Jump to content

Bears could be interested in trading too much for Khalil Mack


cooters22

Recommended Posts

23 minutes ago, spilltray said:

Play maybe, but limited snaps and probably not much opportunity for impact.

He’s gotta have a contract first, right?

...unless the agent just faxes a contract for a 35 mil signing bonus and 23 mil per and it is signed without further discussion.

(edit) Okay...so he has a contract. But will he play for the Bears when he wouldn’t play for the Raiders under those terms.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well damn! That isn’t the news I wanted to wake up to. Good move by the Bears, you get an impact all pro when you can, don’t seen much downside for them. If Trubisky is a hit for them, he will be able to make them contenders for the next 3-4 years. If he isn’t, then they still have to find their guy anyways. Green Bay needs to be able to generate pass rush to play in this division.

In a way the trade helps the Packers this season. I feel good with Bakhtiari and Bulaga at tackle, Lewis able to block in line, and the interior to hold together. Who shouldn’t feel as comfortable is Kirk Cousins, that is an offensive line that can be assaulted and if the Bears steal one or both of their games against the Vikings that could be the difference in playoff seeds.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, packfanfb said:

I just hope Gute went after it hard and the Bears simply offered something crazy. If we find out Gute only offered one 1st and we could have had him for 2, it'll be a huge mistake.

I disagree about the huge mistake part, as it depends on how Gute's drafting is over next year with a draft that is supposed to be loaded with edge rushers, and now they can get two one for Wilkerson and one for Matthews replacements if they're not resigned.

But I completely agree that I hope the Bears offered something crazy, because the more they gave up, the more this move would hurt them.

2 hours ago, Gopackgonerd said:

I foresee everyone blaming Gute for not getting him either way lol. 

I agree... the GM seems to get blamed no matter what. Even if the move (in general, not specifically talking about the Mack deal), but even if the move turns out bad in the future, the GM still gets a lot of blame in the moment and rarely do they get praise after the NON-move turns out to be the smart move.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, RaidersAreOne said:

I want Mack to kill it and was initially pulling for the Bears. But screw that, we need top picks ASAP.

There's a chant and song you guys can use for the next two years, I've got in trouble for posting it here before but the Bears are the subject of said song, them continuously doing something is the descriptive wording used to describe the verbiage which is them sucking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...