NFL 2021 offseason thread

[Kyyle23]

It's very strange to me that Taysom Hill just received a 4 year 104 million extension.  Something tells me that him being in the game for the entire offensive game will translate differently than his sub packages for Brees

[Two-Gun Pete]

18 minutes ago, bmags said:

I do think it's moralistic. 

Ok, I disagree. But, I'll attempt to draw an MLB parallel to Seattle giving away Wilson.

 

Seattle trading away Wilson while they're in their competitive window to a conference foe would be like:

 

The SOX giving away Giolito right now to Seattle, while the SOX are in their competitive window.

 

See? It ain't moralistic, so much as the thought of giving away a #1 SP would be stoopud in the middle of a competitive window, especially to a league opponent.

It also ain't moralistic to give away a top QB in the middle of a competitive window, especially to a conference opponent. It would just be stoopud to do.

 

IMO, there's no "morality" involved, so much as it would be impossibly stoopid to do, in both cases. Its probably better and easier for Seattle, with all their cap space, to address some roster issues, while the aging Pete Carroll smooth things out with the HOF QB. (Seriously, Seattle has a metric fuckton of cap space to pick up FA this offseason.)

[SoxFan562004]

35 minutes ago, Kyyle23 said:

It's very strange to me that Taysom Hill just received a 4 year 104 million extension.  Something tells me that him being in the game for the entire offensive game will translate differently than his sub packages for Brees

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2021/03/14/taysom-hill-creates-7-75-million-in-cap-space-with-restructuring/

 

It's all fully voidable.  There's talk they'll still bring Jameis back. 

[Chisoxfn]

1 hour ago, Two-Gun Pete said:

1. Thank you for agreeing with me. However, I asked those questions in the hope that someone could convince me otherwise.

2. Carroll is a lot of things, but he ain't stupid. He also knows that his time coaching is finite, and he knows that Darnold is probably not good at football. So I think its more likely that he will use his love of culture to smooth things over with future HOFer Wilson, than it is for him to go 3-13 with noted scrub darnold to finish off his career.

3. Players are egotistical, and they say a lot of things through their agents. Who really gives a rip, until he himself says it?

 

This still feels like a pile of media-ginned up bullshit. 

I've long said I think Watson is a more likely target and the Watson market may not be as big as we think.  I don't think the Dolphins are going to be as aggressive as we might think - because I think their GM's are like - hey - we have all these picks - we can take multiple swings and be even better than getting Watson. Plus - I think with Watson not moving for a while - it probably will push down prices to some extent anyway.  But I also don't know that the Bears can wait that long - unless they play the game and literally don't blink.  

It will be interesting to see what happens with Winston / start of NFL free agency.  Things are going to move fast - so I could see momentum moving towards a deal with Wilson - as I presume Bears would want to know what is going on before jumping into free agency.  It also means if they like Winston - they would need to know and pivot pretty quick there as well.  

Now if the Bears options are really - move up and draft a QB or trade for a QB - that is a different boat - as it allows the front office more time on the decision making front.

Note: Well - I hadn't saw the Taysom Hill news - I presume that puts Winston at play.  The question here is - what does it say about Winston that Payton bet on the other horse?  

[bmags]

20 minutes ago, Two-Gun Pete said:

Ok, I disagree. But, I'll attempt to draw an MLB parallel to Seattle giving away Wilson.

 

Seattle trading away Wilson while they're in their competitive window to a conference foe would be like:

 

The SOX giving away Giolito right now to Seattle, while the SOX are in their competitive window.

 

See? It ain't moralistic, so much as the thought of giving away a #1 SP would be stoopud in the middle of a competitive window, especially to a league opponent.

It also ain't moralistic to give away a top QB in the middle of a competitive window, especially to a conference opponent. It would just be stoopud to do.

 

IMO, there's no "morality" involved, so much as it would be impossibly stoopid to do, in both cases. Its probably better and easier for Seattle, with all their cap space, to address some roster issues, while the aging Pete Carroll smooth things out with the HOF QB. (Seriously, Seattle has a metric fuckton of cap space to pick up FA this offseason.)

You aren't getting this. It has nothing to do as a comment on Seattle as much as the criticism among bears fans that are even against it as a hypothetical because it's "giving away the future". It is a comment on the NFL and the over the cap teams that are competitive being "wrong" when they didn't win a superbowl and the more conservative teams.

