Alaskan Grizzly

I’m sorry, Nate Sudfeld? What? Isn’t the idea for a QB trade to get someone who competes with Trubiksy, not be worse than Daniel?

You got my vote!

But Leno will be starting next year so... ?

As an aside, my fav TE prospect Thaddeus Moss, just announced he’d be having surgery on a broken foot. Bummer. And of note; Missouri TE Albert Okwuegbunam ran the fastest 40 for a true TE at 4.49 (and he’s 258# - yikes!!) With Claypool potentially playing TE and a few other bright spots I’m fairly confident the Bears will be able to find a good TE in the draft if they choose to go that route. Paying for someone like Hooper might be too costly. https://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2020/2/27/21156683/2020-nfl-combine-results-wide-receiver-tight-end

Not sure I totally agree. For one, when you get rid of both Patterson and Cohen you lose pretty much your starting return specialists. And although Patterson is not Hester he still can give our team favorable field position whenever he’s out there returning. He’s been doing it this long (3 time pro bowler at it) I think he’s still got one or two more years left in him. And I still think Nagy is underutilizing him in the offense. I’d like to see him develop more plays with him in the mix. Second, trading players away because the Patriots do it isn’t a great practice. For one, you said it yourself the Bears aren’t a perennially great team. And they’re not in a true rebuild mode (yet) where I think trying to trade your good players for value makes more sense. I’d agree that trading Floyd and Cohen would make sense right now. Because neither is contributing enough in their respective positions that their losses would be as noticed. Trading Patterson right now (IMHO) not so much.

I’m with Mad. His ‘flash’ in the pan has certainly flamed out...or at least seems to be headed that way. Hes not on the same level as a Hester or Deion when it comes to returning. They both had side to side elusiveness and speed where Cohen is just straight line speed, which diminishes quickly as you get older.

Null

Upon further review, found this article on Floyd’s marketability. It makes a compelling case to try and keep him. https://beargoggleson.com/2020/01/07/chicago-bears-finding-a-market-for-leonard-floyd/

I went with the trade option and would say 1a is cut, like what you outlined. Still intrigued by the concept of having JPL as an end rusher. But like you said, there are players like Beasley out there too who could easily outproduce Floyd. Speaking of cast offs...heard rumors that Fangio might be interested in bringing Amukamara over to help his D out. What's to say he might not be interested in adding Floyd as a rotational player? Not sure how the price tag would affect that but they are familiar with one another.

I'm going with option C (1/2 in). I think they bring in true competition and either keep him as a starter for year 5 or backup, depending how year 4 pan out.

Thanks both AZ and Adam for explaining. The idea of waiting until May and knowing you can still get out of it in year 5 makes sense. I just was curious by the phraseology of “5th year option” and whether you had to commit or not. And if you did, why do it prior to year 4? Your explanation of Pace’s tact with regards to Mitch and his options also makes a lot of sense. AZs point of Carr as a possibility still rings true to me too. Especially if the Raiders are able to convince Brady to come to them. Many dominoes will fall if he makes that move. I still think regardless, the Bears need to make a play for Carr if they can.

He said he would still be calling plays. To be honest I’m still not sure adding Lazor and DeFillipio will be all that beneficial. IMHO I’m not overly impressed with either of them. They were both fired from their previous jobs; DeFlip from his last two.

I guess I don’t really understand the fifth year option when you say it doesn’t have to be decided on until May. I assume that has something to do with the season calendar but why would you want to say whether you’d commit to his fifth year before going into his ‘make or break’ 4th year? If you commit to that 5th year too early then aren’t you stuck with him that 5th year? Regardless of how he does this coming year? ?

Which I strongly prescribe to. However that’s even flawed. Look at Mariota, look at Vince Young, look at a whole slew of USC starters; Booty, Sanchez, Barkley and Leinart. With Trubisky; I think part of his fatal flaw is he didn’t have that multi year starter career in college. Sure he did well when he started but for some reason he couldn’t supplant Marquise Williams. Why is that? Since coming to the league he hasn’t had much help from Nagy. Especially with not playing in both of the last two preseasons and some of the play-calling since then. I still think the Bears would benefit from adding a QB in the draft. It doesn’t have to be one of the top 5 for this year but maybe one whose at least had more than one season of starting experience.

