jumbo

A report stated that GB offered more money than LV and Adams chose the trade. Was his relationship with Rodgers not good? Why would he leave if the money was the same? I heard he was buddies with Derek Carr but it still doesn't make sense to me. I just hope Rodgers is all pissed off about it. That said, GB will be able to draft four WR in the top 53 or whatever if they want. They won't, but they will have many options to adding cheap production with this deal. Overall, GB trading Adams after resigning Rodgers makes no sense to me

I'm not terribly upset about this. I think he was seriously overpaid at 3/40.5 just for who he is, not to mention that signing a pure 3T is somewhat of a luxury for a team that needs so much help on offense. I'd like to see bigger contracts for cut players like JC Tretter, Lael Collins, etc. Comp picks could be coming back if handled carefully, but obviously still target the best players for the scheme.

I heard this year's scheule is easier, so I had to look it up. In addition to the NFC North Home/Away, there is also NFC East - Cowboys, Eagles, WFT, Giants AFC East - Bills, Patriots, Dolphins, Jets NFC South #3 - Falcons NFC West #3 - 49ers AFC South #3 - Texans Jets, Texans, Giants, Lions are the only teams with a worse 2021 record than the Bears (5 games) Bills, Patriots, Cowboys, Eagles, 49ers, Packers are 2021 playoff teams (7 games) That leaves WFT, Falcons, Dolphins, Vikings as in between (5 games) Looks like 7-9 wins at a glance

Daniels got 3/26.5 and the guy they signed to replace him got 2/8. And he's supposedly a more nasty type of lineman, which Poles made clear he prefers. I think saving money and getting the type of player you prefer makes sense here. Daniels should have been a good got athletically for the scheme. I guess attitude (or even consistency) are being prioritized. This guy got ARob extension wrong last year, but I feel like maybe he has called other things and is maybe connected? He did have something that he predicted that came true, can't recall what it is. I think you could easily go into 2022 with Borom and Jenkins at RT/RG, as long as you get a versatile veteran as depth/competition. Not sure if JC Tretter is a good option at C with respect to scheme and what his contract demand might be. My take is sign some talented upside/value guys regardless of position and let them sort it out in training camp. Multiple C options would be great. Pushing Borom into a reserve role would be great.

Daniels got 3/26.5 and the guy they signed to replace him got 2/8. And he's supposedly a more nasty type of lineman, which Poles made clear he prefers. I think saving money and getting the type of player you prefer makes sense here. I looked at Patrick as C, not G (not a replacement exactly) but I agree that it's a sensible and good signing

Daniels signed for 3/26.5 Nichols 2/11 Artie Burns 1/2 Jakeem Grant 3/13.8 Poles must not have liked what he saw on film from Daniels or Nichols. Neither of those deals seem wildly out of line money wise. I thought Grant might come back on a 2/5 type deal, but that's a lot from Cleveland. As always, these numbers are not pure payout; contract structure matters and will likely reduce the effective AAV

I think theres a little bit of conflating correlation and causation with analysis like this sometimes. Bad teams aren't ncessarily bad because they overspend in FA. They're overspending in FA because they drafted poorly. If you're bad, you can splurge big in FA and still try to improve the draft part. NFL isn't great for tanking benefits. Careers are too short and schedule too much variance. There are certain narrow ways where FA spending inhibits draft development, but if anything it actually could mean the best bet is spending big in just a few areas rather than spreading around too much. And you have to spend a 90% target in actual cash so it's hard to underspend and if eventually you roll all that space over and have like a 100M cap room year you're basically guaranteed to spend it inefficiently then because you can't spend thst much all at once efficiently (or it would be very difficult). I didn't intend to comment on good teams/bad teams in any way. Watching the first couple days of FA and seeing some predictable and surprising overpays reinforces the goal of every team, which is building through the draft. Interesting comment on excessive cap space. I assume there is a salary floor, do we know what it is compared to the cap?

It's funny how everyone freaks out about the overpays in FA, but I am stunned at Kirk 4/72 or 4/84. It's far more than anyone thought, even though everyone agrees that FA day 1 is all about paying too much. It's a totally predictable cycle, but it still surprises. Lots of fair-ish deals happen to, to lesser fanfare. Ultimately the lesson is draft and develop. Buy low, buy castoffs. Not as easy as it sounds but when done correctly a major advantage. I was listening to a podcast the other day about bad FA signings and how to avoid. One of the comments was to look at a player over a two year period. Ogunjobi is a perfect example. Last year he played for 1/6.2MM deal. Anyone could have had him. Now this year, he's 3/40, doubling his AAV. It happens every year, a guy breaks out and gets paid, but many of these guys overperform for a variety of reasons, cash in, and then regress and get cut. I don't know enough about Ogunjobi to say that will happen to him, but it's one of many red flags, or at least yellow flags for me when looking at this signing.

