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

remydat

remydat

CCS Hall of Fame
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '19
Joined:
Sep 15, 2012
Posts:
60,507
Liked Posts:
39,113
knoxville7 said:
I said the lower taxes LIKELY played A ROLE in his decision. Taxes are a money decision, no?!

No goalpost moving here, just reading comprehension issues on your part and trying to ??? anything someone says to you.

Texas has no income tax, Illinois does. He is in a very high tax bracket due to his income, it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out that money played a role in his decision making.

You can still cling to his stating that being close to home was the primary factor in his decision making, that however doesn’t mean money/taxes didnt play a role in the decision.

like, of course money/taxes played a role in the decision, no matter how large or small of a role it was

the fact you’re still going on and on about this is truly perplexing
Click to expand...

Right and again you are basing that on nothing. He said the Bears offered him more and that he wanted to be closer to home. That is it. Obviously Houston's deal had to be somewhere in the neighborhood for him to accept but presuming it was more net of tax like you initially said is just pure speculation.

Like duh money will always be a factor but the whole debate is that sometimes players will take less for other reasons which is exactly what Bouye said he did.
 
knoxville7

knoxville7

I have the stride of a gazelle
CCS Hall of Fame '22
Joined:
Jul 12, 2013
Posts:
19,045
Liked Posts:
13,303
Location:
The sewers
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Tennessee Volunteers
remydat said:
Right and again you are basing that on nothing. He said the Bears offered him more and that he wanted to be closer to home. That is it. Obviously Houston's deal had to be somewhere in the neighborhood for him to accept but presuming it was more net of tax like you initially said is just pure speculation.

Like duh money will always be a factor but the whole debate is that sometimes players will take less for other reasons which is exactly what Bouye said he did.
Click to expand...
Lmao i base it on the fact he is a human being and $$ is always a factor/concern

im not making some giant leap to think money played a factor in his decision still

you have a GREAT day now k?!
 
remydat

remydat

CCS Hall of Fame
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '19
Joined:
Sep 15, 2012
Posts:
60,507
Liked Posts:
39,113
dennehy said:
He'll need a new deal in 25. And he'll be 31, so likely they will get him at a pretty reasonable rate or let him walk.
Click to expand...

Yeah sorry should have said after 24. If they let him walk then they will likely need someone to replace his production. Ideally it would be someone on a rookie contract but if not may need to spend money to sign someone.

My main point though is they probably need to balance the money spent on both sides of the ball as when it come down to it, it was that D that shut down Mahomes in the 2nd half.

You see KC make a similar determination in deciding to let Hill walk because they trust their franchise QB and they need to spend money on the OL and D. So not sure it is the best use of resources to spend so much on 2 No 1 WRs when you already have a top 5 QB that should be able to succeed with just 1. Of course if you can maintain a good D and keep both then do it.
 

TL1961

Well-known member
Joined:
Apr 24, 2013
Posts:
34,052
Liked Posts:
18,586
Aesopian said:
Shouldn't the focus be giving Fields all the weapons we can so he can be a franchise QB once we do that they can fix the defense in 2024 when they make a superbowl ring.

I'm just thinking out my ass it'll strongly depends on how free agency ends up.
Click to expand...
Why do fans think GMs flip a coin and decide to go with just one side of the ball in the offseason?

It has never been the case and makes no sense, but some seem to repeatedly advocate for addressing only one side of the ball.

Why?
 

TL1961

Well-known member
Joined:
Apr 24, 2013
Posts:
34,052
Liked Posts:
18,586
remydat

remydat

CCS Hall of Fame
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '19
Joined:
Sep 15, 2012
Posts:
60,507
Liked Posts:
39,113
knoxville7 said:
Lmao i base it on the fact he is a human being and $$ is always a factor/concern

im not making some giant leap to think money played a factor in his decision still

you have a GREAT day now k?!
Click to expand...

Again that was never the debate.
knoxville7 said:
I imagine state income taxes played a role in that. They could take less $$ but yet still net more $$ after taxes
Click to expand...

This is claiming that he was still getting paid more because of no state tax. I said that is pure speculation and you have no clue if he nets more when he never made that claim. He did not say he took less from Houston because he Nets more after tax. He said he took less because he wanted to be closer to home.

You then switched to this well money played a factor which is a completely useless point as we all know that the players play the game to get paid. That was never in dispute. I disputed you just assuming he nets more after tax.
 
knoxville7

knoxville7

I have the stride of a gazelle
CCS Hall of Fame '22
Joined:
Jul 12, 2013
Posts:
19,045
Liked Posts:
13,303
Location:
The sewers
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Tennessee Volunteers
remydat said:
Again that was never the debate.


This is claiming that he was still getting paid more because of no state tax. I said that is pure speculation and you have no clue if he nets more when he never made that claim. He did not say he took less from Houston because he Nets more after tax. He said he took less because he wanted to be closer to home.

