jumbo

It was mainly a curiousity on my part, I don't expect the team to trade him as they likely won't get the same high 2nd that they gave up to get him. The main reason I wondered about it is that Mooney and Claypool are FA after this year. You can pick one or the other to extend, but I kind of like the idea of picking up JSN so that there is another fixture in the receiving room. If Claypool (who claimed he is/could be a top 3 reciever in the league) wants some stupid amount of money it ends up being a 1.5 year rental for a pretty high pick. If you could recoup some of that capital it might make sense. I totally get being happy to have lots of receivers, especially with tools and past production.

I can’t help but wonder if trading Claypool is back on the table. The lack of WR available might push up his value, though not to the bears 2nd that they traded for him. Picking up Moore obviously changes the receiver room, and if JSN was the pick I could see Claypool being expendable for a second rounder. Maybe it’s not realistic or just a terrible idea, but it keeps coming to mind.

What if you could play a round of golf in 2.5 hours consistently? Would that be too far? I don't think that is a fair comparison. For the players, it's great, but at some point it likely becomes a negative for the fans if games are consistently clocking in shorter than any other major sport. And this isn't really our concern, but what does it do to advertising revenue when there is 30-45 minutes less of live game content each night? I guess we'll see how it plays out over time. I still like it for the most part, but I have some concerns with how significantly the games are being shortened. Whether or not it’s a fair comparison, I don’t know. But what if you could drive to work in less time? Wouldn’t that be better for you? Doing anything you want to do with more time freedom seems better to me. I don’t care about advertisers or owners.

What if you could play a round of golf in 2.5 hours consistently? Would that be too far?

I saw someone on Twitter say that the Jets should insist on getting a '24 second round pick from Green Bay that voids if he plays the '24 season. Essentially insurance against Rodgers retiring after one year This concludes what I know about the situation. I hate the QB (don't even want to type his name again) for trying to get the media to hang on his every action/word/movement every offseason. He might be the biggest attention whore out there, depending on your view of Musk and Trump, and I hate him

That's what I want at this point. I'm taking a guess that Carolina is the team they are talking about that might be offering this year's first, second and third, next year's first, second and third and then the first in 2025. If someone is offering that, how can you say no? Hell, I'd take that without the 2024 second and third. I seriously doubt they can get that much, but it is going to be fun watching the process play out these next few months. I'd love to know the 4 teams. I guess Carolina, Las Vegas, Indi, and the Texans. Someone said Titans a while back, I could see it

I love "shelter in place for the combine" raw

Congrats, Tim. Hope you got a big pile of cash out of this

Im not sure if Aaron Wilson is a real NFL reporter, but he tweeted that Muhammad (#55) was released I didn't see it elsewhere, but I only really look at Rotoworld and they are sort of fantasy focused but tend to report most transactions I wouldn't miss him if true

It is amazing that he had to answer that question. Sounds like it didn't come up in the interview process...

Is Payton's personality at all like Parcells'? I believe he coached under Bill when he was the Dallas HC, I wonder if he has any of the "dictator" type personality that Parcells had (use your own best work to describe him, that's the first thing that came to mind)

