raw

On the surface, the Bears have 20 FAs with only 20 mil and essentially 2 draft picks (top 125) to add talent. But a closer look shows, there's not really a whole lot the Bears have to lose and most of the FAs are extremely replaceable. I'd cut Sims today. I'd probably also cut Sowell. 1.5Mil is a lot for a backup OT/goalline TE. Acho is another possibility to cut at 2.2Mil savings. I would also expect Kyle Long to be restructured or take a pay cut. Bray- wasn't on 53 over 1/2 the year. Doesn't need replaced Cunningham- 4th RB isn't necessary, was essentially a special teamer only. Can fill his spot with any position and cheaper than 1.05Mil he got this year. M. Burton- FB was inactive most of the time. Ryan Nall can take his or Cunningham's roster spot with no drop off at league minimum Kush- didn't play the last 12-13 games. Could be replaced by a similar player for less than 1.35 he got paid White- obviously gone. Was inactive most of the 2nd half. Wims is the 4th WR next year Zach Miller- obviously never active, doesn't need replaced on 53 Nick Williams- anybody even know he was on the roster? 6th DL all year, not necessary. Can be replaced by player at any position. Marcus Williams- Bears had him or Cooper on the roster all year. Neither played much. 6th CB, league minimum type RRH, Scales, DHC, Braunecker, Coward, and Irving made a combined 3.2Mil last year, and I'm not even sure all of them counted toward the cap due to the top 51 rule. All are RFA or ERFAs. Should bring them all back for a similar cost, and the last 4 don't even have to be guaranteed a roster spot. I'd probably bring back Witzmann and Bellamy for depth. Long will probably get hurt again. Witzmann was OK in his spot. Could probably be re-signed for 6 digits again (790K this year). Bellamy would probably take a deal similar to the 2 year/3.5Mil the Bears gave McManis last offseason. That leaves Callahan, Massie, Amos, and Lynch. I don't think there's any way you re-sign Lynch or Amos. Lynch got 6Mil this year, and i don't see him taking a paycut to come back, even with long-term security, unless he just really worships Fangio. Acho is still under contract so he could be the vet 3rd pass rusher (could also be cut to save 2.2Mil). But Lynch was signed before the Mack trade and I'd imagine he wouldn't have been if the Bears already had Mack. They do now, he's expendable. Amos is probably going to get a big contract, he's the top FA safety other than Landon Collins, who is likely getting franchised. Amos is a really good player, but more power to the team that signs him to a big deal. Probably the least important position on the Bears D as constructed, and Bush is probably the most proven capable backup on the back 8 of the defensive side of the ball. No-brainer to let someone else give him a multi-year deal and reap the rewards of a potential comp pick in 2020. Massie I'd look to bring back. If he'll take similar to the 6Mil he made this year on a 3-year deal (with a year or so guaranteed), he's worth the money as a potential upgrade would cost much more money. Anyone cheaper would be a downgrade in ability. Could gamble on a starting caliber OT being there at 87 or Coward taking a huge step forward, but those seem like really easy ways to get your QB messed up and ruin your season. Callahan i'd probably bring back too, but Massie is more important IMO. Again, I think we're looking at about 6Mil/year. Be tough to offer him long-term with his injury history, but probably have to do it. IF not Callahan, there's some decent slot CB talent available. Darqueze Dennard, Kayvon Webster, Justin Coleman, Steve Nelson Jason Verrett are all guys who could be similar cost to Callahan and are of similar ability. But familiarity played a big part in bringing back Prince and Fuller, so I'd imagine the same would hold true for Callahan. That would bring back all 11 starters, along with Cohen, the top 2 reserve WRs and the top reserve OL (Witzmann). On defense, you only replace Amos with Bush and bring back all other contributors save for Lynch. As for the draft, with the first 2 picks....you don't need an immediate starter which is good because you aren't getting immediate starter talent. So, I'd look most closely at finding potential long-term solutions for players who are older and/or near the end of their contracts. So, looking at long-term replacements at RT, RG, CB (for 30-yo Amukamara), SS (Bush a FA after 2019), RB (Howard FA after 2019), OLB (need a rotational guy, plus Floyd's 5th year option is 14Mil+ in 2020).

