Lucky Luciano

But the idea that Caleb not giving medicals is why Justin didnt get more value? That's nonsense. Poles needed the medical but then traded Fields anyway before the medical? That whole narrativer already was proven false today. here is a thought... not a single team in the nfl see's fields as a starting qb after 3 years in the league. potential? steelers think so and it's at a bare minimum cost to them especially now they have an aging qb's backup via injury or to possibly run trick plays. it's a smart move by the steelers AND a smart move by the bears too: a) get anything in return for releasing him. why would the bears want a split locker room or fan base in any sense of the word by keeping him? flus most likely was also consulted on this move and agreed. b) the bear organization respected fields enough that he was traded to a team with the BEST option for him to succeed and one he was 'probably' receptive to. if you are to believe what poles said about doing right by justin, he just proved it. this helps in our future for player acquisitions in free agency or even signing draft picks. it builds TRUST. that is worth losing a future 3rd round pick for next year (a value of 4th round this year). c) if fields succeeds in the future that in itself is great. he is a good kid. with the steelers this is a solid franchise for fields to either become a starter or reach his potential as a backup. there is NO WAY this was a bad move by chicago. they avoided a MAJOR gamble by keeping fields and hoping he turns out better than the entire NFL believes at this moment in time and losing the chance to draft the best prospect at qb in years. this is a win/win situation for all three parties involved. us keeping fields and hoping to trade him in the future to some crap team with a downed qb or hold him for a year in limbo to get a comp pick is surely is not in fields best interest. poles did it RIGHT.

california is a 'smokey' state. hmmmm

yeaaaaa i'm caleb ONLY or bust at least in my mind. it HAS to be him no matter what. add that to all the other non-information from you and.... dude, i am LAUGHING at you.

wow... according to your theory poles is just another same ole same ole GM we have had in chicago since finks. win now so i can keep my job. give the suckers some faux hope with high priced/aging free agents guaranteed to turn it around and we can worry about the future some time in the future. LOL also just for curiosities sake... how long do YOU predict these wonder players we will be drafting in exchange for our #1 pick will take to become all-pro players (or for that matter even GOOD)? what is the average for ANY position to become acclimated to the NFL at a consistent HIGH all-pro level? i guess nobody ever thought of that huh?

https://www.nbcchicago.com/investigations/chicago-bears-new-stadium-plan-shifts-to-publicly-owned-domed-stadium-on-museum-campus-source-says/3378910/

Caleb has talent but there's still a risk with any QB drafted. Much worst consequences with the first pick. Poles knows he has to win this year. OK. are you saying that there is no or minimal risk picking more non-QB player/players as long as you don't use the #1 pick? is that what you are really saying? so to 'reduce' the risk of lower picks being a bust, do you draft the same player position with all your draft picks? otherwise what sense does that make? Draft Williams knowing QBs usually struggle their first year and get one more blue chip player at 9. Your next pick is 75. Starters are more likely in round 1 +2 than later in draft. WR or Edge? so poles is going to figure it will take too long for a drafted qb to help the team he thinks has to win NOW (not a year or three from now) to keep his job? drafting edge or wide receivers is his goal to keep it? if that's the case he is surely the wrong man for the GM spot in chicago. Trade back to 2, draft capital. Trade back again and have 9 and a 10 to 15 pick. You can draft Verse or Latui and Brian Thomas plus get 2 to 3 second round picks. Draft Zach Frazier, OG-OT and maybe a QB prospect. Another WR? A Brandon Fiske? Jaylen Wright? so GAMBLING on more draft 'capital' is the solution to winning a superbowl? more WR's, G's, DE's etc. and hope they turn out average at the worst? If Poles believes Williams is the guy, he will take him and keep trading back for more picks. What if he doesn't? No one has that answer. i already know the obvious, just tell me the incredibly obvious. The second option wins more games than drafting a rookie QB. Stroud was an outlier, that rarely happens. who gives two shites if we win more games? there is only ONE game i want to win consistently!

let's put all this into perspective. let's say you have one of the following qb's on your roster and had coaches that knew what to do with them: joe montana; steve young; dan morino, tom brady, brett favre, john elway, payton manning, aron rogers. you have a chance to trade with another nfl team for an all-pro/pro-bowl LOT, an all-pro/pro-bowl WR AND an all-pro/pro-bowl DE straight up for those three players. which qb would you trade in this scenario? then tell me how long you could keep them in this salary cap age.

so just for the record... are you saying that you would draft a franchise quality receiver instead of a franchise quality quarterback if you needed both? that being said, do i assume that fields is a franchise quality qb to you?

there are 38 numbers to play. every single number you play (no black/red even/odd) has the exact same chance to win. just because you would play 5 numbers doesn't make each number a better odd to win.

uhhh so what? who cares what he says. if fields doesn't turn the corner moore ain't gonna offer himself up free of charge in a trade for us to move up to draft another one. if we trade fields to some crap team will he volunteer to go along?

bryce young huh? at 5'10"? i don't remember anyone calling him a generational talent before the draft. do you?? the 'odds' of every single player picked is the same in the range of what round and position you pick them. the odds that you have a better chance at a player being good is a sliding scale for each and EVERY player. just because you pick MORE doesn't mean any single one has better odds or a better chance to be an excellent player in the NFL. take a thousand dollars and go to vegas and play some roulette with your system. let me know how it works out.

agree. think on this... what players that we could pick if we trade down are considered once in 10 YEARS + quality according to ANY experts? who are these once in a lifetime players further down in the draft? if they are that good according to any analysis why are they NOT considered the top picks in the draft? would ANYBODY rather draft a franchise WR over a franchise QB? i can't even imagine it.

