Week 15: Bears/Vikings Part 2

[raw]

Also for some reason the Jets are beating the Rams right now, so the Jags might be in the Trevor Lawrence sweepstakes next weekend with even more motivation to suck (not sure what the Jets/Jags 1 pick tie breaker)

 

SOS. Jets have played the toughest schedule in the league. So, the Jags will likely win the tiebreaker by doing just as bad against lesser opponents.

[raw]

Arizona is going to hold off the Eagles. The Cards finish with the teams that just lost to the Cowboys and Jets today.

[WrigleyField 22]

Cue the Riddick for GM rumor mill

[UMFan83]

Well Bucs and Cardinals win. Bears still a game behind Arizona and 2 behind TB for the last 2 WC spots with 2 to play

[Soul]

Outside the Bears game, the Bucs have only lost to good teams. They play the Lions and Falcons.

 

AZ could lose 2. That’s a bad PHI team and it was nip n tuck.

 

Is it possible the Pack has nothing to play for the final week?

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Going 9-7 and being last team out would be very bears

[CaliforniaRaisin]

Eagles tie it 26-26 and then go for 2 and miss... what is the point of that?

 

edit- the only thing I can think of is to stop the other team for matching TDs going forward and going for 2 for the win, but I don't know I'd take the lead first before worrying about that scenario

 

It was a botched snap on the PAT.

[Brian]

ok that makes sense, I just had a live box score up on my computer

[raw]

Going 9-7 and being last team out would be very bears

 

Not as Bears as a "win and in" game Week 17 against the Packers in a game that is moved to Sunday Night Football after the Cards lose next week. Then having a late lead taken away by Aaron Rodgers.

[raw]

Outside the Bears game, the Bucs have only lost to good teams. They play the Lions and Falcons.

 

AZ could lose 2. That’s a bad PHI team and it was nip n tuck.

 

Is it possible the Pack has nothing to play for the final week?

 

It is very possible. Packers win next week, they win the tiebreaker of the Saints because of the H2H win. But if the Seahawks win next week and Week 17 vs. the 49ers, they'll win the common games tiebreaker. However, if Seattle loses against the Rams next week, which they already did this year....then GB wins HFA with a win.

 

That being said, 0 chance the Packers take the final week off and let the Bears in the playoffs. Also, they'd be the only team with a bye under the new format, so it would essentially give them 2 weeks off which could cause a fear of rust. Worst case, they play a 1/2 with their guys if Rodgers is getting beat up. But last time they played, the game was over by halftime anyway.

[Wilson A2000]

Outside the Bears game, the Bucs have only lost to good teams. They play the Lions and Falcons.

 

AZ could lose 2. That’s a bad PHI team and it was nip n tuck.

 

Is it possible the Pack has nothing to play for the final week?

 

Packers will have nothing to play for week 17. But Rodgers will still play and destroy our playoff hopes again.

[raw]

The 5th year option rule is changed for players drafted in 2018 and beyond, meaning if you accept their 5th year option, it's fully guaranteed immediately. For players drafted in 2017, it was the last year that the 5th year could basically be rescinded (like it was with Floyd). So, it looks like a 5th year option decision coming back again to bite Pace in the butt.

 

Did NOT exercise option for Fuller- forced into transition tag and long-term deal. Not necessarily a bad outcome, but unnecessarily risked losing him before 2018. DID exercise the option on Floyd, only to release him to get out of the 5th year, give more money to Robert Quinn, and have Floyd go elsewhere and have a career year. Did NOT exercise on Trubisky and is at risk of losing him this offseason or potentially overpaying him to stay.

[WrigleyField 22]

The 5th year option rule is changed for players drafted in 2018 and beyond, meaning if you accept their 5th year option, it's fully guaranteed immediately. For players drafted in 2017, it was the last year that the 5th year could basically be rescinded (like it was with Floyd). So, it looks like a 5th year option decision coming back again to bite Pace in the butt.

 

Did NOT exercise option for Fuller- forced into transition tag and long-term deal. Not necessarily a bad outcome, but unnecessarily risked losing him before 2018. DID exercise the option on Floyd, only to release him to get out of the 5th year, give more money to Robert Quinn, and have Floyd go elsewhere and have a career year. Did NOT exercise on Trubisky and is at risk of losing him this offseason or potentially overpaying him to stay.

Trubisky's 5th year option was either the amount of the transition tag or franchise tag. So that would still technically be an option (though that sounds insane to me) if it really came to it. Though you lose the ability to use the tag for Arob. All things considered, it was a super low risk move to not pick up that option, even given a super low odd outcome where he came out and slayed all 16 games.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

I like the idea of keeping Trubisky around on a bridge deal, but if we're anywhere near transition-tag money, then best of luck to him.

[WrigleyField 22]

I like the idea of keeping Trubisky around on a bridge deal, but if we're anywhere near transition-tag money, then best of luck to him.

Yea, I'm like at 12/2 range tops and that's assuming he plays well the next two weeks.

[Wilson A2000]

What if another team comes in and gives Mitch 3/$75? We keep talking about a one year prove it deal or a bridge deal, but how do we not know there won't be a bidding war for Mitch?

[Hairyducked Idiot]

I like the idea of keeping Trubisky around on a bridge deal, but if we're anywhere near transition-tag money, then best of luck to him.

Yea, I'm like at 12/2 range tops and that's assuming he plays well the next two weeks.

 

Same, and even that feels like a sentimental overpay.

 

*looks at what it would cost to get rid of Foles*

 

God *dammit* pace

[WrigleyField 22]

I like the idea of keeping Trubisky around on a bridge deal, but if we're anywhere near transition-tag money, then best of luck to him.

