NFL 2021 offseason thread

[StrangeSox]

I think if Pace and been fired and a new GM came in and made this same move as their first shot, there'd be even more support and excitement.

Edited April 30, 2021 by StrangeSox

[bmags]

So I just want to be real and clear.

I loved Fields and really, really was amazed when it became clear there was a possibility bears could get him without needing to go up to like 4. That really only happened a few weeks ago.

He played the top competition, started for multiple years, and has a tantalizing package of arm strength, accuracy and mobility. It's the kind of guy you go after.

But, if he does fail, it is likely due to struggling to read coverages and decisionmaking. That is also most quarterbacks. But I also think this criticism is too harshly applied to Fields mainly because he was one of the few QBs to have lots and lots of reps over multiple years for teams to adjust. 

Can I think of a QB who succeeded despite questions around their decisionmaking and ability to read coverages? Yes, his name was Deshaun Watson, and he was also getting crushed with similar comments. I don't think people accurately remember pre-nfl draft chatter about Watson, but Bears fans online weren't enamored at all with him. They wanted jamal adams. He had poor ball placement, and made bad decisions. Would just pull the ball down after his first read. Mahomes could get through progressions but was critiqued for his field vision and decision making.

He succeeded, and it doesn't mean Fields will. 

Fields was in an offense that prioritized the deep ball, and there were reasons why fields processed the way he did. He had some examples of really missing how teams were disguising coverages, but also incredible examples of reading what happens and taking advantage. He will need to improve and if he doesn't he'll fail.

There's no guarantee Fields is great. There's no guarantee on any of these guys. But after the last 5 years, if you haven't revised your views on what is necessary for QBs to succeed you are overconfident.

Josh Allen was crushed. Nobody with accuracy that poor could succeed. He improved it. Kyler Murray/Mayfield are succeeding despite height. Lamar Jackson became accurate downfield over an offseason.

[scs787]

Just now, bmags said:

I like him because he's one of the few that people think could be an LT.

Just watched his tape from the Senior Bowl and I'm sold on him now too. 

 

Walker Little would be an interesting pick if they can trade down. He may even be there in the 3rd. 

[Balta1701]

7 minutes ago, Two-Gun Pete said:

Yeah. The other poster to whom I replied posted, "take a shot," not ,"drafted." (Shrugs)

It isn't just "one QB drafted" that leads me to want regime change. Its the fact that they've been bad at their jobs for years, leading to bad teams each season. Leading to fall/winter sucking out loud for we the fans.

I look forward to regime change, because this regime has been embarrassingly incompetent. I doubt that this move will work out, because every single one of the preceding QBs acquired has sucked out loud. Because Pace is a garden variety mediocrity. That said, as a fan I hope Fields beats the odds.

 

As an aside, the NFL's front offices lag those of MLB and the NBA, in terms of being led by highly-educated and highly-qualified GMs and Team Presidents. Ryan Pace has a (snicker) marketing degree from EIU. Which can help explain why stoopid decisions keep happening by his FO.

Pace has earned that toxicity and it is remarkable that he has kept his job. Fields hasn’t. Hate for Pace doesn’t mean this was the wrong move. Frankly, I expected the Bears to come out of this draft with no QB as that would have been the biggest way to foul it up. This was clearly the right move even if the cost is high, and if Fields busts then the next GM will be trying for a QB in 3 or so years.

Incidentally, we still see some pretty bad decisions in the other sports. I will take a GM with a marketing degree and Tatis back.

[Two-Gun Pete]

24 minutes ago, bmags said:

So I just want to be real and clear.

I loved Fields and really, really was amazed when it became clear there was a possibility bears could get him without needing to go up to like 4. That really only happened a few weeks ago.

I cant disagree with any of this. I like Fields, and I believe that, in the RIGHT SITUATION, with competent coaching, and the RIGHT compliment of talent around him, and a competent front office, Fields can be a good NFL QB.

I'm just not sure that this will occur here. There's still only 1 skill position player who would definitely start for another team. The O Line isn't as strong as others. The play calling has sucked. And the defense is aging.

So, while we all look hopefully to his tenure here, we'll have to see how it goes.

19 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

Pace has earned that toxicity and it is remarkable that he has kept his job. Fields hasn’t. Hate for Pace doesn’t mean this was the wrong move. Frankly, I expected the Bears to come out of this draft with no QB as that would have been the biggest way to foul it up. This was clearly the right move even if the cost is high, and if Fields busts then the next GM will be trying for a QB in 3 or so years.

Incidentally, we still see some pretty bad decisions in the other sports. I will take a GM with a marketing degree and Tatis back.

I have much more vitriol for front offices, who have months and years to decide what to do with their rosters, than I would ever have for an individual player.

So, I don't blame Trubisky for sucking at football. I blame the stoopid GM for overpaying to overdraft him, then having a shitty bridge QB ahead of him, then rushing him into service before he might have been ready.

