WrigleyField 22

BTW can we update this title since "Pace/Nagy" FIRED ain't exactly breaking news anymore.

Here's your entertainment minny

I'm pretty near absolutely opposed to any trade where they gotta turn right back around for some massive extension. And I'm by no means cap cautious (quite the contrary), but they do really gotta start hitting and developing draft picks. Anyways I bet 49ers will priorize a AFC team if they can. KC makes too much sense.

Son, if you can’t drink 8 beers in 154 minutes that’s on you. Coulda had 10 beers but only had time for 8.

Coulda had 8 beers, but only had time for 6.

Rounds 2-5 is just a convenient cutoff for Bears (2 in each of 2nd and 5th), but saw this and perked up

Pace had a top 5 D to pair with Trubisky. That's a pretty good bet to make since you have 1/2 of the team already at top performance. If Trubisky hits big, the Bears are real good. Poles has Fields,,,,,,and that's about it. He has to build SOMETHING Yes, and that's why his approach does make sense. Fields alone doesn't make a team contend, despite being the most important piece. So, Poles concluded it didn't make much sense to pay an older guy like Mack, when he could trade him for a pick to select a younger player to build along with Fields. And why it didn't make much sense to him to spend big money on 1-2 positions to help Fields and potentially have those guys eating into cap room they'd need to really go for it with Fields. I posted my mock offseason. I would have loved a proven WR. I really wanted Laken Tomlinson (and eventually Terron Armstead) to really solidify at least 1 spot on the OL. But I get why Poles didn't do that (or maybe he wasn't able?). Hopefully, this time next year we're looking at a team that not only has Justin Fields to build around but also has Darnell Mooney, Cole Kmet, Teven Jenkins, Larry Borom, Khalil Herbert, and two 2022 2nd round picks who all stepped up to be part of this team's future on offense. Yea I supported the Mack move partially because it also did open up cap go realloacote towards O and supporting Fields, while also helping to restock sorely needed draft capital. But basically all that cap won't get tapped into until 2023 and it didn't have to be that way.

I don't really think it has much validity, but also the moves they have made to date are not equivalent to many other moves teams make around a 2nd year QB historically. The big difference of course being regime change. It is gonna be easier for Poles to cut bait. He doesn't have to tie his stakes to Fields. That's plainly factual. Yeah and honestly, it's probably the smart way to play it. Pace put all his eggs in the Trubisky basket and went big to win with him in his rookie contract window in 2018 (Mack, ARob, paying players already on the team). If Poles did that and Fields wasn't the guy, that's basically a waste of time. If Fields shows what they expect him to, they can be the 2021 Bengals or 2020 Bills really quick. They will have the money and/or draft pick ammunition to add almost whoever they want with Fields. Even with another couple splashes, they'd still have basically all the flexibility they would need in 23 to continue to build around Fields, if he hits. You basically have to buy really high on "his ultimate success will have very little (or none) to do with his 2022 supporting cast". That true even if they find 3 day 1 starters with their draft picks, because they've left little room for error (injury or otherwise). It will be very frustrating if Fields does look like a star but they're like 8-9 because they were so overly patient and conservative on year 1. Kind of a waste of a year. Granted their schedule is so bad a 8 win season might not even be that impressive. Anyways my highly controversial take is trying to win more games each year is good.

I don't really think it has much validity, but also the moves they have made to date are not equivalent to many other moves teams make around a 2nd year QB historically. The big difference of course being regime change. It is gonna be easier for Poles to cut bait. He doesn't have to tie his stakes to Fields. That's plainly factual.

ITT we dunk on millionaire college coach idiots.

Love the 100% unwarranted optimism lol

To me it seemed like about 500k too much, but Young's seems like at least a 500k bargain. So altogether a good value day for Poles yesterday, but if you had given me both values and it was a price is right game, I'd have lost.

Thought the Griffin money was kind of a lot for a #2 TE who isn't really a move TE. Like unless their running a lot of true big personnel isn't he a true backup for Kmet?

Wonder if players can even be minority owners. I 2 minute search of the CBA didn't show me anything but there are huge potential salary cap implications of that.

Yea I think I mentioned before, but in my opinion, Pace's OL failings were as much about depth as it was the starting 5. It's not a promising group. And I still hate the idea they may be narrowed into like two positions among their top 3 picks.

I don't really disagree with you much, but if Fields gets killed this year because the O-Line is so bad and turns into David Carr then you've set yourself back another 3-4 years. It's certainly a fine line to walk. I mean, yeah that would be bad. But that's more of a coaching issue. The Bears OL wasn't any less talented than many OLs around the league. The problem was the combination of mediocre talent along with obvious pass downs and pass formations allowing pass rushers to tee off. One thing Getsy has said is that he wants the pass game to look like the run game. RPOs, playactions, extra TEs, staying out of obvious pass down and distances will help. It's not an ideal situation, but kind of is what it is at this point. Jenkins has gotta be good. Patrick has got to be a significant upgrade at C. The early draft picks have got to hit. At this point, got nothing else but to hope Poles/Cunningham (2 former offensive linemen) really know their stuff. I'm counting on scheme upgrades, but why wouldn't you want both talent upgrades and scheme improvement? And even if they hit on 38 or 49 for a RG, it's still a very thin depth chart. Would be much preferred if they have a reasonable answer for RG and even swing tackle or swing IOL before draft. Maybe in next 3.5 weeks there will be movement on that front. While some of the younger more high ceiling names are long gone there are some stop gaps. Either that or really banking on post June 1 cuts. But they won't be the only team watching the waiver wire at that stage.