And regarding these basebally analogy you are just ignoring the fractured relationship/trade demand aspect. This isn't a team building exercise. No one is advocating that Seattle should trade Wilson because picks are better. They are saying it may be worth moving on, getting picks and $35 million of cap space back in future years than having a poisonous relationship between your top paid player and its coach. Especially when every single offensive play gets touched by that player, and he is the one leading the team on the field.

In Baseball, it would be like if Giolito demanded a trade after LaRussa hire, made it known unhappy, and the sox made it known that it was LaRussa's team. They have 3 years left, they don't have to trade him. But is it worth having a player make everyone miserable, and the player miserable? Other sports have shown teams move on in these situations. And a SP is not a Quarterback. It would be more like when James Harden demanded a trade, and had 3 years left, and the rockets were competitive, and had no reason to trade him, and the whole team was built around his skillset.

And then they traded him.

I think you've proven your point that you refuse to acknowledge the internal dynamics here, but everyone else doesn't have to.

[Balta1701]

59 minutes ago, Chisoxfn said:

I've long said I think Watson is a more likely target and the Watson market may not be as big as we think.  I don't think the Dolphins are going to be as aggressive as we might think - because I think their GM's are like - hey - we have all these picks - we can take multiple swings and be even better than getting Watson. Plus - I think with Watson not moving for a while - it probably will push down prices to some extent anyway.  But I also don't know that the Bears can wait that long - unless they play the game and literally don't blink.  

It will be interesting to see what happens with Winston / start of NFL free agency.  Things are going to move fast - so I could see momentum moving towards a deal with Wilson - as I presume Bears would want to know what is going on before jumping into free agency.  It also means if they like Winston - they would need to know and pivot pretty quick there as well.  

Now if the Bears options are really - move up and draft a QB or trade for a QB - that is a different boat - as it allows the front office more time on the decision making front.

Note: Well - I hadn't saw the Taysom Hill news - I presume that puts Winston at play.  The question here is - what does it say about Winston that Payton bet on the other horse?  

I don't believe there is a trade market for Watson, at least until August. The 2 sides are both going to push one to reveal that they're bluffing - either Watson is bluffing and he will not sit out the whole year, or the team is bluffing and they'll give in to a trade demand once Watson actually sits out. It could well be that neither is bluffing, and he "Leveon Bells" it the whole year and lets the team go 1-15. They're not even going to talk about him until they reach the point where he's actually holding out, it doesn't matter what you put on the table. If that's the case, then are you willing to sit there with your QB position unfilled through September and hope Houston gives in?

 

[Two-Gun Pete]

1 hour ago, bmags said:

1. You aren't getting this.

2. And regarding these basebally analogy you are just ignoring the fractured relationship/trade demand aspect. This isn't a team building exercise. No one is advocating that Seattle should trade Wilson because picks are better. They are saying it may be worth moving on, getting picks and $35 million of cap space back in future years than having a poisonous relationship between your top paid player and its coach.

3. I think you've proven your point that you refuse to acknowledge the internal dynamics here, but everyone else doesn't have to.

1. Oh, I get it. I just don't see how it is in any way "moralistic," so it isn't really worth discussing.

2. Pretty much all of what you posted in this part of your post is speculative.

The only "known knowns" about Wilson's issues in Seattle all center around him being hit too much, him being dissatisfied with the O-Line, and the offense overall. He hasn't said anything directly or indirectly about his relationship with Carroll.

Ya know, the sort of stuff a team with a metric fuckton of cap space could fix in FA. (Like the Seattle Seahawks!)

 

3. Yes, I refuse to engage in discussing all hypothetical "internal issues" that, IMO, just aren't in evidence here. Wilson doesn't want to be hit as much, and he wants some help on offense. For Seattle, these issues are more easily fixed than it would be to find another HOF QB.

So, I tried to get others to explain to us exactly why Seattle would want to trade Wilson away.

 

There hasn't been any direct and reliable reporting of Wilson having a problem with the organization, or having a problem with Carroll. Anything that has suggested these things is mere speculation. 

Edited March 15, 2021 by Two-Gun Pete

[Chisoxfn]

Roy Robertson Harris getting 14M guaranteed from the Jags.  This should be worth a 5th round comp pick next year (depending on whether the Bears sign someone that cancels this out).  

[bmags]

signs 16 year 600 million contract*

(*12 void years)

[scs787]

3 hours ago, bmags said:

signs 16 year 600 million contract*

(*12 void years)

I assume they have a plan to clear Watson/Wilson money, so if that doesn't pan out I'd love to add Williams. 

