QB with the #3 overall pick, what 'unfolding' needs to be done? Are the Bears going to be like "we really wanted Peterman in the 5th round, but the Niners grabbed him before we could draft him". It makes no sense. The Bears control their own destiny.

First, no the situation is fluid because there are any number of scenarios. I am not suggesting this scenario is the only scenario or the most likely scenario because I already said that they can sign Glennon and then draft a QB in any of the first 3 rounds. You are the one that is trying to take my position which allows for a QB to be taken in any of the first 3 rounds and try to reduce it to only the question of taking a QB in round 1.

Second, yes I understand the odds of that happening are low which is why I said that they could sign Glennon and draft a QB in one of the first 3 rounds. Like holy shit, you are the one trying to limit the discussion to Glennon and a QB at 3 and I keep telling you that is only one scenario because my position is they could sign Glennon and draft a QB in one of the first 3 rounds.

Third, I am not suggesting that if one of the QBs the bears like are drafted before their pick that Mike Glennon is the franchise QB now because of that. They are not basing their evaluation of Glennon on whether they take a QB at 3 or not. They are basing their evaluation of Glennon on whether they think he can be a capable starter. If so then they sign him. And then come draft time, they draft a QB in one of the first 3 rounds because there is no law that says they can't have two QBs on the roster they think are capable.

Fourth, they can see how the draft unfolds by seeing which QBs are available with their 2nd and 3rd round picks and taking a QB at one of those picks if they consider that QB to be the best option. The unfolding is simple a recognition of the fact they are not psychic so they can't predict how the draft is going to unfold.

 

[satchice]

Crazy idea but is it possible that the Bears are floating the Glennon is worth 14MM just to increase Jays trade value? Do you think other teams might think I would rather give up a 6th rd piock and get Jay for 14MM then get stuck with a longer commitment to Glennon for 15MM?

 

[Smokey Robinson]

Mike Glennon - QB - Free Agent
NFL Network's Mike Silver believes the Bears will land free agent Mike Glennon, and that neither the Jets or 49ers have legitimate interest.
It suggests the Bears are bidding against themselves to land Glennon at $15 million per year. The NY Daily News has also reported the Jets do not have serious interest in Glennon, and CSN Bay Area reported the 49ers have "no interest" at all. Glennon figures to be one of the first free agents to sign on the dotted line Thursday. Chicago is also targeting free agent CB Steph Gilmore.

 

[billwade]

Still makes no sense... Why the **** would you pay Glennon $14/15M to be a temporary stop gap when you could sign Hoyer again to do the same thing for $2M?!?

No one would pay him that kind of money as a stopgap. If stopgap was the strategy, Pace could sign Nick Foles (who actually has starting experience and success in the league) for 5-6 mil. Foles is only 28, has a much stronger arm than Hoyer, and would give the Bears breathing room as the drafted QB was developed.

No, Glennon would be envisioned by the Bears as a long term solution and another way to avoid making scary big decisions.

Unbelievable...

 

[remydat]

But if Glennon is immediately beaten out by a rookie QB, then what was/is the point of proactively signing him when you would have been better served with Cutler/Hoyer? Glennon is not a vet. I'm not sure how many times I need to tell you that. He is not a proven quantity. Also, the Bears don't need to "get a vet"...they already have one in Cutler and can sign Hoyer to a much cheaper deal than Glennon. Nothing of what you say makes sense.

Are you stupid? You sign him because you don't know. Once again, they are not psychic, they can't use hindsight in their decision. They sign Glennon because they think he can be a capable starter. And no they don't have one in Cutler because everyone understands that Cutler is toxic for the Bears and most likely can be cut. And Glennon may be a better option than Hoyer because he has more upside.

But you are drawing parallels to the Redskins and Seahawk situations when they aren't even remotely the same thing as your "Glennon + #3 overall" plan. Your continued mentioning of the Seahawks is even worse, because they was a terrible plan in itself. The Seahawks got lucky with Russell Wilson. The only smart thing they did was give Flynn a contract that was bargain basement starter money.

I don't have a Glennon plus 3 overall plan. I said I understand a Glennon plus a QB in the first 3 rounds plan. You can't just decide to limit my position to QB and 3rd pick when that is not what I said. The Seahawks didn't get lucky with Russel Wilson. They drafted a QB they thought had potential. It turned out they were right.

And? Hoyer/Cutler probably gives the Bears a greater chance of winning more games in 2017 than the #3 overall pick...so does it make sense in a total rebuild to view Hoyer/Cutler as your longterm QB solution, and either have the #3 overall pick sit behind Hoyer/Cutler or not draft a QB at all?

I am not advocating Hoyer/Cutler so your question is stupid. Glennon is presumably an option because he can potentially led the team to more wins and he is still relatively young with enough upside that he might exceed expectations. Hoyer and Cutler are older and known quantities with limited upside.

Then what is the point of signing Glennon? And how/why does Glennon have any affect on how the Bears draft in 2017?

The point is he has upside and they may believe him capable of being a good starter. They may also think a QB in one of the top 3 rounds has upside and can be a good starter. There is no reason for them to deny themselves either because there is no reason to have to put your eggs in one basket. Like is it lost on you that teams can carry two QBs they think are good?

The Bears view Glennon as a 'capable starter'....and? What is your plan? It sounds like you are just repeating yourself over and over again, stuck in the remy vortex. Glennon is unproven, despite your posts to the contrary. A #3 overall pick QB is unproven. Yet in your mind, you are treating this as if the Bears are the Packers, with Glennon playing the role of Brett Favre, and whomever falls into the Bears lap in the 3rd round is Aaron Rodgers.

Glennon provides insurance on nothing. To think that the #3 pick provides insurance on Glennon is preposterous. Glennon should not influence the Bears decision in regards to drafting a franchise QB. If the Bears think Glennon is a franchise QB, then they should not waste their #3 pick on an unproven QB 'insurance policy'.

None of it makes sense to me.

Again, repeating myself, but if 'sheer numbers' is the solution to the Bears QB problem, then why just sign Glennon and use the #3 overall pick on a QB? Why not sign Glennon and use every draft pick this year on a QB? One of them HAS to end up being a franchise QB, right?

I'm saying two unproven QBs are better than one because you double your chances of one of them ending up being the solution to your QB problem. I'm saying the Bears can think both guys have a chance of being successful and if so there is no reason for them to deny themselves one over the other when the only downside is money they are unlikely to spend anyways and that maybe dumb fans like you might decide that having two QBs you believe in is somehow a bad thing.

You entire argument is dumb. This would be like saying there are four doors and only 1 door has the jackpot and you are somehow confused by the fact that picking 2 doors is better than picking one day as if it isn't obvious that doing say gives you a higher chance of selecting the door that has behind it a good QB. If the Bears can get Glennon at a good price as well as draft a QB in the first 3 rounds they think has potential to be good then they should. You seem more worried by a QB controversy that exists in your head than you do with actually finding a good QB.

 

[westcoast bear fanatic]

I'm seeing some tweets suggesting his market may not be as high as previously posted. Maybe this won't be as bad as we think it's going to be.

It's too late, I already slashed my wrists I'm down to my last couple ounces of blood