Mike Glennon Expected To Land 14-15 Mil Per Season

[r1terrell23]

Or throwing them to the wolves with not enough weapons around them absolutely messes them up which i can show sooooo many cases of happening.

If this is true do we want a messed up qb? I'm sure Tampa knows how good Glennon is or isn't. If they truly believed it was everyone else and not him would they have drafted Winston?

 

[Enasic]

I guess you have repressed the memory of the Bears 2016 season, but they were getting their asses handed to them before injuries became the FoxPace excuse du jour.

Not sure why Glennon is being compared to Barkley...are you assuming that Barkley was going to be the Bears starting QB in 2017?

Just kind of moronic posting all around.

Lol...

I'm sure having a shit secondary had nothing to do with the struggles. Which is why I specifically said.....with the right acquisitions in the secondary. We could pretend like injuries had nothing to do with anything. That's fine too. But a better secondary and better health, in addition to a couple rooks, and this defense should be top 10.

And no, I'm not assuming Barkley would be the starter this year, you moron. I'm saying that he was a major problem for the Bears last season and if say, Glennon were the starter, the Bears would have won more games. Like I said before, Glennon isn't a terrible option. You can win with him and a great defense while you develop a rookie. Or everyone could spaz out over nothing (nothing has even happened yet) like usual around here.

 

[westcoast bear fanatic]

I have a rule of thumb and it's you don't sign garbage players to big contracts. 15 million per season means you are a good qb, I don't care if it's one year or 7. Glennon isn't the worst qb in the league but he is at best a bottom 5 starting qb.

At best a bottom 5, sure about that? You probably thought David Terrell was a top 5 WR so I take your view with a grain of salt.

 

[Enasic]

I think the absolute ceiling of such of a move, if they can add a few more quality players to the defense, would be ending up in a KC/Houston situation with a good defense but not enough play making ability at QB to win in the playoffs.

Then when it's the 2008 Orton Bears again and they realize they need a legit QB to push them over the edge, they'll be back to picking 15-23 every year again and therefore needing to give up multiple years of premium picks to trade up for a more "sure thing" prospect at QB that the Watson/Trubisky/Kizer detractors keep telling us isn't there this year.

Terrible, terrible move.

That's a huge assumption, dude. Something pretty unrelated happened 9 years ago, so it's going to play out the same way? I'm not sold. Let's say hypothetically Pace does sign Glennon (which is far from a given). The move can't really be judged until after the draft. If he ends up with Mahomes, Kizer (who will fall), or even Watson by trading back up into the 1st, the move looks completely different. This board loves to jump the gun at the slightest reports.

 

[dabears70]

How do you know who won't be a starting QB in the NFL? Who are they, and who has suggested picking them?

I don't. How do you know who will be?? You don't so that makes us even.

 

[r1terrell23]

At best a bottom 5, sure about that? You probably thought David Terrell was a top 5 WR so I take your view with a grain of salt.

Right now if you had to rank 32 qb's in the league including Mike Glennon were would you put him?


In no particular order the following qb's a better:

Stafford, Rodgers, Bridgewater, Eli, Cousins, Wentz, Dak, Ryan, Winston, Brees, Cam, Kaepernick, Wilson, Palmer, Brady, Tannehill, Tyrod, Ben, Dalton, Flacco, Luck, Mariota, Rivers, Carr, Smith, Jimmy G

That's 26 better than him. And I hated David Terrell, I wanted Koren Robinson. Who turned out to be a better player.

 

[bearmick]

I don't. How do you know who will be?? You don't so that makes us even.

So since nobody ever "knows", I guess we should never draft a QB. Good plan.

I do know you have to try, and I disagree with those who still think this is a weak QB class (though a lot of the "experts" do appear to be predictably backing off that narrative now).

 

[dabears70]

A little richer than I would care to pay him however it's not my money and if he can offload his contract in 2 years with no cap hit and it doesn't prevent them from taking a QB early this draft and have an open competition than I'm fine with it. The rest of you bitches can go slash your wrists.