It's ridiculous that this is being discussed. Guy admits he has had anxiety attacks and all the sudden he has an injury and some people are saying the guy who threw a trick pass touchdown on 4th down in the Super Bowl last year is having a panic attack. I realize that a) the injury was rather mysterious and b) panic attack occurrences aren't always related to the magnitude of a given situation but still, there is no reason to believe that Burton and the Bears are lying about this. The theory is that his anxiety is related to not wanting to be known for the Philly Special. Didn't want to do a version of it against the Giants. Couldn't bring himself to play in a game where it obviously would have been mentioned ad nauseum. Not saying I buy it, but that's the theory. Sent from my moto e5 supra using Tapatalk

I mean, they were missing an All Pro safety today and starting TE and nickel. Robinson missed 3 games, Mack the first 2 of his career, Trubisky missed a pair. Long, Shaheen, etc. They were healthier than recent years and probably a little fortunate, but they were also abnormally injured in the past and got a well regarded strength coach upgrade this past off-season. Sent from my moto e5 supra using Tapatalk

But they did? That was directed at the people arguing they shouldn’t, not the bears themselves I argued that they shouldn't play for the bye. They did, didn't get it, got a superior team in the playoffs, and lost the game. Not sure what your point is.

But they did?

More accurately, he left the game with the lead the bullpen blew it, then had the bases loaded with 0 outs in the bottom of the 9th and Parkey hit into a triple play. more accurately, he left the game with a lead after giving up 4 runs in 5 innings because the offense scored 6 So.....now it's not a quality start? I've lost sight of your point (as have you).

Foles is the reigning Superbowl MVP in his prime. Two can play this dumbass game. He’s a nothing QB doing the bare minimum to win. His team caught his floaters enough to beat the bears because the bears qb did nothing all game. "QB has to play good to win" - Mitch outplayed Foles "Well he's a backup" -Foles is reigning SB MVP "Well, he did bare minimum, because Mitch did nothing" I've internet known you for like 20 years dude. You're smarter than this, and not a meatball. You're changing a bad argument and making it worse every time you comment. Not sure why you've chosen this character when discussing Mitch, especially after excusing every single thing Cutler ever did for 7 years. This is dumbfounding.

Sent from my moto e5 supra using Tapatalk

More accurately, he left the game with the lead the bullpen blew it, then had the bases loaded with 0 outs in the bottom of the 9th and Parkey hit into a triple play.

What a stupid horsefeathering thing to say. That obviously wasn't the expectation at the beginning of the game. Given the situation (57 seconds and 1 timeout), that obviously became the expectation. Expectation was met. If the kicker met his, we wouldn't be having this conversation. you're literally saying that he met the expectation that became the expectation after the original expectation wasn't meant And you're literally saying nonsense.

He was better than Foles. foles is a backup Foles is the reigning Superbowl MVP in his prime. Two can play this dumbass game.

He did. He gave Parkey the kick. Twice. Parkey proved he could do it and he failed the bears were a 12 win team facing a wild card team at home. if just getting into position for your terrible kicker to make a game winner at the buzzer is all that is being asked of him, I guess the question becomes why are the expectations so low What a stupid horsefeathering thing to say. That obviously wasn't the expectation at the beginning of the game. Given the situation (57 seconds and 1 timeout), that obviously became the expectation. Expectation was met. If the kicker met his, we wouldn't be having this conversation.

Yuuuup. Mitch played fine and in the clutch, played the game we needed him to. They needed him to put up more than 16 points and he didn't They needed the TEAM to put up more than 16 points, 1 player on the TEAM prevented them from getting more than 16 points, and it wasn't Mitch.