1. some people believe williams is too much of a risk to pick with the overall #1. he could be a bust. 2. these same people believe we should trade down and get a plethora of draft picks AND pick a lesser qb. i just gotta ask.... what makes these picks you will accrue any different from the williams pick? according to that theory, they could ALL be busts right? if you deem williams the best qb in this qb heavy draft why in the H E double hocky sticks would you NOT pick him and roll the dice that we will have a high end qb that will beat the good/accomplished qb's in our own division for a freaking decade? isn't that what this is all about? being at LEAST good enough to win the division each year to get us a SHOT at a supberbowl and WINNING IT? having a solid team that maybe makes it to the playoffs every 5 years or more as a wildcard or even rarer win our division and has an even rarer chance to win a superbowl is just not enough. it's some kind of glutton phobia some are having. for god's sake we have TWO top ten picks!!! they want to trade out of the rarest of the rare situation to land that key player that moves this franchise into a yearly contender and for what? didn't the 85 bears teach these people ANYTHING? the 85 team had all-pro/HOF players on both sides of the ball (remember this was prior the cap) yet what did they lack? a freaking QB (after mcmahon's career was stolen from him, and also a good coach i might add) to win those tight games. if we couldn't do it with that team it's insane to believe we could do it in the salary capped NFL of today!!!

wow, it sure would for me. how could you pass up the best qb in a great qb talented draft when you are holding all the cards? yikes!! listened to the phil simms video on williams. haven't seen him that animated since the 85 bears defense ran him into the ground in the playoffs.

that is true in a sense but.... 1. certain FA primo players can play into their late 30's especially offensive and possibly defensive linemen. so for instance, to drop a primo left tackles contract because you don't have the cap space is seriously dangerous in building a winning long term franchise. 2. even if you release those aging primo players, you HAVE to replace them. so if you rely on FA that's another major cap problem. if you rely on the draft, you have forced yourself to pick redundant positions to cover the loss years in advance. and if you miss on them what next? you are back to day one of drafting a player in the first or second round or using creative cap financing for a primo FA and that all comes due eventually when you borrow against the future.

if you keep cutting or trading your primo players they have to be replaced. the only option in that scenario is acquiring much less talented FA players to fill their spots while the rookies you HOPE turn out good and drafted high again figure it all out. SO, you either hope to hit the lottery in the draft in lower rounds or you have to pick more top 50 rated players to fill their spots. with a three year, as would be normal, for a rookie to start showing the quality you hoped to get by drafting him. if you miss on these newly drafted players you get from a trade/cut etc. you are stuck with 2nd or 3rd rate quality starters. for me, especially if you are building a team through the draft, you can stagger the big paydays for the high end players that turn out. otherwise if half your quality starters all come due at the same time there is no way you can have a roster that can win you superbowls.

here's the thing, ANY top end free agents will likely sign for a 4-5 + year contract. if you end up with all of these trade down first and second round picks THEIR rookie contracts will come due in that 4-5 year span. how could we possibly afford that in the cap? say all of these top two round picks pan out to be very good to excellent players. we would never be able to resign the top end free agents AND these players when their rookie contracts come due. we just couldn't afford that many contracts for high end players coming due all at once. add to this, if any believe that fields is going to be a high end qb, HIS contract will come due at the same time as the rookies and high end free agents. we would be in cap hell and have to CUT half the players we traded down to get, release the high end free agents we signed and/or release our starting qb.

they absolutely CAN'T trade down further than #2 and then ONLY if washington tells you who the pick is and it's not the one you were going to pick at #1 as your top choice. any further down and you risk your target qb (no matter who he is) will be picked before you get a chance to grab him. that's dumb management. if he is good enough to pick in the top 5 and considered the best qb in the draft then there is no way you gamble he will be there when you pick.

i CERTAINLY hope this is the year to pick the franchise qb. the first overall pick is a gift that we just can't use to stock up on filling the roster. look at it this way, we would have been happy getting a top 10 pick (#9). that we have two is just gravy and we have to pull the trigger on it to go for the franchise high end qb. is he guaranteed to become a franchise player? of course not but if you use that as a yardstick as to how to approach this they you would NEVER pick a top 10 qb. you go for broke. even loading up on first round picks if we traded down is going to cause a lot of cap troubles that will all come due at the same time. how would we pay for them in 4 years from now? it's doubtful we could even KEEP what we drafted this year if they all turn out good+ players. so stocking up with first and second round talent has serious drawbacks in our future team.

i gotta disagree. i HATE the cowboys with a passion but aikman was an excellent qb who in my opinion does belong in the HOF. the reason the stats are so skewed is because of emmit smith and the offensive line. he didn't HAVE to light it up every game. the boys running game was exemplary.

ditka was a BAD coach. unless what we had was a complete disaster he would be one of my last choices. with the talent ditka had at that time to only win one sb is almost criminal. you talk about flus making errors costing games? ditka was the master at that. he is probably the most over rated coach in nfl history who won a superbowl on jim finks and buddy ryans shirt tails.

draft the future franchise qb. then... use baggette as you say or if he turns out looking like i THINK he could you then have a good+ qb in bagette and then can make the decision to either keep him and trade the draft pick or trade baggette for some really nice draft picks. this is how the packer org. operated. think of the qb's they drafted and traded for good draft picks or premium players all the while favre was in the fold. you then got something out of fields, a franchise prospect and a possible good+ qb in bagette. if you keep fields for that purpose you will REALLY divide the locker room and fans and make it much harder for transition of your new qb.

SIGN HIM!! my word is law

Bow down before the one you serve You're going to get what you deserve just do as 'I' say.

i AM the GM. just agree without fail to every thing i say without question. i KNOW best. us GM's do.