Why not right? If what pretty much everyone is saying which is that none of these top QB's are ready to start day one except maybe Watson then why not give a vet who hasn't had a real chance to show what he can do in the NFL a chance for a year or two while drafting one of these QB's in the 2nd, 3rd or 4th round to sit behind him for a year or two??

Glennon/Mahomes

Glennon/Kaaya

Glennon/D.Webb

or my personal favorite--Glennon/Trubisky who i'd be just fine with spending the #3 pick on.

 

[PickSix]

My take. If Pace knew for certain that Watson would be there at 3, he wouldn't do the MG deal as Watson is ready to be thrown to the wolves. But he's not going to take that risk that Watson doesn't go 1 or 2.
If Trubisky is the consolation prize at #3, or maybe the guy he really does want anyway with long term upside, then Glennon does make sense. Trubisky is not ready to be thrown to the wolves. He just isn't. Same for a trade down scenario if Mahommes is his guy.
Grabbing MG will keep Foxy happy too. Not that anyone here cares about that, but Pace probably does.
So what if Watson is their guy and available at 3 with MG in the fold. Ease him in and maybe 2018 money on MG is a waste. Big whoop if we finally have a QB solution.

 

[dabears70]

If this is true do we want a messed up qb? I'm sure Tampa knows how good Glennon is or isn't. If they truly believed it was everyone else and not him would they have drafted Winston?

They also tried signing him to a $8 mil per contract to be a backup which would of made him the highest paid backup in the league so they clearly like something about him.

 

[westcoast bear fanatic]

He hasn't started in a couple years so it's hard to project, we also don't know if Alshon is re-signing and if not who will be the wideouts or TE's he has to throw to. He could possibly put up top 15 numbers this year or could be in the bottom 5 and get put on the bench and replaced by a rookie. But I don't know how you can make a definitive statement "at best bottom 5 starter" at this point in time. That is a foolish statement IMO.

 

[Bearly]

It has nothing to do with whether you draft a QB or a rook can start or not. Glennon is a good QB and worth acquiring. His only issue is mobility. He's smart and has a good pro arm. As a rookie, his TD to INT ratio was over 4-1 and he had an 85 rating. The only reason he was sat the next year was Lovie's pigheadedness in justifying a McCown signing. That year Glennon had to start 5 games and play most of a 6th. He had 3 games with a rating of 83 or higher. In the other 2/3rds of the season McCown had one against an abysmal Redskin team. Not that McCown is anything special but he's a known in the same system.

 

[dweebs19]

If the Bears sign this dude to $15 mil per season while letting Alshon walk, I will be taking a bath with the toaster.

http://www.csnchicago.com/chicago-bears/report-potential-bears-target-qb-mike-glennon-expected-land-contract-range-14-15

If that's the case, I roll with Barkley and Shaw and a rookie qb. Hell, I might even prefer to keep Cutler as a backup and draft a rookie qb to start than sign Glennon at 15mil per

 

[bears5150]

On the previous page, posters were mentioning having the #1 overall pick next year with Darnold and Rosen coming out. Their reaction to that was to wonder what you could get in a trade down with Darnold sitting there. This tells you all you could ever need to know about the Bears fan base and the Stockholm Syndrome-esque mentality when it comes to the QB position. Even when faced with the prospect of being there to take the blue chip guy, the first thing they think about is what they could get by trading down. Just incredible.

The same people who think drafting a second round QB at #3 overall or signing a career back up is going to some how change us into the Patriots. This team with its QB options is not going anywhere near the Superbowl the next couple of years, unless they drive by it. Stop Stupid and start building for the next decade not just for tomorrow.

 

[bearmick]

That's a huge assumption, dude. Something pretty unrelated happened 9 years ago, so it's going to play out the same way? I'm not sold. Let's say hypothetically Pace does sign Glennon (which is far from a given). The move can't really be judged until after the draft. If he ends up with Mahomes, Kizer (who will fall), or even Watson by trading back up into the 1st, the move looks completely different. This board loves to jump the gun at the slightest reports.