I think Indy has to trade up. They risk getting the 4th best QB if they sit still. Houston is taking a QB. Bears are trading down with someone. AZ could trade down also if they are offered a crazy package for the 3rd pick and the last of the top 3 QB prospects. I think the Indy pick is one of the best picks the Bears can get. They have a chance to get the best player in the draft this year and next year as I think the Colts will have a tough year. If I'm Poles, I try to get as much out of Indy as I can. If AZ doesn't trade down and takes the guy the Bears covet, they can then consider dropping back again to the team that wants that last top QB prospect. In other words, I feel like the Bears will be in another great spot to trade back a second time (or even a third time if they swapped with Houston, although highly unlikely). Yeah, Colts are an ideal trade partner. It makes so much sense. Division foe that needs a QB is sitting at 2. Years of vet QBs who haven't worked out. Likely going with an offensive coach (thinking Eagles OC gets the job, hence why no hire yet). They really need an identity as a franchise. And they have had good luck (pun intended) with drafting QBs at #1. Plus from the Bears perspective, they could be top 10 bad again next year. Also, as you said, if the Bears really like Carter and/or Anderson it gives them a shot to get either with a trade back. That being said, I think Carolina has close to the same level of desperation. Even down to a division foe potentially getting the QB they want as Tampa and Atlanta could trade up as well (NO has no 1st). Less obvious path to their division foe getting their guy, but also less obvious path to actually sit still and get their guy than the Colts. And if moving down from 1 to 9, you're talking potentially getting an absolute mint for the pick. Poles said he wants value, and if he's not sold on the top guys in this draft, this could be a more desirable trade. I've thought about this and wondering how much less Poles might take to stay at 4 with Indy versus trading further down. Similar idea to Houston. The only reason I wondered this is because of teams not being in love enough with a clear top QB to pay up for the trade. But, as they say, it just takes one, so they'll likely be able to make some kind of trade. If they can get firsts in 24 and 25 with some other picks I think you just have to do it. Carter and Anderson are still prospects who have to pan out and I don't think you can give up that opportunity for either of them.

I will be royally pissed if we do not sign Payne if he's available. Clear need, young proven stud, lots of space. Guys like him don't hit the market more often than not. Can't afford to punt two offseasons in a row on some absurd value principle. It's not absurd at all. And there will be 30 other teams trying to sign him. It makes no sense to be pissed off if Payne decides to pick Miami over playing over Chicago or something. Just setting yourself up to be disappointed. But yeah, I explained the value thing. I don't think you are clear on what I am saying. Value does not mean, cheap. I get what you're saying. I realize he can choose another destination and every GM will have his limit as far as what they would spend on player X out there. I should have said I'd be pissed if they don't make a serious run at him or whoever the top players are that actually hit FA. We have the need at almost every position and the money and need to be flexible and add the best talent available. I'd rather pay the top player at their position and set the market (or non-Donald market in this case) than overpay a second tier player that you're dreaming on turning into the guy. Not really in response to anything, but I didn't intend to say that the Bears are cheap. I think they've spent plenty and let their GMs do what they want. I never bought the meddling owner conspriacy that is out there either.

I will be royally pissed if we do not sign Payne if he's available. Clear need, young proven stud, lots of space. Guys like him don't hit the market more often than not. Can't afford to punt two offseasons in a row on some absurd value principle.

Have you seen his new girlfriend?

Good read. I’d love it if the bears got Anderson then a solid 3 technique right after. Are you the scoring report analyst?

Despite the tons of money the Bears have to spend, I still expect them to look for value in free agency. That's not to say they will bargain shop like last year. I explained this somewhere else, but my example is this. Da'Ron Payne, he's probably going to get 22Mil AAV on the open market. 2nd highest paid DT makes 21AAV, so I'd guess at 25, he gets a touch more. But as long as Aaron Donald is around, he'll be the 2nd highest paid DT and the best case scenario is his play is that of the 2nd best DT in the league. And based on his salary (and others right below him) we know that level of DT play is worth about 20-22Mil per year. Basically, there's 0 chance he provides surplus value over his cost because you're already paying him tops at his position. A guy like Dre'Mont Jones from Denver, may cost like 15Mil/year, but he could give you top 10-15 DT level play on the field, which may be worth like 16-18Mil, so essentially you could get a surplus in value because there is a chance (no matter how slight) that he outperforms his salary in any given year. So, I still think Poles will spend a bunch of money (again he has to). But I do think he will be smart about it. He will look for ascending players, who are still young, potentially improving, and have been successful in smaller roles. And honestly, this is how all teams should look at adding in free agency, if they aren't surely one of the top 5 contenders missing singular pieces here and there. Once in a while I’ll go to over the cap and look at free agents by position. I typically sort by age and snaps played to try to identify young starting grade players, typically looking at 27 or so and under. I think poles will do what you said and target up and comers. The snaps played thing is flawed cuz teams like us play Jones and Mustihoer all season due to lack of competition/depth Side note on jones being on the pff all rookie team: how many rookie tackles actually play from game 1? Generally a handful, but him doing it as a 5th round pick says more about the bears than him (though I do credit him on his transition to a 17game season)