Yea, I'm like at 12/2 range tops and that's assuming he plays well the next two weeks.

 

Same, and even that feels like a sentimental overpay.

 

*looks at what it would cost to get rid of Foles*

 

God *dammit* pace

Trade him for a conditional 2034 7th rounder.

[gflore34]

It's the Bears and we all know making the playoffs is going to come down to win and in vs. GB. They'll lose and still be in the worst possible position to draft an average to above average QB, I'm setting the bar real low. An average QB who can do all the things required of an NFL QB would be a good starting point. Don't think we can ask for more, well, we can ask for more in a franchise QB but, chances for such are slim.

[Omar]

Packers have nothing to play for. They may bench their starters. They know they can beat the Bears in the playoffs if they had to.

 

With that said, the back up QB will have 300 yards and a few touchdowns with Packers still beating the Bears.

[ChiCubsFan]

I like the idea of keeping Trubisky around on a bridge deal, but if we're anywhere near transition-tag money, then best of luck to him.

Yea, I'm like at 12/2 range tops and that's assuming he plays well the next two weeks.

 

Same, and even that feels like a sentimental overpay.

 

*looks at what it would cost to get rid of Foles*

 

God *dammit* pace

 

For some reason I totally thought we set up his contract to basically be a 1 year deal with no cap hit after this year. Boy, was I wrong. What the actual horsefeathers?!?

[gflore34]

Packers have nothing to play for. They may bench their starters. They know they can beat the Bears in the playoffs if they had to.

 

With that said, the back up QB will have 300 yards and a few touchdowns with Packers still beating the Bears.

 

Suggesting a GB route would be too merciful for us Bears' fans, it's got to be a kick in the balls. Something like the Bears dominating most of the game yet, being unable to build a big enough lead to put it out the question, said back up QB completes a 30+ yd pass with Mack in his face allowing the Packers to kick a game winning FG.

[gflore34]

Whenever the Bears and Mitch do well on offense my first response is their opponent must have a real shiity defense. I'm not going to be sucked into thinking a change in play calling, playing to Mitch' strengths, and the OL starting to jell are the reasons for success.

[raw]

I have no idea what to think anymore about this team. So much has changed multiple times this season. I think it's pretty safe to say the Pace, Nagy and Mitch still aren't going to lead this team to a championship and consistent playoff contention, but do you actually get rid of them all? I think most assume if they make the playoffs, you run it back. But does Trubisky want to come back? What's even his market? I was thinking he'd be in the Tyrod Taylor, Ryan Fitzpatrick range (2 years/$11Mil). But he's younger than both with some upside still in there. So, does he get the Mariota deal (2/$19M)? Does he get more? After all, Mariota lost his job, never got it back, and his replacement went on to play at an MVP level since.

 

But all of a sudden, Nagy's decision making is looking good with him giving up the playcalling. Pace's roster moves are looking good, with 3 starters from the 2020 draft, 2 UDFAs playing well on the OL, and Ifedi being one of the more stable parts of the OL this season.

 

But what if they don't make the playoffs? They'll beat the Jags next week. But what if they lose to the Packers and miss? What if they get embarrassed again? Do you fire a coach who never had a losing record and is 8 games over .500 in 3 years? Do you let the GM have another shot at a QB?

 

This is a weird situation where if they want to run it back, they might not have the QB on board with them. Either way, we still aren't close to being sure if this is the right GM, coach or QB. If they don't run it back, they end on somewhat of a hot streak where players and coaches may be figuring this thing out. It's so Bears to get in a "damned if you do/don't" situation.

[WrigleyField 22]

I have no idea what to think anymore about this team. So much has changed multiple times this season. I think it's pretty safe to say the Pace, Nagy and Mitch still aren't going to lead this team to a championship and consistent playoff contention, but do you actually get rid of them all? I think most assume if they make the playoffs, you run it back. But does Trubisky want to come back? What's even his market? I was thinking he'd be in the Tyrod Taylor, Ryan Fitzpatrick range (2 years/$11Mil). But he's younger than both with some upside still in there. So, does he get the Mariota deal (2/$19M)? Does he get more? After all, Mariota lost his job, never got it back, and his replacement went on to play at an MVP level since.

 

But all of a sudden, Nagy's decision making is looking good with him giving up the playcalling. Pace's roster moves are looking good, with 3 starters from the 2020 draft, 2 UDFAs playing well on the OL, and Ifedi being one of the more stable parts of the OL this season.

 

But what if they don't make the playoffs? They'll beat the Jags next week. But what if they lose to the Packers and miss? What if they get embarrassed again? Do you fire a coach who never had a losing record and is 8 games over .500 in 3 years? Do you let the GM have another shot at a QB?

 

This is a weird situation where if they want to run it back, they might not have the QB on board with them. Either way, we still aren't close to being sure if this is the right GM, coach or QB. If they don't run it back, they end on somewhat of a hot streak where players and coaches may be figuring this thing out. It's so Bears to get in a "damned if you do/don't" situation.

The Mariota comp is an interesting one as far as contracts go. It was ~10 guarantee, which is the important number. Give Mitch 2/12 with 10 guarantee and some snap count incentives/escalators that guarantee his 2022 portion... that basically makes it a Mariota equivalent. And it's a small enough contract the high guarantee isn't a huge issue.

 

Winston got the minimum on the other hand, and while I'd rather have Mariota over Winston, it's not a 10M difference, IMO. So the market can be tough to predict. If Pace doesn't get set on one guy I'm pretty sure someone will shake out of the bottom of the market that's acceptable for a super low cost.

 

Speaking of Mariota, he's a cut candidate. If Mitch gets outbid elsewhere for dumb money, they could do worse that Mariota as a bridge QB.