I'm not assuming anything. You said that with Glennon and some upgrades, they could be somewhat competitive. I'm saying the team will never get over the hump and win Championships with Glennon as the QB, and that being decent/competitive/average is going to leave us back in the middle of the first round again.

Bearing in mind that the people against taking a QB at #3 this year seem to say that because they don't think this year's class are "sure things", you can see the issue surely? If Darnold/Rosen are more "sure things", they certainly aren't going to be there in the middle of the round. Hell most mocks now have this year's "weak" class having the top 3 gone very early, so why anyone thinks the more "sure things" Darnold/Rosen are going to be available to the Bears after they're somewhat better with Glennon, I have no idea.

Now, if the plan is to sign Glennon purely as a bridge AND draft one of the top QBs this year, I could live with that. But if the plan is to go with Glennon as the starter and just draft another late round developmental prospect, then **** everything.

 

[dabears70]

So since nobody ever "knows", I guess we should never draft a QB. Good plan.

I do know you have to try, and I disagree with those who still think this is a weak QB class (though a lot of the "experts" do appear to be predictably backing off that narrative now).

I love when someone says something to one of your posts that makes sense you throw words into their mouths instead of just saying it makes sense, lol. Where did i ever say we should never draft a QB?? Ummmm i didn't but thanks for implying i did.

 

[westcoast bear fanatic]

Rather than get in a tizzy over what Pace does or doesn't do in FA I'm judging him on what he does in the draft. If he signs Glennon and ignores the QB position in the draft or go after some low ceiling guy like Peterman in the 4th round as his answer then tell Pace I said **** him. Pace put himself in a corner by passing on a QB the last couple years so all eyes and pressure is on him and he better do right.

 

[Enasic]

I'm not assuming anything. You said that with Glennon and some upgrades, they could be somewhat competitive. I'm saying the team will never get over the hump and win Championships with Glennon as the QB, and that being decent/competitive/average is going to leave us back in the middle of the first round again.

Bearing in mind that the people against taking a QB at #3 this year seem to say that because they don't think this year's class are "sure things", you can see the issue surely? If Darnold/Rosen are more "sure things", they certainly aren't going to be there in the middle of the round. Hell most mocks now have this year's "weak" class having the top 3 gone very early, so why anyone thinks the more "sure things" Darnold/Rosen are going to be available to the Bears after they're somewhat better with Glennon, I have no idea.

Now, if the plan is to sign Glennon purely as a bridge AND draft one of the top QBs this year, I could live with that. But if the plan is to go with Glennon as the starter and just draft another late round developmental prospect, then **** everything.

First off, I'm not even sold that Pace is going to sign Glennon. But I wouldn't hate it if he drafts a QB either by trading up into the 1st or drafting one in the 2nd. I would think that's what he would do, but who really knows.

 

[bearmick]

I love when someone says something to one of your posts that makes sense you throw words into their mouths instead of just saying it makes sense, lol. Where did i ever say we should never draft a QB?? Ummmm i didn't but thanks for implying i did.

I didn't put words in your mouth. You started off by assuming that none of the QBs in this year's draft would be starting QBs in the NFL. I then responded by asking how do you know they won't be, to which you said ...

I don't. How do you know who will be?? You don't so that makes us even.

So what did you mean by this inane response, if not that QBs shouldn't be drafted unless you know they'll work out?

 

[Bearly]

I didn't put words in your mouth. You started off by assuming that none of the QBs in this year's draft would be starting QBs in the NFL. I then responded by asking how do you know they won't be, to which you said ...



So what did you mean by this inane response, if not that QBs shouldn't be drafted unless you know they'll work out?

If you 'know' one will be a Sb winning QB, better get in touch with some GM. I bet they'd make you rich for that assurance. Almost every draft pick has some doubt attached to it.