This was the JaMarcus Webb OL if I remember right? Cutler got hammered year after year and never got the protection he needed. Cutler's dumb and a meathead but I was a huge fan of his. He got such a bad rap in the national media

Not sure hot to post a tweet, but he tweeted something like “it’s been real, Cubs” after his one month with the org I liked it

That’s the MO Says dumb horsefeathers, get outrage clicks

It's more like a Venn diagram where they have overlapping skill sets, but not necessarily with all of them at the same spot. Same with each player's weak spots. But, I agree it just depends on what the team's front offices key on. Young has the highest "football IQ"/game awareness, but he's not the most gifted physically. If he were five inches taller there wouldn't be any question that he is the clear #1. Yea certainly more nuanced than my chart. And, yea, I think if he had better size, he'd be a clear #1. What's he actually expected to come in at? He's listed at 6'0" 194, but seems like consensus is he's gonna measure smaller on both, by a lot. If he somehow measured at that height/weight he may clear the hurdle just enough for some teams who would be out if he's 5'10" 180. On Hoge and Jahns an "expert" guest said he is smaller than Kyler (acknowledged Kyler is heavier/built thicker) Kyler's combine numbers we 5' 10"/207

RedZone channel again!

I did a mock draft where I traded back with Indy and got DeForest Buckner, then traded back with Atlanta and got Kyle Pitts, then drafted Skoronski at 7. Completely unrealistic but fun. We're going to see a lot of bad spending during FA. Many will be roasting the money Poles is giving out, but he kind of has no choice as Wrigley has pointed out. I think Jersey said something about not punting offseasons, and our forced spending this FA is going to look ugly in a lot of cases. I'm not really sure who all is going to be even available. So many receivers were traded for/resigned. Packers just kept Jenkins off the market. It will happen many more times with other attractive targets. I'm sure there will be some good players out there still, and Poles needs to fire the money cannon at the best players available and can do so without much regard for players already on the roster. A RG is the best lineman available, horsefeathers it, sign him and move him or Jenkins to LG. Saquan is the best pure playmake available, horsefeathers it, sign him. Best defender is a corner, sign him. Just get the best players instead of trying to fit some niche of the defense. Let your coaches coach the good traits and position the guys for success. I'm ramlbing, but it's hard to be really optimistic about the offseason/FA period knowing that many of the best players are being taken off the market.

I've always been team "let him get reps" but if they are going to gameplan and playcall and have the personnel that they did Saturday, there's no reason to play him in that mess. If Claypool is a go, I do see the value in getting reps with him and Velus (they should get a ton of targets each). But if no Claypool, there's not much to gain by him playing. Having this lack of talent hurts him more than helps him. What habit is he going to develop beyond throwing into every tight window every pass since no WR can separate? I agree with your point about the talent around him. It’s risky for him to be out there with that line, with the compound argument of him starting to “see ghosts” or have the mental side impacted. At this point, part of you wants him to play and another pArt doesn’t. But some of us use the tanking as a tiebreaker

I wouldn't mind it. I'm just not sure if the Bears will do it or not. I didn't really expect Poles to sell off MLB-style early in the season either. He pretty much broadcast that he's tanking, so sitting Fields seems to be is in line with that. Wouldn't they have sit Fields Saturday though? The put him out there yet obviously protected him. It's 50/50 for me. I wouldn't be surprised either way. If it was me I'd shut him down, but it's not me. I think you can justify sitting him the final 2 games over the final 3 games. He sat out the final drive, you can say it was because of the nagging injuries (shoulder, foot, ankle or whatever) and that it's just become too much. Plus, they just had the bye so you wouldn't have brought him back for 1 week post bye. I think the odds are something like 60/40 starting next week, and maybe 80/20 the final week. Playing indoors hopefully with Claypool could be a good oppotunity, but if there is anything to the shoulder being aggrevated just shut him down. He does need good reps, but these are not really that....more broken plays than anything. Put in Peterman, let the Texans knock off the Colts week 18, trade from 1 to 3 or 4 and still get either Anderson or Carter, horsefeathers yeah.