[Chisoxfn]

1 hour ago, scs787 said:

I assume they have a plan to clear Watson/Wilson money, so if that doesn't pan out I'd love to add Williams. 

Evidently some insider indicated Bears intend to add Williams and Wilson.  

[Tony]

I mean the Bears have pretty much painted themselves into a corner, no? You just restructured the Mack contract and I think I saw on PFF tonight that it indicates there is no way you can trade Mack now after doing that sort of deal. You franchised ARob. You re-worked other deals to give yourself more cap room....you can’t do all that and just bring back Foles. It doesn’t make sense. 

[Chisoxfn]

22 minutes ago, Tony said:

I mean the Bears have pretty much painted themselves into a corner, no? You just restructured the Mack contract and I think I saw on PFF tonight that it indicates there is no way you can trade Mack now after doing that sort of deal. You franchised ARob. You re-worked other deals to give yourself more cap room....you can’t do all that and just bring back Foles. It doesn’t make sense. 

Well - they aren't rebuilding - so I don't really think the Mack move hurt them much since reality was they weren't trading him this year anyway.  On Arob - if they wanted to - they could always trade him.  So I don't think they really did that much to mortgage the future - but your point on Foles has always been the case, but I think more are coming around to it - no front office/HC combo in position that Nagy/Pace is - is hitching there wagon to Foles at this point.  

I know there are some reports of Dalton - I guess maybe that could be true - but again - I don't see Nagy/Pace going out that way. I think they go with a Winston (who is a more upside guy than Dalton), a trade, or 1st round QB (most likely via a trade-up).  All 3 of those offer real upside (yes - bust risk too) - but they all are targeted big swings at the position - which with a hit dramatically alter the direction of the franchise.  

[Chisoxfn]

Winston & Fitzmagic both off the market. More and more rumblings indicating Dalton might be on Bears short list.  I don't get excited about him - I guess if I'm Nagy he's a massive upgrade over any QB Bears have had since he was HC - but he is nothing more than okay - again a major step up from Foles/Mitch - but still a long ways away from anything else.  

I honestly wouldn't have been that upset going that route + a potential pick entering the off-season but at this point - would be so hard after having fantasties of Watson/Mac Jones/Wilson.  

[bmags]

5 hours ago, Chisoxfn said:

Winston & Fitzmagic both off the market. More and more rumblings indicating Dalton might be on Bears short list.  I don't get excited about him - I guess if I'm Nagy he's a massive upgrade over any QB Bears have had since he was HC - but he is nothing more than okay - again a major step up from Foles/Mitch - but still a long ways away from anything else.  

I honestly wouldn't have been that upset going that route + a potential pick entering the off-season but at this point - would be so hard after having fantasties of Watson/Mac Jones/Wilson.  

confused by Mac Jones sandwich down there

[Chicago White Sox]

I don’t know how it would work financially, but Wilson + Williams would be insanity in a good way.

[bmags]

This dalton thing man.

I don't really think it's the bears thinking it is a solution, but there is one part I'm confused by: Foles salary.

Spotrac says he is $9 mill to get rid of vs $6 to keep. So some thought was maybe Dalton as backup would be cheaper than foles, but that's not easily apparent to me. There has been interest in foles as mentor, so we will see.

[Chicago White Sox]

Please god no

 

[Chicago White Sox]

 

[Chicago White Sox]

Adding Dalton and then trading for Wilson would be a terrible use of limited financial resources, so if Dalton does end up being our veteran addition I’m very confident they’ll be trading up to land a QB in the draft and probably Mac Jones.

[scs787]

Just now, Chicago White Sox said:

I don’t know how it would work financially, but Wilson + Williams would be insanity in a good way.

One thing I like about adding Rus is I read his contract can be restructured without discussion. I'm not sure how much kicking of the can the Bears should do but, its there. 

[bmags]

Interesting the way Biggs talks about the bears this offseason, as if all the info he is getting is agent-side/outside F.O.

[Chicago White Sox]

 

[Chicago White Sox]

I could live with Williams plus a Dalton / Jones combo at QB if the Seahawks are unwilling to trade Wilson, but damn would that be risky if you are Pace & Nagy.

[Balta1701]

Has something changed about Jones where the Bears could now be expected to get him in the draft without having to trade up substantially?