Do think it's a reach to say there's 31 other kickers, well 30 (Janokowski Seatlle kicker) who would have easily made that kick. Parkey literally made the kick, right before that. Kicked thru the TO call and hit it right down the middle. Every kicker makes that or it's a choke.

No he wont. But NO will win. Mitch did his horsefeathering job. He got to within a range that every NFL kick should be confident at. Parkey blew it. The Bears blew it by giving him anything beyond this year in money. Draft a horsefeathering kicker. Mitch had one good drive in the 4th when they got the TD and made a nice pass to Robinson in the 4th to get them in FG range. Outside of that, he was pretty mediocre especially in the first half. 15 points (should have been 18) in a home playoff game just isn't good enough, sorry. Keep saying that, but if Parkey makes the FG, they win. It was a very make-able FG. Therefore, Mitch literally did enough to win. The kicker blew it. Not saying that's the only play that determined the outcome. I'm sure Mitch missed some reads. Amos had a bad penalty, as did Amukamara. The defense didn't get enough pressure and missed some tackles. O'Donnell had a 32 yard punt late. Nagy didn't call a timeout after the Jeffery 1st down, which would have given the Bears 35 more seconds at the end. There were several plays that could have gone differently and made it so the Bears win this game. But if Parkey makes the FG, no other play matters as the Bears would have won. It is reasonable to expect an NFL kicker to make that kick.

I'm sorry, but you guys are going to have to start putting some evidence with these statements. When was Mitch off target early (talking about legitimately missing passes) that prevented the team from scoring? I'm not at all claiming he was great. Just saying, he in no way prevented them from scoring more points as you and Goony are alluding to. For shiggles (because you guys aren't going to get off your incorrect narrative), here's how the Bears drives ended in the 1st half. Incompletion that was nearly picked to Howard in the flat after being flushed out of the pocket. Terrible decision, didn't exactly stop them from having the game in hand, considering it would have still be short on 3rd and 10 if caught. Tipped pass by Bradham in the spy position. Field goal after a 3rd and 10, 6 yard scramble Deep ball to Robinson (which he actually caught OOB) on 3rd and 9 from their own 21 (clearly not in point scoring range). FG as time ran out (completion inside of the 10 taken away because of a blown call) The only "early" play that you can maybe argue early that he missed and potentially took points off the board was the incompletion late middle to Shaheen that was broken up. If he throws that quicker, it's a catch and maybe the Bears don't settle for the time expiring FG on that drive.

I'm sorry, but you guys are going to have to start putting some evidence with these statements. When was Mitch off target early (talking about legitimately missing passes) that prevented the team from scoring? I'm not at all claiming he was great. Just saying, he in no way prevented them from scoring more points as you and Goony are alluding to.

The offense didn't have huge plays? The offense had to move the ball and score. They did not. Special teams was fine, sans Parkey. Defense was fine. Offense was not here. They did nothing and the QB, Mitch Trubisky, takes the bulk of the blame. He was not good. The QB has to be good to win in the playoffs. Mitch was not. Special teams had a 32 yard punt (with 12 yards of rolling), on the go-ahead drive. Defense gave up the game-winning score. Offense didn't play well enough, but had over 350 yards. Trubisky was good. He wasn't great. But if the QB has to be good to win in the playoffs, why did the guy who performed worse get the win?

Mitch was pretty good today, wouldn't blame him, besides Parkey, if someone must be blamed. I lay it Amos and O'Donnell, if the [expletive] gets off a decent punt the Bears win. Amos and O’Donnell both had huge plays. Punting didn’t lose this game. Neither did the secondary. The offense did nothing. The offense didn't have huge plays?

Prove it. Name the awesome throws and name the awful ones.

Seriously man, horsefeathers you.

I want to horsefeathering cry!

Nah, best defense in the league. You gotta trust they make a stop. Now you call timeouts.

Nah, best defense in the league. You gotta trust they make a stop.

He's a non-factor in the pass game so far.