Thanks raw. Yeah I know it won't stay that high, but you can see what Poles is looking at when he traded Mack and trying to build around Fields for the next few years. Knowing that, I feel the Bears def need to go after a top OL (regardless of position really) and Kirk as your slot WR as your "big" signings this offseason and build as much depth as possible with whatever cap space is left. You could probably fit Cooper or Godwin for WR, but I really like Kirk in the slot and draft a WR to develop for the outside with Mooney. We only have to wait about a week to understand the plan in a much more fully formed view I think on defense the real must have starters from FA are 3T, CB, MLB (assuming Roquan plays weak side) On offense you need a C, WR, T/G (depending on evaulations of current roster) and another WR You can value shop in FA for the rest of the holes to fill and look for BPA upgrades/depth in the draft

This is it. The team pushed all in on Mack, then again with Quinn and didn't get the offense right at the same time. It left a lopsided team with too many resources pointed to the defense and Poles is addressing that. Positive outcomes: Draft capital - obviously, and acknowledging that this is probably the best offer out there you either take it or decline to re-align the resources - this was the correct decision Cap space - less of a positive for this year, but beyond they have flexibility to sign anyone they want. Even this year they will be able to Poles roster evaluation - he rightly saw that this team is not close to contending for a SB and took a declining asset and turned it into future players/flexibility. This seems like a lay up, but the previous FO screwed this up multiple times and kept going for it also... Chargers/Staley - What a pass rush with Mack/Bosa if healthy. I will be keeping an eye on this team for the Mack factor. If they wanted to go maximum boom/bust DL they should sign Akiem Hicks to 1/$5MM. If those three were all healthy this team would be bananas My first knee jerk reaction was what? A 2nd rounder?! But then looking at Mack's stats, he hasn't been a standout since 2018, and he's over 30, and had season ending surgery this year. Eh, I don't like it but I think the draft pick compensation was probably OK, except I wish they could have gotten that second pick for this year and not next year. Agree with all your other points too. The 2nd rd pick is 2022 The 6th rd pick is 2023

No one had to say that Greenberg sucks and is not funny

This is it. The team pushed all in on Mack, then again with Quinn and didn't get the offense right at the same time. It left a lopsided team with too many resources pointed to the defense and Poles is addressing that. Positive outcomes: Draft capital - obviously, and acknowledging that this is probably the best offer out there you either take it or decline to re-align the resources - this was the correct decision Cap space - less of a positive for this year, but beyond they have flexibility to sign anyone they want. Even this year they will be able to Poles roster evaluation - he rightly saw that this team is not close to contending for a SB and took a declining asset and turned it into future players/flexibility. This seems like a lay up, but the previous FO screwed this up multiple times and kept going for it also... Chargers/Staley - What a pass rush with Mack/Bosa if healthy. I will be keeping an eye on this team for the Mack factor. If they wanted to go maximum boom/bust DL they should sign Akiem Hicks to 1/$5MM. If those three were all healthy this team would be bananas

And what does Dolphins owner Stephen Ross get for trying to pay Flores to tank? I'm sure there will be some evidence, nothing conclusive, and nothing will happen, but hearing Goodell talk about the sanctity of the game if this is true is quite the double standard.

I think part of this is that Fields had to recalibrate himself from college open to NFL open. We saw him make those throws in the Steelers game down the middle of the field. Then he got hurt a couple times and we didn't see him continue displaying this skill, but I think he gets it now. Sucks so badly that he missed almost the entire 2nd half of the season. After that Steelers game he played one below average half against the Ravens and then was out a month, then came back for I think 2 games and then was done. Almost no chance to build off that Steelers game. Even in Matt Nagy's horsefeathers offense I bet if he doesn't get hurt the discussion on Fields this offseason is a little different because he would have shown more improvement later on in the season. Edit: I almost forgot that the 49ers game was right before the steelers game too. He was nothing special as a passer in the 49ers game but he looked a lot more confident and comfortable in that game leading up to the Steelers game. 49ers game he was very decisive in scrambling. I'm not crazy about a lot of designed runs and read option for the same reason as Trubisky, he gets hurt when he's a runner. Scrambling on broken pass plays is less of a concern for me and likely enough running action to achieve the utility of his athleticism.

With that accuracy, he had 0TDs and 3INTs. Underlines the horsefeathers receivers that the Bears rolled out. This and, I remember reading Fields throws to open receivers were amongst the lowest, if not the lowest, in the NFL. That had to be a side effect of the fraud known as the Nagy offense. I think part of this is that Fields had to recalibrate himself from college open to NFL open. We saw him make those throws in the Steelers game down the middle of the field. Then he got hurt a couple times and we didn't see him continue displaying this skill, but I think he gets it now.

I'm anxious to see who they target in FA at the WR position. I was looking through a list of FA's trying to find players 29 and younger that had played a certain % of snaps last season. Those criteria whittle the list down very quickly. Mike Williams, Zach Pascal, Christian Kirk, Kalif Raymond made the cut I was using, though I should lower it for WR compared to other positions like OL, Safety, CB, etc.