Problem isn't Poles, it's your expectations. Poles wasn't going to come in and build this team into a contender with 5 draft picks, little cap room, and like 23 players under contract. What's the threshold for you to be ok with what he's done? Did you want to pay Christian Kirk 19M per season? Did you want to trade 1 or more of the limited draft picks just for the right to pay a WR 20-25Mil/year (Cooper, Hill, Adams)? He tried to add Bates, but the deal was matched? They were in on other linemen who got paid more than they were willing to pay, and probably went to teams closer to winning than the Bears are. I would have liked a stud lineman or proven WR as much as anyone else, but the only reason why you are disappointed is because he didn't do what you wanted him to do, not because of what he's done/hasn't done. If the Bears had signed Terron Armstead and traded for Robert Woods (using him because his trade value and contract are most reasonable of the deals made) they'd still be a team that's not good enough to seriously compete for a Superbowl, maybe not even a playoff spot. If you're that far away and need 21 other players, there's really not a point in hampering your future ability to add players by giving 15M/year to a 30+ year old or trading draft picks for a big salary or injury risk, in Woods' case. The GM and the coaching is the help this year. Clearly those were huge issues for Fields last year, by his own admission at least in the Cleveland game. Just relax and give it more than 2 months. I don't really disagree with you much, but if Fields gets killed this year because the O-Line is so bad and turns into David Carr then you've set yourself back another 3-4 years. It's certainly a fine line to walk. I'm not overly concerned about him being David Carr'd. But I definitely don't think QB development is in a vaccum without influence. Supporting Fields helps his development. But if he also just has "it" and is ready to explode, relatively modest improvements make this a playoff team in 2022, so there is opportunity cost to punting too much to next year. Anyways at this pace next year's spending splurge will probably put Bears 2018, Pats 2021, and Jags 2022 splurges to shame.

I'm okay with not giving up trade assets, but the FA spending is gonna come. 2023 is shaping up to be a absolutely massive year for them in FA and it would have been relatively easy to do some more if that now. And I'm not sure the FA risks/downsides disappear. You'll overpay some. You'll probably get stuck with some bad deals. But you'll raise tye talent floor greatly. I don't generally love any sort of feast/famine approach. Would be better to use some of those cap resources in 22.

Sucks that we we “went for it” the year we had an impossible schedule and are retooling the year we have an easy schedule Gonna line up for so many bad takes lol

Can't believe Treylon Burks may slip to the 2nd round. I understand his limitations, but his play on the field says more than running around in underwear does. He's a big play waiting to happen whether you get the ball to him short, deep or intermediate. This is probably how I'd rank them as far as talent goes, but with the caveat that the Bears really need an outside WR, so if they pass on Dotson for Pickens or Watson, I'd understand completely. Dotson and Moore can play outside, though they are smaller, but may be better off playing all over the field similar to Mooney and maybe Pringle as well. Messed around on a PFF mock the other day where I trade up to 33 to snag him then back down from 48 to recoup some picks.

IIRC, I think Cruikshank is very good defending against TEs, but yes, he's another DHC type. If we can sign a capable SS to start and then a minimum $$ FS to back up Jackson/5th safety, I'm fine with the safeties as a group. Do Bears normally have 5 safeties on their roster? Pace usually seemed to go more CB happy than S happy but that is obviously meaningless in a new regime.

The threshold to count toward the comp pick formula is typically around 2.5Mil. I don't think it's a "set" amount, it's just based on percentage of contracts signed. Only players who sign contracts in the top 35% of AAV league-wide qualify for a comp pick. And with rookie deals, UDFA deals, vet minimums, etc. 65% of NFL contracts tend to be less than 2.5M AAV on any given year. Yea, best estimate I've seen is around 2.5. There is a set lower limit thats currently 1.77 and goes up 0.2 every other year. But the 35% threshold is obviously well about that and would figure to stay so.

Grant's deal would have been big enough, but he was never gonna be comp pick eligible because he didn't reach the "Maximum Possible Term" on his deal. O'Donnell wasnt big enough. And yea not much chance to net any.

Do you have me blocked? Haha never. Just didn't read ahead. Looks like they didn't do much in that first year either. I guess it's just destined to be a first year GM thing. Ultimate conservative league. https://www.profootballrumors.com/2016/08/offseason-review-tennessee-titans-2016