Jump to content

Bears could be interested in trading too much for Khalil Mack


cooters22

Recommended Posts

Just now, packfanfb said:
2 minutes ago, JBURGE said:

I totally disagree with this. The Jets are on the first year of their 5 year window with a QB on a rookie deal who could be legit. This is exactly what they should be doing

Too early. You have no idea whether Darnold is Carson Wentz or Ryan Leaf. You make a move for a guy like Mack when you're knocking on the door, not when you first discovering whether you even have a QB. 

The rest of their roster is already behind, so I still think it's the right time. If Darnold sucks you draft another QB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Packerraymond said:

They were 7th and 7th according to pro football reference in JJ's two dominant years. No idea where your numbers came from, but if you're using years he was hurt or still developing kind of pointless.

7th isn't exactly elite. And that further proves my point. Even with Watt at his best, he could only carry that defense so far, much less the team

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, cannondale said:

Your every post mentions QB's. That's not the discussion. Of course Rodgers is worth QB money. I'm saying Mack isnt.

 

Your posts have said that when Rodgers is great and our defense is bad we havent had a great team, and then when the Texans QB is were awful and their defense good, they didn't have a good team.

As simply as I can put it, if we get Mack and have Rodgers, we will have a good defense and a very good offense, that's usually a very dangerous combo and worth paying for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, packfanfb said:

Watt's deal is all relative to the timing. Donald just got what, $24 mil a year? What would Watt get tomorrow? 

I don't think Donald signed yet.  I didn't see any reports that he did anyway.  Now there is talk the Rams may need to trade Donald.  Should we start a Packers may be interested in Donald thread?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, eyecatcher said:

I don't think Donald signed yet.  I didn't see any reports that he did anyway.  Now there is talk the Rams may need to trade Donald.  Should we start a Packers may be interested in Donald thread?

Give me Mack over Donald. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, eyecatcher said:

I don't think Donald signed yet.  I didn't see any reports that he did anyway.  Now there is talk the Rams may need to trade Donald.  Should we start a Packers may be interested in Donald thread?

And why is that you think the Rams would trade him ?

My opinion is that unless your name is Lawrence Taylor or Reggie White, it's just not good value. I think its a trend for good reason. Paying anyone QB money without getting QB impact is not money well spent

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, cannondale said:

And why is that you think the Rams would trade him ?

My opinion is that unless your name is Lawrence Taylor or Reggie White, it's just not good value

I don't think the Rams will trade him.  I saw an article saying the Rams may eventually need to trade him.  To be fair I didn't read the article and it is from 49ersNation so it probably as accurate as the National Enquirer is on Celebrity news. 

How far into LT'or White's career before they got that status?  You are talking about two guys that were the most dominate guys in their time.  I'd argue that Donald and Mack are the most dominate right now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, packfanfb said:
10 minutes ago, eyecatcher said:

I don't think Donald signed yet.  I didn't see any reports that he did anyway.  Now there is talk the Rams may need to trade Donald.  Should we start a Packers may be interested in Donald thread?

Give me Mack over Donald. 

For our roster yes. If I were starting a new team I would take Donald 100%, but with our roster construction Mack makes more sense

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, eyecatcher said:

I don't think the Rams will trade him.  I saw an article saying the Rams may eventually need to trade him.  To be fair I didn't read the article and it is from 49ersNation so it probably as accurate as the National Enquirer is on Celebrity news. 

How far into LT'or White's career before they got that status?  You are talking about two guys that were the most dominate guys in their time.  I'd argue that Donald and Mack are the most dominate right now.

Maybe the game has changed. Maybe its harder for defensive guys to take over games as LT and White did. I dont know. I just feel strongly that giving a guy QB money without having QB impact is not money well spent. Thats been my simple argument all along

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Packerraymond said:

They were 7th and 7th according to pro football reference in JJ's two dominant years. No idea where your numbers came from, but if you're using years he was hurt or still developing kind of pointless.

Defensive points against.  All his dominant years, skipping injured, starting in 2015, going down to 2012.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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




×
×
  • Create New...