You then switched to this well money played a factor which is a completely useless point as we all know that the players play the game to get paid. That was never in dispute. I disputed you just assuming he nets more after tax.
Click to expand...
no shit it’s speculation, unless we know the contract he supposedly turned down which we don’t, right?!

but to speculate that after taxes he could be coming out ahead despite turning down a bigger offer from Chicago is a totally realistic speculation because like you even said yourself, the two offers were likely close in money

so if the two offers are close in money but one gets taxed like a mother fucker and the other doesn’t, I’d say that’s a pretty notable thing to take into consideration when presented with multiple offers

you apparently don’t seem to think that is fair speculation, which is your opinion to have. It’s just an opinion that is absolutely stupid, but your welcome to it. Enjoy!

now I’m done derailing this thread with you, I’m not trying to get thread banned or some shit because of your dumb vortexing that you cannot help but do ALL THE TIME
 
remydat

remydat

CCS Hall of Fame
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '19
Joined:
Sep 15, 2012
Posts:
60,507
Liked Posts:
39,113
knoxville7 said:
no shit it’s speculation, unless we know the contract he supposedly turned down which we don’t, right?!

but to speculate that after taxes he could be coming out ahead despite turning down a bigger offer from Chicago is a totally realistic speculation because like you even said yourself, the two offers were likely close in money

so if the two offers are close in money but one gets taxed like a mother fucker and the other doesn’t, I’d say that’s a pretty notable thing to take into consideration when presented with multiple offers

you apparently don’t seem to think that is fair speculation, which is your opinion to have. It’s just an opinion that is absolutely stupid, but your welcome to it. Enjoy!

now I’m done derailing this thread with you, I’m not trying to get thread banned or some shit because of your dumb vortexing that you cannot help but do ALL THE TIME
Click to expand...

I am not the one vortexing. You are literally creating a fiction as to why he signed with Houston instead of just accepting at face value what he actually said. Again he said to be closer to home not that he still got more after tax. So why the need to assume it is something other than what he actually said?

By contrast, I don't need to know the contract he signed as I simply accept what he said. He signed with Houston because he wanted to be closer to home. Done. No vortex required.
 
remydat

remydat

CCS Hall of Fame
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '19
Joined:
Sep 15, 2012
Posts:
60,507
Liked Posts:
39,113
TL1961 said:
If (when?) the Jets trade 2 first round picks for Aaron Rodgers, they will be a better team, but not a Super Bowl contender.

And in two years, they will be in the market for a QB and will have missed out on drafting two more 1st rounders.

It's the kind of move I expect they would make, and it would be stupid.
Click to expand...

Well I suppose that depends on Love who we haven't seen enough of to determine if he can be good or not.
 
remydat

remydat

CCS Hall of Fame
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '19
Joined:
Sep 15, 2012
Posts:
60,507
Liked Posts:
39,113
BEARZOMBIE said:
A couple months ago he was on his bullshit trying to say having the 2 pick better than the 1st when it looked like no way in hell bears get 1. Gl with him lol
Click to expand...

Yeah no need to lie. I said we would get a haul at 1 or 2 if we decided to trade the pick so worrying about the 1st pick at that stage was pointless.

Then Tanny got injured and I revised my statement.

remydat said:
Ok I know I said no chance in hell Texans get to 3 wins bit they have Titans, Jax and Colts left. Tanny is likely done for year and Matt Ryan sucks donkey balls so just saying.
Click to expand...

The Tanny injury opened the door to the No. 1 pick and when that happened I changed my mind. Shit happens.
 
Last edited:
knoxville7

knoxville7

I have the stride of a gazelle
CCS Hall of Fame '22
Joined:
Jul 12, 2013
Posts:
19,045
Liked Posts:
13,303
Location:
The sewers
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Tennessee Volunteers
remydat said:
I am not the one vortexing. You are literally creating a fiction as to why he signed with Houston instead of just accepting at face value what he actually said. Again he said to be closer to home not that he still got more after tax. So why the need to assume it is something other than what he actually said?

By contrast, I don't need to know the contract he signed as I simply accept what he said. He signed with Houston because he wanted to be closer to home. Done. No vortex required.
Click to expand...
Ahhh so anytime a player says something it’s supposed to be 100% believed at face value now?!

jesus Christ, remy

not to mention again, both things can be true! His number 1 factor can still be location close to home while still having other factors in play. You seriously cannot be this dense

adios muchacho!
 
dennehy

dennehy

Well-known member
Joined:
Dec 29, 2015
Posts:
11,335
Liked Posts:
12,279
Location:
Jewels to get a case of Squirt
remydat said:
Yeah sorry should have said after 24. If they let him walk then they will likely need someone to replace his production. Ideally it would be someone on a rookie contract but if not may need to spend money to sign someone.

My main point though is they probably need to balance the money spent on both sides of the ball as when it come down to it, it was that D that shut down Mahomes in the 2nd half.

You see KC make a similar determination in deciding to let Hill walk because they trust their franchise QB and they need to spend money on the OL and D. So not sure it is the best use of resources to spend so much on 2 No 1 WRs when you already have a top 5 QB that should be able to succeed with just 1. Of course if you can maintain a good D and keep both then do it.
Click to expand...
It's possible. I just don't see evidence that it's imminent. Cincinnati historically doesn't operate like that and the same people are in charge.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

10,910members
94,461threads
4,464,455posts
480online users

Members online NOW

  • Member
  • Admin
  • Mod
  • Donor
  • HOF
Total: 480 (members: 59, guests: 421)

Staff online NOW

Top