I dont blame Leury for sucking at baseball. I blame the front office for not bothering to find a better player who can cromulently play multiple positions. Or building versatility into the roster.

So yeah, I agree that we as Chicagoans have had to enjoy the fruits of stupidity for years.

Edited April 30, 2021 by Two-Gun Pete

[bmags]

19 minutes ago, scs787 said:

Just watched his tape from the Senior Bowl and I'm sold on him now too. 

 

Walker Little would be an interesting pick if they can trade down. He may even be there in the 3rd. 

Yeah, his injuries are a little worrisome but I'd yolo him. It's very frustrating with the OL guys, really hard to get good info on who is a tackle vs. guard. Seeing a lot more on Eichenberg is a better guard, then you'll have someone just be fan of the talent and that they could play tackle or guard. 

I think I like Brady Christianson too.

[CentralChamps21]

Some thoughts:

I didn't think there was any scenario in which I thought I'd be OK with the Bears drafting a QB, but Fields falling to 11 wasn't something I considered. I can be OK with this, only if the Bears get a T/G with their 2nd round pick. Would love Eichenberg but don't think he will still available and clearly the Bears don't have the ammo to trade up again. Cosmi, Mayfield and Banks would be my next tier of guys I'd like to see. There is zero chance Fields can be successful this year without a really good addition at T/G. If the Bears go elsewhere with this pick, then they might as well call 2021 a rebuilding year and let Dalton start. Even with next year's first round pick gone, the positions in the other rounds matter so might as well tank.

Can't believe Owusu-Koramoah is still available. Jags are going to get a Top 20 talent in the 2nd round.

I don't get the Niners trading up to pick Lance when Fields and Jones were still available. Seems very Trubisky-esque.

[T R U]

1 minute ago, WhiteSoxFan1993 said:

Some thoughts:

I didn't think there was any scenario in which I thought I'd be OK with the Bears drafting a QB, but Fields falling to 11 wasn't something I considered. I can be OK with this, only if the Bears get a T/G with their 2nd round pick. Would love Eichenberg but don't think he will still available and clearly the Bears don't have the ammo to trade up again. Cosmi, Mayfield and Banks would be my next tier of guys I'd like to see. There is zero chance Fields can be successful this year without a really good addition at T/G. If the Bears go elsewhere with this pick, then they might as well call 2021 a rebuilding year and let Dalton start. Even with next year's first round pick gone, the positions in the other rounds matter so might as well tank.

Can't believe Owusu-Koramoah is still available. Jags are going to get a Top 20 talent in the 2nd round.

I don't get the Niners trading up to pick Lance when Fields and Jones were still available. Seems very Trubisky-esque.

The Niners traded up over a month ago, how would they possibly know those guys would still be on the board? Fields went 11 anyways so they would have still missed him had they stayed.

[bmags]

2 minutes ago, WhiteSoxFan1993 said:

Some thoughts:

I didn't think there was any scenario in which I thought I'd be OK with the Bears drafting a QB, but Fields falling to 11 wasn't something I considered. I can be OK with this, only if the Bears get a T/G with their 2nd round pick. Would love Eichenberg but don't think he will still available and clearly the Bears don't have the ammo to trade up again. Cosmi, Mayfield and Banks would be my next tier of guys I'd like to see. There is zero chance Fields can be successful this year without a really good addition at T/G. If the Bears go elsewhere with this pick, then they might as well call 2021 a rebuilding year and let Dalton start. Even with next year's first round pick gone, the positions in the other rounds matter so might as well tank.

Can't believe Owusu-Koramoah is still available. Jags are going to get a Top 20 talent in the 2nd round.

I don't get the Niners trading up to pick Lance when Fields and Jones were still available. Seems very Trubisky-esque.

I feel good at guard, Whitehair was great when moved to G last year and we'll have daniels back. I'm a mustipher believer. But if we can improve upon Ifedi or lord above, Leno, that's huge.

[CentralChamps21]

6 minutes ago, T R U said:

The Niners traded up over a month ago, how would they possibly know those guys would still be on the board? Fields went 11 anyways so they would have still missed him had they stayed.

I guess I got confused about where they traded up from. Still, I think going all the way up to 3 was the worst possible value decision. Could have gotten same or equal QB closer to 10.

[Marqhead]

Question, I assume the answer is no. Fields was there at 11, was there a scenario where he was still there at 20? Or was it almost a guarantee that someone trades up and takes him or the Pats take him at 15?

[T R U]

14 minutes ago, WhiteSoxFan1993 said:

I guess I got confused about where they traded up from. Still, I think going all the way up to 3 was the worst possible value decision. Could have gotten same or equal QB closer to 10.

As a Dolphins fan, I loved their decision to trade up to 3 ?