I dont' see Mitch signing anywhere without a starting opportunity. The league has seen evidence that Nagy was not QB friendly. Couple that with Mitch's athleticism and renewed confidence in himself (also from Bills staff) and I think he won't settle for a back up job. Matt Ryan is still in ATL right? Probably not for long. Mitch could probably hold out for a starter's gig, but I really doubt anybody hands him the keys unopposed. Filling in for a team in transition is Mitch's best option and Atlanta should be in transition. Assuming no Rodgers/Wilson trades there will be plenty of teams in transition without a Matt Ryan type around, Mitch has got options 1 year prove-it as starting QB: Steelers, Redskins, Saints, Broncos, Bucs Compete with shaky incumbent starter: Panthers, Texans (Mills), Giants, Browns, Dolphins, Colts, Not sure how to classify Goff/Lions

Looks like Mitch will have a nice landing spot next season. I dont' see Mitch signing anywhere without a starting opportunity. The league has seen evidence that Nagy was not QB friendly. Couple that with Mitch's athleticism and renewed confidence in himself (also from Bills staff) and I think he won't settle for a back up job. Matt Ryan is still in ATL right?

I have been watching Icarus on Netflix. It starts with an amateur cyclist/filmmaker trying to blood dope as a documentary. He ends up working with the Russian Director of Anti-Doping who shows him how to beat all the tests. He outlined in clear detail how Russia swapped samples at Sochi which led to the ban at Rio by WADA, which ultimately was pulled back by the IOC. It's really aggrevating to see them clearly skirting the rules with no punishment. There was a tweet abut Richardson being disqualified and Valiyeva not - totally unfair

Who would not have expected this to happen?

Where's the "dislike" button?

Yeah, I can't imagine Rodgers would want to go somewhere where they aren't already a playoff caliber team. Are there any playoff caliber teams that need a QB and can also afford $30m for Rodgers and $30 for Adams? The rumors I've read is that Adams wants $35m. Doubt anyone gives him that. But, if he really wants money like that, some crappy team with money to burn just might give him a ridiculous contract. Jacksonville? Broncos have 40Mil in cap space. That's enough to sign Adams. If they trade for Rodgers, he'd almost certainly be willing to restructure to make that work. I heard a Green Bay reporter say that his expectation is that the Packers franchise Adams and then trade him and Rodgers to Denver for 3 firsts, two seconds and Jerry Jeudy I could see Denver doing it with their defense pretty good as is...

The way I read it was that the search team had those three coaches, but Poles insisted on being able to hire who he wants, presumably including others not in the final 3 three. If correct, then Daboll, Flores, whoever may be in play. It would be interesting to see if Poles wants Flores, for example. Does George just say OK or does he want to push back and say I didn't like him? So in my scenario, maybe the Bears said, yes, hire who you want (even someone we didn't like - this is the questionable part), but please start with our three finalists before expanding the grouping.

No, KC still would have to score in 13 seconds to force the tie. But then yea, game continues from last spot. In that case the spot is the kickoff. The theory behind it is that the halftime KO already gave each team equal chances to gain the possession edge at one of the halves. After that point, any possession edge is only time based which is game flow dependent and reliant on strategy and execution. But we don't have to guarantee equal possession because that's not football. As it played out theres no valid reason for KC to get back to back possession, its 100% luck. "That's not football" is the argument I have seen a bunch since yesterday. But you can't have sudden death and then give only 1 team the opportunity for the kill. It's like 1 team getting penalty kicks, penalty shots, a chance to score a basket, a chance to bat. That's the difference between regulation, it's not sudden death. You have a clear ending to regulation. You don't have a clear ending to OT. It's not even true sudden death. It's sudden death, if you do this (score a TD). And it gets magnified when you have one of the best offensive teams in the history of the sport. I get it, and you can't have 1 offs, but seems disingenous to say, "welp, should have stopped them" when nobody is very good at stopping them. Same if the shoe was on the other foot and Buffalo got the ball. Nobody's great at just stopping them partly because the NFL continues to change the rules so you can't stop them. The OT rules do not fit the long term shift in the game to offense. The NFL had to be thrilled with that shootout, though. Amazing back and forth that the must have imagined at some point in the past

I agree except I think game clock management should still be a component, IMO. No one argues that if the 2nd half receiving team wins the game on an ending possession that the loser should get to respond, even though the other team got an extra possession. The clock just falls that way sometimes where teams dont posses equal number of times. As long as OT is a timed play that goes to the end, then we get more football and don't alter the gameplay. Just a matter on the right length of extension and how many TO or stoppages to include. But the coin flip is total nonsense and that should be the primary goal, eliminating a coin flip to alter who might get an extra possession. KC actually ended up with two extra possessions on the night (although one was a 13 second possession so kudos to them). I want a 10 minute period, whoever leads at the end wins. But, what if there was no coin flip for overtime - whichever team received the first quarter kick off gets the ball first. This would go against the current league tendency to kick off the game and receive the second half kick off in hope to score twice in a row (finishing first half and starting second half). Minor wrinkle, but could add another layer of strategy to the first decision of the game.