raw

Laviska Shenault is Velus Jones, the prequel. No thanks. He was traded by the Jags this year for nothing, he has 0 value.....which seems to be accounted for with all the other picks, but still.

Real ones own both charcoal and propane. Propane for easy, quick cooking. Charcoal for slower, more flavorful cooking. I didn't use either very much last year though. Unfortunately. But back to football talk, Luke Getsy is the head coach of the American team in the Reese's Senior Bowl. Huge opportunity to get hands-on scouting of some of the top prospects.

There's 0 chance I'm buying that the Colts love Will Levis today enough to be willing to know they are ready to move up for #1 him. The season just ended last week. They didn't even know they would have a chance to trade to #1 until middle of Sunday afternoon. And they haven't even legally spoken to Levis yet. It's possible they are in love with the size and the arm strength, but there's no way they can decide to make a franchise altering trade for him a week after the season based on his college tape. Nor can they be ready to make that decision before they even interview or workout the guy. He could be a bumbling idiot in interviews and put up a single digit Wonderlic. It's way too early for anyone to be enamored with anyone.

Richard Dawson was unavailable.

Day 1 is only the 1st round. They aren't getting 4-5 1st round picks

I get the concern of going defense again but Fields was starting to put up points. If we had a defense to prevent the same from happening to us it would be beneficial. Also i am not a fan of takign wr in 1st round unless he looks like Calvin Johnson and you know hes a HR. Lots of good receivers come out of rounds 3-5. Just need to pick the right one. Best WRs still come out of Round 1. Actually, best everything come out of Round 1. That's probably a large reason why they got in Round 1 in the first place. The Bears couldn't continue to put up those points because the offense where you run 40 times, throw 20, and pray for record breaking rushing performance from your QB was not sustainable. Defense does need a TON of help, but mostly they need to stay out of the way. Take the ball away some times, but most of all, the offense needs to be good enough to either keep them off the field or make the other team 1-dimensional because they got a lead on the other team. Honestly, had the Bears simply kept Roquan Smith, they probably would have been good enough on defense to potentially win all of the first 3 games after the trade where they lost by a total of 7 points. Based on the improvements the Ravens D had with him and the downgrades the Bears suffered without him, it's reasonable that 1 off-ball LB could have won this team 2-3 extra games. Add a top 10 pick and a good bit of the 120M cap space on defense, and there's no reason they can't be good enough while still giving the offense some young talent in the draft.

Welcome. I really don't want to be in a situation where the Bears take defensive players with their first 2 picks 2 years in a row. I love some of those names (not Bresee) and Witherspoon is a stud who I'd love to have. But it would be somewhat of a crime if the Bears don't add some young offensive help early for Fields really soon. I understand defense top 10, because that's where the value is, but after that, you have to take offense. The only offensive help they gave Justin last year was a 5th round LT and Velus who is like 3 years older than Fields.

The second you put him on the market and let teams know you're open to trading him after 2 years it devalues him. It's a stain all on its own. Not that it's a route I would want them to take even if it weren't the case. I reminds me of my mother-in-law's shopping strategy in the super market. She was born and raised outside of Manila and moved here in her 30's, so much of American life was learn-on-the-fly. Essentially, she would walk around and watch what other people bought and buy those items, judging if they were popular they must be good. I dont think its a great way to grocery shop OR evaluate your NFL QB, she could quickly over-buy inferior products and in Poles case, walk away from a better QB prospect for the sake of misguided perceptions LOL. I thought this was going to be a horrible story and analogy based on the 1st sentence, but it's actually not bad.

Agreed. I feel like it's a ratings thing in an industry (sports media) that makes money on hot takes. Everyone was saying all season when Fields was putting up highlight plays every week how he was great and the Bears needed to get him some help. Now the same people are saying the opposite for shock value. I feel like if he had a 50 yard run or a beautiful deep ball completion against Detroit Week 17. Or even something as simple as if Houston had lost and the Bears had the #2 pick, nobody would be talking about replacing him with another QB. Even still, I feel like the ones saying that are being disingenuous. yeah... at least, other than lesean mccoy lol McCoy went to high school near me. Aliquippa. Let's just say, that school doesn't focus on academics much.

Figured I'd start a thread to discuss WC games. Saturday, Jan. 14 Seattle Seahawks @ San Francisco 49ers, 4:30PM EST, FOX LA Chargers @ Jacksonville Jaguars, 8:15PM EST, NBC Sunday, Jan 15 Miami Dolphins @ Buffalo Bills, 1PM EST, CBS NY Giants @ Minnesota Vikings, 4:30PM EST, FOX Baltimore Ravens @ Cincinnati Bengals, 8:15PM EST, NBC Monday, Jan 16 Dallas Cowboys @ Tampa Bay Bucs, 8:15PM EST, ESPN/ABC Home teams win every game. Discuss.

