Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
WindyCity

The Last Ride of Mitch Trubisky Offseason

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, dll2000 said:

https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/free-agents/san-francisco-49ers/ says he is and you can pluck practice squad players if you roster them.  Bears can do it now.  

 

 

Mullens is an exclusive rights free agent (ERFA) meaning that if the 49ers tender him, which they will since it's a 1-year non guaranteed salary at the veteran minimum, then there's no chance he can sign with any other team.

If Bears want Mullens they'd have to either trade for his rights or wait until he becomes a UFA the following year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, topwop1 said:

Mullens is an exclusive rights free agent (ERFA) meaning that if the 49ers tender him, which they will since it's a 1-year non guaranteed salary at the veteran minimum, then there's no chance he can sign with any other team.

If Bears want Mullens they'd have to either trade for his rights or wait until he becomes a UFA the following year.

2 years. He would be a RFA after.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, WindyCity said:

2 years. He would be a RFA after.

@topwop1

Yeah, but then 49ers have to match whatever you offer.  ERFA, which I didn't know, is basically he gets a 1 year raise but stays with team if they want him.  Kind of a crap deal for player.   I guess if you want Mullens you would have to trade for him.  

You can just have Lauletta now though.  You just have to claim and roster him.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, dll2000 said:

@topwop1

Yeah, but then 49ers have to match whatever you offer.  ERFA, which I didn't know, is basically he gets a 1 year raise but stays with team if they want him.  Kind of a crap deal for player.   I guess if you want Mullens you would have to trade for him.  

You can just have Lauletta now though.  You just have to claim and roster him.

 

 

They could give him a 2nd round tender and then it costs you a 2nd round pick if they don't match.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, WindyCity said:

They could give him a 2nd round tender and then it costs you a 2nd round pick if they don't match.

Yeah, but its doubtful they put a 2nd round tender on a back up QB. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/21/2019 at 2:59 PM, topwop1 said:

That's why I am not sure about Nate Stanley in the 5th.  Give me a guy like Jake Fromm over him.

Stanley won't last until the fifth. Not even close. And you should watch them both play before stating such a clear preference for Fromm. Stanley has clearly displayed a knack for high difficulty passes far beyond Fromm. (Although I'm not saying Fromm is bad.)

1 hour ago, big_palooka said:

Najee Harris in round 5? Raiders forum is hoping he last until the 3rd so we have a shot on him lol

There's a lot of projection and reasoning in this thread thus far which is simply OFF. 

Keenum should ABSOLUTELY not be an option for the Bears, for example. 

Edited by Heinz D.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Heinz D. said:

Keenum should ABSOLUTELY not be an option for the Bears, for example. 

Be a hell of a back up,  but I absolutely agree otherwise. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Heinz D. said:

Stanley won't last until the fifth. Not even close. And you should watch them both play before stating such a clear preference for Fromm. Stanley has clearly displayed a knack for high difficulty passes far beyond Fromm. (Although I'm not saying Fromm is bad.)

There's a lot of projection and reasoning in this thread thus far which is simply OFF. 

Keenum should ABSOLUTELY not be an option for the Bears, for example. 

Prepare yourself. Unless they want to invest serious money that is what you can afford for competition for Mitch.

If they still have faith in Mitch, which they probably do, are they really going to invest 17-20 million in another QB.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, WindyCity said:

Prepare yourself. Unless they want to invest serious money that is what you can afford for competition for Mitch.

If they still have faith in Mitch, which they probably do, are they really going to invest 17-20 million in another QB.

Oh, I totally get that you're basing this all on them giving Mitch another chance, and this isn't really the path you would choose if you were calling the shots. And right now, that's probably the most thought provoking/conversation starting way to go about looking at the issues. 

I simply don't know that they truly have faith in Mitch anymore. They may still have hope--they'd like him to succeed. But, whether Pace should ultimately be fired in the near future or not, I'd think that he'd realize that he needs another viable option at QB. I don't think Keenum represents that. I'd take Keenum over Daniel as a backup, but that's only if there was a solid #1 guy in the mix. 

Edited by Heinz D.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Heinz D. said:

Oh, I totally get that you're basing this all on them giving Mitch another chance, and this isn't really the path you would choose if you were calling the shots. And right now, that's probably the most thought provoking/conversation starting way to go about looking at the issues. 

I simply don't know that they truly have faith in Mitch anymore. They may still have hope--they'd like him to succeed. But, whether Pace should ultimately be fired in the near future or not, I'd think that he'd realize that he needs another viable option at QB. I don't think Keenum represents that. I'd take Keenum over Daniel as a backup, but that's only if there was a solid #1 guy in the mix. 

I think a lot of the haze around what Pace/Nagy think about Trubisky will be addressed not only by his play the remaining 6 games of this season but in the postmortem presser they will give us at the end of the season.

I think it's not only in their best interest, but our franchise's best interest as well for them to allocate resources to protect the QB/improve the running game (OL) and add threats to the offense to take pressure off the QB (TE/WR improvement). I think we'll see our money and draft resources go there.

In terms of backup QB... I think Mariota / Tannehill make a lot of sense but it will boil down to $$$. Truthfully, if Mitch hasn't proven himself by the end of 2020, we'll have a high draft pick in 2021 and it will be a QB so I almost think you just ride-or-die with the kid unless you think one of these younger FA QBs could be your franchise.

 

Such a ******* mess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  



×