There's analytics and then there's over-analytics. I'm not an engineer so all the numbers make for a mind-numbing affair to make sense of it all. It seems to me (as he alludes to in the QB data piece) that ..."the NFL Draft largely remains a total guessing game." You have players like Brees who are not the 'protypical' NFL QB at 6'4 plus and has easily had a very successful NFL career where his Combine results were anything but successful. His college stats weren't bad (in fact Trubisky did better his senior year than did Brees) but again probably weren't a true indicator of his NFL potential. Conversely, Brady wasn't even a starter until his Junior year, and again his college stats were even less stellar. And we all know although he did participate in the Combine his performance there wasn't enough to raise him any higher than a sixth-round draft pick. And what about arm strength and velocity as a measure? Look no further than Jay Cutler (himeself a first round pick) to know that talent doesn't necessarily translate to success on the big stage. Of this year's prospects, we could just as easily say those that are at the high end of the draft board have as just a chance to succeed/fail as those at the other end. "Experts" be darned.

But why not? What if they get someone they find out is better at running the offense and understanding ‘football 200’? What if that person is able to do it before the season starts? Are WE concerned with making Pace look bad?

Yeah, saw an interview on NFL Network with Kyle Long (not sure how old the interview was). But they started to talk about potential QBs coming to Chicago and he cut them off to say the team needed a POWER running game. And that although both current backs (Montgomery and Cohen) are great scat backs, they still needed that power running game. When asked if Jordan Howard was that guy Long stopped short of saying yes. But instead said he’s a great back and he’s not currently on the team. And that the answer is “out there somewhere”.

So my typing DANG IT then explaining how I understood him not coming to the Bears because he cost so much means I “walked back” my thoughts? Wow...just wow. I’ll try this again. Yes I would have liked to have seen him come back to Chicago (why I said DANG IT). At the time I didn’t know he would cost as much as he did. I don’t really pay attention to all that . But once I saw how much I realized it didn’t make a lot of sense. Not with all the other issues on the team. Your counter-claim to me was not about that at all. You said he was an injury risk. I didn’t agree to the level you did. His talent, to me, outweighs what you perceive as an extensive injury history. Which he does not have. Yes he has had a rough two years but who on the Bears TE grouping is better than he with talent and lack of injury history?

Agreed. He seems like a perfect U or Y TE (whichever catches more). The little they used him late in the season and out of the slot or in trips he almost always got at least 10ish YACs.

I will if or when I am. ?

Too bad for both Gabriel and Amukamara. Injury and age ended up getting the best of them. Good luck to them both and thank you for your service. FWIW between Gabriel and Miller I’d have chose Gabriel every day and Tuesday. (And no I’m not saying they made a bad choice in releasing Taylor - I’m just sayin).

So we wait two more years to see if Trubisky works out? The defense doesn’t have that long a shelf life. We’ll be lucky if Mack and Hicks will be around that long. I suppose it comes down to tom-AY-to, tom-AH-to.

I’d be cool with Dalton as a 1a option. Something about Keenum I just don’t trust/like. And you mentioned McCarron who’d be an intriguing 1b option.

Sorry to disagree but Tennessee did it last year and it worked for them.

First thing; I have to get me one of those jackets. Second thing; is he doing this show in front of a green screen? And lastly, when he listed his number one as Carr (and all the reasons why) i stopped watching. All he’s done is convince me that Carr is the best option if not to compete with Trubisky, to replace him. I especially took notice of his comparison to what the Titans did with Mariota and Tanehill last year. You make good points about the rest of the QBs you listed. I especially like the idea of Moore and Smiths familiarity of this offense but also believe Smith may not be able to physically play again and Moore to me is more similar to our current back up Daniel. If you look at the total package with money involved, this also helps these two. But again, Carr to me is the best option...right now.