[bmags]

3 minutes ago, Marqhead said:

Question, I assume the answer is no. Fields was there at 11, was there a scenario where he was still there at 20? Or was it almost a guarantee that someone trades up and takes him or the Pats take him at 15?

No way to know for sure, but there was a rumor last night that the vikes would have considered him at 14, we don't know what the pats chart would have been, and there are teams like the raiders that would be possibilities. Also Washington a possibility.

[Soxbadger]

16 minutes ago, Marqhead said:

Question, I assume the answer is no. Fields was there at 11, was there a scenario where he was still there at 20? Or was it almost a guarantee that someone trades up and takes him or the Pats take him at 15?

Impossible to tell. But it seems really unlikely. There are some people who feel Fields was the #2 QB prospect and a lot of people who consider him #3. Given that Lance went #3 it was hard to imagine Fields dropping out of the top 10. Strange things happen, but I just dont see anyway that the Bears at 20 could have gotten him. 

[chw42]

32 minutes ago, bmags said:

No way to know for sure, but there was a rumor last night that the vikes would have considered him at 14, we don't know what the pats chart would have been, and there are teams like the raiders that would be possibilities. Also Washington a possibility.

I'm sure BB would have taken Fields if he was there.

[Chisoxfn]

2 hours ago, Two-Gun Pete said:

Ok, so just since Cutler, this GM took the following shots:

1. Was the only GM who believed that Mike Glennon was a starting-caliber QB (and paid him more than Cutler would have made),

2. Moronically took a shot at Trubksky,

3. Took a shot at giving up a draft pick, for the rights to overpay Nick Foles,

4. Overpaid for Dalton to the tune of $10MM (helping to fuck up the salary cap, & ushering Fuller out the door), 

5. And now this with Fields.

 

I'd say that they take plenty of shots at QB. They simply take stoopid shots at QB, because Pace is a stoopid human being. I dont mind this move, so much as I hate that a garden variety mediocrity like Pace gets chance after chance to prove how wrong he can be.

If any of us were as bad at our jobs as Pace and Nagy are at theirs, we'd all be on fucking food stamps. Some of us would be in jail.

That said, here's hoping Fields can beat the odds, and be a Pace-acquired QB that can be adequate at football. We'll have to see.

No one thought Glennon, Foles or Dalton are LT solutions. Maybe - there was a - 1 in 100 scenario where Glennon takes a bit step forward, since he was young and not terrible in limited playing time.  Those were all stop-gap measures.  None of these moves were permanent LT fits.  They were risk mitigation moves in general. Not saying they were good moves - the Foles one - is still the one that irks me the most.  

I don't blame Dalton for the Fuller loss - because quite frankly - they could have dumped Graham and kept Fuller - so it feels more like the Bears just decided that based upon the dialogue they were ready to go seperate ways. Not a move I would make - but if you know you are adding a young QB (or hoping to) - maybe it isn't crazy cause you know that by time your young QB is ready - you'll need a younger DB anyway.  I don't know - probably grasping for straws here and I still say I would have kept Fuller and dumped Graham. 

But with a young QB - long term, maybe a vet like Graham is still worth his weight in gold from that standpoint - and in the development of Kmet.  

[Two-Gun Pete]

51 minutes ago, Chisoxfn said:

1. No one thought Glennon, Foles or Dalton are LT solutions. Maybe - there was a - 1 in 100 scenario where Glennon takes a bit step forward,

2. since he was young and not terrible in limited playing time.  Those were all stop-gap measures.  None of these moves were permanent LT fits.  They were risk mitigation moves in general. Not saying they were good moves -

3. the Foles one - is still the one that irks me the most.  

 

4. I don't blame Dalton for the Fuller loss - because quite frankly - they could have dumped Graham and kept Fuller .

1. Just a year ago, this same moronic FO decided that, instead of pursuing other FA QBs with better CVs, (ya know, like some guy named "brady"), OR waiting for Foles to be cut, and then sign him for the league minimum, that they should spend a draft pick for the right to pay him. They told us that they'd rather have Foles than the guy they drafted 2nd overall. On Glennon, they paid him MORE than Cutler was about to earn. And on Dalton, they negotiated against themselves to overpay him.

Now, whether you or I think/thought that any of these piles of shit were LT solutions, this FO certainly behaved as though some of these guys would/could have been.

2. THIS was the guy they decided to sign to a $45MM contract. He was never "not terrible" at football. It is laughable that this guy still collects a paycheck now. It was laughable THEN that anyone could think that he could/should have been a starting QB. He sucked then, he sucks now. He was a bad choice by a bad front office, full stop. 

3. By the time Foles was signed, I'd already shifted gears to "let's fire everyone" mode; but to your point, it was a moronic choice.

