Jump to content
North Side Baseball

UMFan83

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    93,886

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    64

 Content Type 

Profiles

Joomla Posts 1

Chicago Cubs Videos

Chicago Cubs Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits

2026 Chicago Cubs Top Prospects Ranking

News

2023 Chicago Cubs Draft Picks

Guides & Resources

2024 Chicago Cubs Draft Picks

The Chicago Cubs Players Project

2025 Chicago Cubs Draft Pick Tracker

Blogs

Events

Forums

Store

Gallery

Everything posted by UMFan83

  1. UMFan83
    Some ESPN (huge eyeroll) comments on some of the Bears signings: Don't see one on Walker, so its possible they don't see it as a relevant enough signing.
  2. UMFan83
    I think it's crazy, but this FO never has seemed super enthused on him. Even when he was already clearly their best OL he was splitting snaps. And he has an injury history. Even if I thought they were fully over any other issue, that's maintained a question. He was getting nearly 100% of the snaps for a huge chunk of the season (92% or more in every game played between Week 5 and Week 13). I think the FO became sold on him as the season progressed. The injuries though are a concern, missing 4 of the last 8 games, and in 2 of the games he played he only played a few snaps.
  3. UMFan83
    Haven't watched this video yet but this is quite the claim by YouTuber named The Football Scout:
  4. UMFan83
    I was hoping it would prompt one of you people to do the math for me
  5. UMFan83
    Bunch of people are saying stuff like this but no one is breaking it down for me and I’m not smart enough to figure it out myself
  6. UMFan83
    Given what we're upgrading from, even a decent starter is a pretty substantial upgrade. Definitely. Just doesn’t help our need for impact players on defense. That said I’m not sure if FA was going to net us any impact players regardless
  7. UMFan83
    Hasn’t even hit one in the All-Star game. Pretty lame Kyle
  8. UMFan83
    Spoke too soon
  9. UMFan83
    The Bears will be fine, they finished *checks notes* last in the NFL in sacks last year.
  10. UMFan83
    I miss it sooooo much
  11. UMFan83
    I was worried that was going to be your take. I would have said going into the off season that the Bears biggest holes were in the trenches, even more than WR. So far we haven't done a ton to change that. While they could focus heavily on this in the draft, I don't want the Bears to be in a position where they have to take OL and DL instead of BPA.
  12. UMFan83
    I haven't heard much about Marcus Davenport as a name for the Bears at DE. I think he had a down year last year in terms of pass rushing (0.5 sacks in 15 games is something, but he had 9 the year before), but he's only 26 and graded decently on PFF. Is he someone the Bears should be going after?
  13. UMFan83
  14. UMFan83
    I'm fascinated by the non-traditional countries in this tournament like England and Italy. Do they even know this tournament is going on? Are the games broadcast anywhere? I just looked at a couple of English news sites and I found 1 article total on the WBC and I had to use the search function to find it. If England was following the tournament they might actually come away excited about baseball after a closer-than-expected loss to USA, an offensive explosion against Canada (though won by Canada with the mercy rule) and currently leading Colombia 6-3 in the 7th.
  15. UMFan83
    I know this is a Bears thread, but anyone else feel like the Bills are about to take a step back? They're kind of in a tough spot I think. They maxed out their roster to contend but keep coming up short. As long as they have Allen and Diggs and an adequate defense they'll be good I think but may take a small step back to retool and maybe be 10-7 good instead of 13-4 good. We'll see...
  16. UMFan83
    Forgot that Edwards grew up in the Chicago area and unlike other potential Bears additions that grew up in the Chicago area (*coughSkoronskicough*), was a big Bears fan
  17. UMFan83
    Not that I don't also value the input from Wrigley and several others here, but I really need raw in here and provide his input to complete the NSBB analysis of the Bears moves. Hurry up raw!
  18. UMFan83
    They got better players and a draft pick (and not having him probably helped the tank). What are you complaining about? Good riddance to that weirdo flake. If you think Roquan was that important to the tank, then he was probably worth the money he got paid People are saying that they'd rather have Edmunds, Edwards, 2nd round pick, 5th round pick for roughly the same amount of money as Roquan. PLUS the fact that not having Roquan helped give us the return that we just got for 1.01. I mean Roquan only played for the Bears half the season and he almost singlehandedly destroyed our chances for the 1st overall pick with is interception to give the Bears the win vs. the Texans. Thankfully a vindictive Lovie allowed us to overcome that :) This is not discrediting Roquan at all as a player
  19. UMFan83
    Found this funny:
  20. UMFan83
    It's just kind of hard to say without a little more details. But with some indication of frontloads on two of these, could be as little as two substantial signings. But certainly could be 3-4 more as well. Lots of flexibility on what they do. I'd think 3 more big-ish signings. I know you are doing guesswork here with not a full set of data but is 3 signings accounting for potential extensions for 1-2 guys? Also I'm assuming something like re-signing Monty would be considered a big-ish signing?
  21. UMFan83
    Maybe an intentional strategy to spend big on non-premium positions like LB and then trying to get as many starters at premium positions on rookie deals to maximize their competitive window with Fields' rookie deal? Or am I looking too much into it?
  22. UMFan83
    Edmunds contract is insane. How much are we looking at having after these 3 signings? Edit:
  23. UMFan83
    Poles woke up from his nap
  24. UMFan83
    I mean poor in the same sense that Tom Ricketts was poor after his "biblical losses". Last year 30 of the 32 teams spent to within $8m of the cap (the other 2 were the Panthers ($11m) and Browns ($30m). It should never be an issue for an NFL team to spend up to the salary cap. Well cap aside it is cash that matters, but there were really only 2 or 3 teams at risk not meeting that minimum by end of year One if those handed out a 5/105 contract today, and I think also a big DT signing. So it's really down the Bears and Cowboys who probably have work to do towards the cash minimum. I have to be honest, I don't understand the cash handed out vs. cap space thing that well. It would be pretty pathetic if the largest NFL market with 1 team didn't have the resources needed to field a winning team. I understand Arlington Park is expensive and the Bears are planning to build an expensive stadium with their own money, but if they want to win as much as they claim their do then they can find the money to put enough resources towards a good team.
  25. UMFan83
    How is our old friend Sulley handling Bears FA so far? https://twitter.com/Sulleymon/status/1635344531850932224 Edit: he must have deleted it. it was an all caps tweet yelling about trading Fields before he gets killed and he doesn't deserve this dog horsefeathers
×
×
  • Create New...