**OFFICAIL** Bears 2024 Regular Season News & Schleisse - FTO Preferred - No ALTS! Derailing Is Discouraged!

gallagher

gallagher

Ave Atque Vale
Donator
Joined:
Sep 27, 2010
Posts:
7,410
Liked Posts:
6,574
Location:
Semi-Nomadic
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
  1. Michigan Wolverines
  2. Ohio Bobcats
iueyedoc said:
The other thing that is being ignored is that to reset the financial clock and drafting a QB at this point would be premature and logistically incorrect. Fields is cheap for 2 more year and reasonably priced for another.

If Fields unexpectedly takes a step backwards, that would mean the Bears will have added premium surrounding pieces with the 5 picks in the first 3 rounds this draft and go into the next draft with the draft capital( likely being 2 high 1sts) to go get a top QB, stepping into a much more development friendly situation and then you have 5 yrs of a rookie QB in a much more fast track development situation.

I assume these talking heads know that and are just talking to fill the dead air a week before the draft.
Click to expand...
Oh absolutely.

But you know how sometimes, you can tell someone is the type of person who goes shopping, and comes home having spent their budget without getting anything on their list?
 
HearshotKDS

HearshotKDS

Well-known member
Joined:
Sep 9, 2012
Posts:
6,541
Liked Posts:
6,680
Location:
Lake Forest
Brownie said:
Thisis why I could only halfway listen to /read DJ's interview with Weiderer. His theory on this scenario in particular is senseless. Seems like the media ONLY has the Bears projected to constantly do something weird and out-think themselves. As if they HOPE we do in order to a) stay losing and b) give them something negative to talk about.
Click to expand...
Lets be honest, its what happens when you run out of new content and the draft is still a week away. Its content creators struggling to come up with new content on a topic that has already been discussed to the point of exhaustion. But gotta get them views/clicks/etc.
 
remydat

remydat

CCS Hall of Fame
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '19
Joined:
Sep 15, 2012
Posts:
59,903
Liked Posts:
38,509
There really is no point taking the draft a QB at 9 people seriously. It is just the stupid kind of speculation/opinion you get when you have run out of original drsft content.
 
dabears70

dabears70

Well-known member
Joined:
Dec 31, 2013
Posts:
35,013
Liked Posts:
10,840
Location:
Orlando
My favorite teams
  1. New York Mets
  1. New York Knicks
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. New York Rangers
  1. Syracuse Orange
Brownie said:
Thisis why I could only halfway listen to /read DJ's interview with Weiderer. His theory on this scenario in particular is senseless. Seems like the media ONLY has the Bears projected to constantly do something weird and out-think themselves. As if they HOPE we do in order to a) stay losing and b) give them something negative to talk about.
Click to expand...
Yeah i disagree and don't think it's senseless at all to at least have that convo about trading Fields and drafting a QB in the 1st round if you think that QB can or is better than Fields which also gives you 2 extra years of control and lower pay on that new QB. Not saying they should do it but it absolutely makes sense.
 
dabears70

dabears70

Well-known member
Joined:
Dec 31, 2013
Posts:
35,013
Liked Posts:
10,840
Location:
Orlando
My favorite teams
  1. New York Mets
  1. New York Knicks
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. New York Rangers
  1. Syracuse Orange
BaBaBlacksheep said:
I just have this bad feeling we’re going to end up with Van Ness in round 1 and that gangly fucker from Utah will be our RT.
Click to expand...
I have a feeling we go Skoronski and trade T.Jenkins for a not so good return, or at least not the high 2nd we used on him and can't remember what we traded to move up to get him in the high 2nd round. Don't understand why we don't just put him at RT and i'm okay with drafting Skoronski, or let Skoronski and Jenkins battle it out for who plays LG and RT.
 
Discus fish salesman

Discus fish salesman

Well-known member
Joined:
Mar 31, 2018
Posts:
15,218
Liked Posts:
19,620
dabears70 said:
Yeah i disagree and don't think it's senseless at all to at least have that convo about trading Fields and drafting a QB in the 1st round if you think that QB can or is better than Fields which also gives you 2 extra years of control and lower pay on that new QB. Not saying they should do it but it absolutely makes sense.
Click to expand...
This made sense at #1 and I'm sure the discussion was had. It's extremely dumb after trading down to #9.
 
remydat

remydat

CCS Hall of Fame
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '19
Joined:
Sep 15, 2012
Posts:
59,903
Liked Posts:
38,509
dabears70 said:
Yeah i disagree and don't think it's senseless at all to at least have that convo about trading Fields and drafting a QB in the 1st round if you think that QB can or is better than Fields which also gives you 2 extra years of control and lower pay on that new QB. Not saying they should do it but it absolutely makes sense.
Click to expand...

It made sense when we had the 1st pick. It makes no fucking sense at 9 as it would suggest the Bears had multiple QBs they thought were better than Fields, opted to trade down and then got lucky that the 3 or 4th option at QB was still there at 9.

dabears70 said:
View attachment 28474
Click to expand...

Yes the exact reaction most have to your posts devoid of logic.
 
gallagher

gallagher

Ave Atque Vale
Donator
Joined:
Sep 27, 2010
Posts:
7,410
Liked Posts:
6,574
Location:
Semi-Nomadic
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
  1. Michigan Wolverines
  2. Ohio Bobcats
dabears70 said:
Yeah i disagree and don't think it's senseless at all to at least have that convo about trading Fields and drafting a QB in the 1st round if you think that QB can or is better than Fields which also gives you 2 extra years of control and lower pay on that new QB. Not saying they should do it but it absolutely makes sense.
Click to expand...
It isn't senseless. It is that the most conservative assumption is that the team has had that conversation and came to a conclusion in March.

If you agree that having the conversation about trading Fields and drafting his replacement is sensible, why do you think that Poles moved out of the first pick before having that conversation?

If you agree that QB is so valuable that it is of prime concern to lock them in at the lowest possible cost, why would you accept risk at not getting the player you identify as better than the one you have at a rookie cost at present?

Do you not think, on balance, that talking about moving on from Fields using the 9th overall pick is too late when you had the 1st overall pick last month?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

10,910members
94,273threads
4,448,338posts
83online users

Members online NOW

  • Member
  • Admin
  • Mod
  • Donor
  • HOF
Total: 83 (members: 5, guests: 78)
Top