Aside from the occasional hot take artist, I’m not seeing this at all. The general sentiment is that they have their quarterback and need to find a way to surround him with better weapons and a line all while restocking a pathetic defense. Agreed. I feel like it's a ratings thing in an industry (sports media) that makes money on hot takes. Everyone was saying all season when Fields was putting up highlight plays every week how he was great and the Bears needed to get him some help. Now the same people are saying the opposite for shock value. I feel like if he had a 50 yard run or a beautiful deep ball completion against Detroit Week 17. Or even something as simple as if Houston had lost and the Bears had the #2 pick, nobody would be talking about replacing him with another QB. Even still, I feel like the ones saying that are being disingenuous.

It's funny, because I never feel like anyone talks about Lamar Jackson's lack of support either. Granted, he has a great OL and a strong defense. But so does Aaron Rodgers and all we heard was "Rodgers doesn't have enough weapons". Rodgers had Lazard, Sammy Watkins, his handpicked safety blanket in Cobb, and they drafted a pair of WRs, including 1 early. Lamar went into the season with Rashod Bateman, who granted was a 1st round pick in 2021, but then they had Demarcus Robinson and glorified Velus Jones, Devin Duvernay. They also traded their #1 WR in the offseason, and I didn't hear a bunch of "they had to trade him because they couldn't pay him and Lamar" like the talking heads say about Rodgers/Adams.

Or not. #-o Such a promising season down the drain.

Yes. This! Saw a tweet that said they should trade a 3rd for Hopkins then get an extra 1st from trading down this year and use on Marvin Harrison Jr., even if you have to trade up next year. Not only would you be trading a 3rd for a WR, after trading a 2nd for Claypool, but now you want to potentially take a WR 1 the following year, maybe even giving up multiple 1sts.....but if you want Hopkins because "Justin needs a #1" and you still need Harrison Jr next year, then maybe Hopkins ain't the guy you thought he was. I'm all about getting weapons. And I know the Eagles gave up a 1 for AJ Brown after using a 1 on Smith. But they didn't do it also after trading the highest possible 2nd on Claypool, nor did they have a Mooney already in house. And I understand guys will be out of contract soon (Claypool, potentially Hopkins) but feels like overkill maybe, when you don't have an offensive line, or a defense.

Really comes down to contract expectations for me. If it's basically guaranteeing his 23/24 and tacks on some new unguaranteed for his age 33/34 at a lower base, I'm okay with that level of risk I think (dependent on draft comp required) Yeah, I just don't see any way all of that stuff lines up. Plus, there's a greater than 0 chance he starts falling off as soon as next year as WRs tend to fall off a cliff after 30.

No interest in Hopkins for me. 31 year old WR (next time he takes the field), who wants a new contract. Yeah, count me out on trading anything of value for him and paying him a bunch of money thru his mid 30s.

I was just using last year's Day 3 trades as evidence that Poles knows they need multiple players. I don't expect him to add 9 guys on Day 3 again. But I think he will use the same approach now with upper level talent. Last year, he was throwing horsefeathers at the wind. This year, a trade down would be building the top of the roster, long term. But just using other teams actions as an example, early round pick treatment isn't necessarily congruent with late round treatment. And frankly he needs less players now. The bottom of roster building has gone *okay*. He still needs to get a few stars. Unless he's trading for assets to in turn trade back for vet stars, I'm not super confident he'll go into crazy pick asset acquisition mode. There's still a pretty big difference from top 10 to next 10. I don't agree he needs fewer players now. But I wasn't trying to imply that he's looking to add quantity like last year. He's obviously going to want to add quality players. But the key is that "s". He has 1 quality player if he stays at 1. The next pick isn't going to be until the mid-to-late 50s. The best way to get multiple quality players is to have a quantity of early picks. The best way to get a quantity of early picks is to trade the most valuable one.

I was just using last year's Day 3 trades as evidence that Poles knows they need multiple players. I don't expect him to add 9 guys on Day 3 again. But I think he will use the same approach now with upper level talent. Last year, he was throwing horsefeathers at the wind. This year, a trade down would be building the top of the roster, long term.

