Jump to content

Raiders, Bears Reach Agreement on Khalil Mack Trade


ramssuperbowl99

Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, Packerraymond said:

This makes the Bears better, which sucks a lot, but with no firsts for at least 2 years, now paying out a franchise QB like contract while their QB is on a rookie deal, I don't see them surpassing us and Minnesota.

Mack seemed like an all in move for a contender. Multiple first rounders for a team who wasnt expected to contend doesnt make sense.

I don't entirely agree with this.  It has been proven many times over that Defense wins championships.  It wouldn't be the first time a young player at QB helped lead a team to the Super Bowl.  I'm not saying that is a guarantee to happen but this greatly changes the landscape of the NFCN defensively, the Bears definitely have the best front 7 in that division now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, wwhickok said:

I don't entirely agree with this.  It has been proven many times over that Defense wins championships.  It wouldn't be the first time a young player at QB helped lead a team to the Super Bowl.  I'm not saying that is a guarantee to happen but this greatly changes the landscape of the NFCN defensively, the Bears definitely have the best front 7 in that division now.

They have the best single player in any front 7 sure but overall as a unit I'd still put the Vikings front 7 ahead of the bears.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Matts4313 said:

Well, now think about it from the Raiders perspective. 

If you want a top five defensive player in the NFL, you've gotta pay him. That's the whole point of the rookie scale. If not, trade him and hope your draft picks can even sniff that level of play.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, bucsfan333 said:

With Trubisky making peanuts for the foreseeable future, it doesn't matter what Chicago pays Mack.

Well I mean this is going to be a franchise QB size deal, so essentially they'll have a QB sized contact on the cap. A team like Chicago I would've sprinkled that money around to lots of FAs and used what should be a top 15 pick again this year.

Like I said in the Packer forum, had he gone to a contender, a Mack deal is like pushing all your chips in with suited face cards. For the Bears feels like they pushed their chips in with 6-8 off suited.

I think they can be .500 this year, but I still don't see that defense anywhere near as good as Minny. That offense is no where near as good as GB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, wwhickok said:

I don't entirely agree with this.  It has been proven many times over that Defense wins championships.  It wouldn't be the first time a young player at QB helped lead a team to the Super Bowl.  I'm not saying that is a guarantee to happen but this greatly changes the landscape of the NFCN defensively, the Bears definitely have the best front 7 in that division now.

Nope, I'll take that Vikings front seven by a landslide. Not even close. Yuck I can't believe I'm defending the Vikings....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Elky said:

The Raiders made the only decision they could make. If they paid Mack what he's worth, then a big chunk of their cap is going to him and Derek Carr.

Raiders did this to themselves.

I mean just look how much money they have tied up into their o-line, particularly their interior.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On that note I'm not sure if the Bears were in a great position to make this deal since we're talking about a team with a lot of holes, but for a team with a current championship window two firsts would definitely be worth it for Mack if you could twist the cap numbers around enough to keep him.  If the Steelers could wrangle up the cap space I'd consider 2 Firsts+another pick a bargain and start scheduling time off work in January.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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




×
×
  • Create New...