4. The loss of productive players for salary relief is a symptom of a stoopid FO led by a stoopid man. Failing to master the roster economics of the NFL, and to properly asset allocate is further proof of Pace's ineptitude. And that's setting aside that Fuller is what, top 5 at his position, while the dessicated remains of Jimmy Graham is "just a guy" at his?

I cant disagree that I would have cut Graham and kept Fuller. But I also wouldn't have offered Dalton more than ~$5-6MM, given that NO OTHER TEAM was tied to him.

Fuck, you just made me more irritated at this stoopid front office!

Edited April 30, 2021 by Two-Gun Pete

[ShoeLessRob]

Soooooooooo why is Dalton on this team? If they had an idea they were going to draft a QB in the first or second to groom, why not just throw Foles out there to be a bridge? They have to  trade or release Foles right? Didn't he just get a contract bonus or some shit. 

[bigruss]

6 minutes ago, ShoeLessRob said:

Soooooooooo why is Dalton on this team? If they had an idea they were going to draft a QB in the first or second to groom, why not just throw Foles out there to be a bridge? They have to  trade or release Foles right? Didn't he just get a contract bonus or some shit. 

It's tough for fans as we'll never like the answer.  The fact we let go Fuller and opened up a hole on the roster is even more infuriating.  But again, we'll never be satisfied with a response from Pace on this.

[The Beast]

3 hours ago, Two-Gun Pete said:

Ok, so just since Cutler, this GM took the following shots:

1. Was the only GM who believed that Mike Glennon was a starting-caliber QB (and paid him more than Cutler would have made),

2. Moronically took a shot at Trubksky,

3. Took a shot at giving up a draft pick, for the rights to overpay Nick Foles,

4. Overpaid for Dalton to the tune of $10MM (helping to fuck up the salary cap, & ushering Fuller out the door), 

5. And now this with Fields.

 

I'd say that they take plenty of shots at QB. They simply take stoopid shots at QB, because Pace is a stoopid human being. I dont mind this move, so much as I hate that a garden variety mediocrity like Pace gets chance after chance to prove how wrong he can be.

If any of us were as bad at our jobs as Pace and Nagy are at theirs, we'd all be on fucking food stamps. Some of us would be in jail.

That said, here's hoping Fields can beat the odds, and be a Pace-acquired QB that can be adequate at football. We'll have to see.

Sorry I didn’t satisfy you with my wording. I should have said drafted and I am referring to more Bears GMs than just Ryan Pace.

Edited April 30, 2021 by The Beast

[StrangeSox]

10 minutes ago, ShoeLessRob said:

Soooooooooo why is Dalton on this team? If they had an idea they were going to draft a QB in the first or second to groom, why not just throw Foles out there to be a bridge? They have to  trade or release Foles right? Didn't he just get a contract bonus or some shit. 

Same reason they signed Glennon in 2017 before drafting Mitch!

 

 

(Ryan Pace is generally bad at his job even if he seems to have made a very good move yesterday)

[champagne030]

16 hours ago, Soxbadger said:

Fields it is, you get the guy who was considered so good at the college level that last years #1 transferred because he was going to be the back up.

Mac Jones probably dinged for athleticism. Fields can cover up a lot of the Bears oline weakness.

Joe Burrow transferred because Dwayne Haskins was named the starter.  Fields was still at Georgia when Burrow transferred.

[Balta1701]

6 minutes ago, StrangeSox said:

Same reason they signed Glennon in 2017 before drafting Mitch!

 

 

(Ryan Pace is generally bad at his job even if he seems to have made a very good move yesterday)

Did they even have another QB on the roster in 2017? They overspent on Glennon but signing someone was necessary.

[Jack Parkman]

Andy Dalton is on this team because the Bears didn't actually think they'd be able to get a QB in this draft. I'm sure that if they actually thought they could get Fields from where they were, Dalton wouldn't be here and Fuller still would. 

[Two-Gun Pete]

1 hour ago, The Beast said:

Sorry I didn’t satisfy you with my wording. I should have said drafted and I am referring to more Bears GMs than just Ryan Pace.

Nah, I don't want to be the guy who picks nits. I misunderstood your previous post, and I think it's fair on your part to want a team to more regularly make attempts to draft a QB.

 

That said, when your GM has a career negative WAR compared to competent GMs, its like giving Leury or Hamilton more PAs than they deserve. And when your negative WAR GM fucks up other acquisitions, and has to re-do positional upgrades, here we are as a Fandom.

52 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

Did they even have another QB on the roster in 2017? They overspent on Glennon but signing someone was necessary.

Well, they coulda, ya know, kept the franchise's all time passing leader for less money than they squandered on Glennon. But, reasons. Oh, and that all time passing leader wasn't nice to the media or something.

So yes, setting aside that there was a better player here, and on less money who could have been a bridge QB, yes, Mike Glennon was an ABSOLUTE NEED for those geniuses.