Kingsbury was also the exception in that he wasn't a particularly good college coach either. 35-40 overall, 2 winning seasons out of 6(and none in his most recent 3), never more than 8 wins in a season(his first season). Texas Tech can be hard to recruit to, but not that hard. I also wonder who in their right mind would want to coach in college these days. With the portal, you're basically re-recruiting 70 guys every year plus all of the HS recruiting and transfers in addition to all of the alumni ass kissing you have to do. I know you make a ton of money and have an army of assistants, but if you can go be an NFL OC and make a couple million bucks instead of going to deal with all of the nonsense in college, not necessarily sure why you wouldn't just take the OC job. Yeah that sucks, but college also pays similar money to the NFL and has more job security. 1. coaches keep their job longer. You build up an average or below program, you basically stay as long as you want. 2. if you do lose your job, there's 130 other jobs now instead of 31 others

Yeah, this is as no brainer as it gets. And everything Poles has said, "build thru the draft" and done (turned 5 picks into 11 last year) in his year on the job point to this being 100% a trade down. Hell, even sitting Fields on Sunday says to me, "hey we have a shot at #1 lets see if we can get it". Fields has been playing hurt most of the season. It's not a coincidence they sat him Week 18. No better way to build thru the draft than turn 1 pick into 4+ early picks.

Can't imagine Houston would give up 2 and 12, maybe 2, 33, and a 2024 2nd? The Seattle deal for 2 seems like a decent chance, but is Seattle going to go after a QB or give Geno Smith a shot with 2 additional 1st rounders added to the roster? Houston and Indy will be bad next year. Seattle won't be as bad. Draft position in 2024 is of utmost importance as well, IMO. Agree that Houston and Indy will likely be bad. But I wouldn't be surprised if Seattle is too. They do have a decent amount of talent, but that QB position is still unstable with Geno or a rookie. They only went 9-8 this year with 4 wins by 4 or fewer points. They were up and down all year with losses to the entire NFC South, who all had losing records. They also lost to a bad Raiders team. I know they are well coached and have drafted well, but I wouldn't discount that could be a top 12 pick in 2024 from them. They made the playoffs, but they won in OT against a bad Rams team Sunday which a loss would have had them with the 14th pick. I'd take almost any scenario that gets the Bears multiple 1st round picks in 2024. Worst case scenario, it gives you an extra 1st to trade for a really good WR or Tunsil or Buckner if the Colts are cutting salary.

No way Houston trades up from 2 to 1. I think they'd be perfectly fine taking Levis at 2, if Young goes 1. I actually think the smart move for Houston would be to take Anderson at 2, and then use 12 to move to move back up for a QB (Arizona at 3 would be a prime target or even Bears at 4 with double trade down). They could get the best player in the draft AND get their QB. They also have two 1sts next year from the Watson trade.

and then we draft marvin harrison jr with their pick lmao This is quite realistic. The Colts will be in rebuild mode and will be a bottom feeder next year. I wanna say their offensive line was hideous, which explains why they went through so many QB's this year. I'm all in on a trade with the Colts, assuming it pays well enough. And I'd be especially cool if they traded down with the Texans along the way. Not sure you get the same prize from the Colts by letting the Texans have first pick of the QB's, but you still end up with Anderson if they no longer wish to do business. They'd still have to worry that someone will jump to the 3rd pick ahead of them. I don't see Detroit drafting a QB. Goff has been mistake free and he's running their offense quite well. They can use their picks to strengthen their roster. For once in a blue moon, they are the team to beat in the NFC North next year. Hopefully, the Bears make it a two team race. Colts also had the league's most expensive OL as well. They all dealt with injuries in the last couple years and have zapped the effectiveness of a once fantastic group. One thing about Detroit is they've built quite a foundation there. They finished with a winning record, were mostly hot to end the season. Established great chemistry on that team. And now get to add 4 top 64 picks. I don't see them taking a QB, which would create some controversy in what should be a pretty strong and optimistic locker room going into next season.

I think that fan base would riot if they go after another veteran QB. Granted, Jimmy G isn't as ancient as Ryan and Rivers or as terrible as Wentz. But there's no way they can justify adding another vet as their starting QB. They've had good luck (no pun) picking QBs at 1 (since the Elway debacle), so I feel like there will be a ton of pressure and incentive for them to trade up to a team that's clearly got the 1 on the table. Extra incentive to take their top guy over the division rival Texans.

My point is, Will Anderson may be the best prospect in this draft. That doesn't mean he is the best pro in the draft. He could be Jadeveon Clowney, solid player but not a world beater. Even if he is Nick Bosa, the best pass rusher in his class who went #2 in his class......there may be a Brian Burns available in the middle of the round, like there was in that 2019 draft. I'd probably still trade the pick if I knew Anderson was going to be a Bosa level pass rusher, if I knew I could another pretty good pass rusher PLUS another early pick in this draft PLUS likely a 1st round pick next year PLUS probably another pick or two. To put names to it from the Bosa and subsequent draft. I would give up Bosa to get Brian Burns, Dalton Risner (early 2nd in 2019), Jerry Jeudy (mid 1 in 2020) + an extra 3rd next year or whatever else it takes. And I didn't even take the best available guys in the early 2nd and mid 1st like Deebo and Wirfs. One player can add the elite player this team needs, but they aren't 1 player away. 4-5 players can be franchise altering if you draft well.