beardown3231 Posted March 4, 2020 Share Posted March 4, 2020 I seriously don't know why the Bears aren't rumored to be in on Brady. The receivers are decent, TE is lacking but it'll be addressed, OL stinks but this guy could actually make line checks and adjust things, and the D is great. Of course it's a long shot but the fact that "Brady" and "Bears" aren't being mentioned in absurd. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abstract_thought Posted March 4, 2020 Share Posted March 4, 2020 1 minute ago, beardown3231 said: I seriously don't know why the Bears aren't rumored to be in on Brady. The receivers are decent, TE is lacking but it'll be addressed, OL stinks but this guy could actually make line checks and adjust things, and the D is great. Of course it's a long shot but the fact that "Brady" and "Bears" aren't being mentioned in absurd. The Bears have no intention of replacing Mitch. The only guys that will come here are the ones who can’t find a guaranteed starting job. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beardown3231 Posted March 4, 2020 Share Posted March 4, 2020 1 hour ago, abstract_thought said: The Bears have no intention of replacing Mitch. The only guys that will come here are the ones who can’t find a guaranteed starting job. And that's the unfortunate thing Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soulman Posted March 4, 2020 Share Posted March 4, 2020 4 hours ago, AZBearsFan said: I don’t buy the SF/Brady rumor at all. But... Should we wanna trade for a 28-year old guy who just took his team to the Super Bowl yet is being dumped by his team for a 1-2 year rental? That should give pause, no? By nearly every measurable statistic Garoppolo was better than Brady in 2019, and he’s 15 years younger. That should give pause too, no? I'm not biting on the SF rumor either. But if Garopollo was available in trade I'd be interested. Would have preferred to have traded for him back in 2017 before we drafted Mitch. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
topwop1 Posted March 4, 2020 Share Posted March 4, 2020 1 hour ago, soulman said: I'm not biting on the SF rumor either. But if Garopollo was available in trade I'd be interested. Would have preferred to have traded for him back in 2017 before we drafted Mitch. Garoppolo is basically a more seasoned Trubisky. If we are going to trade high draft capital for a QB then he damn well better be really good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
topwop1 Posted March 4, 2020 Share Posted March 4, 2020 2 hours ago, beardown3231 said: I seriously don't know why the Bears aren't rumored to be in on Brady. The receivers are decent, TE is lacking but it'll be addressed, OL stinks but this guy could actually make line checks and adjust things, and the D is great. Of course it's a long shot but the fact that "Brady" and "Bears" aren't being mentioned in absurd. Chicago is and probably always will be where QBs go to die. Brady better off staying in NE than coming to Bears Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AZBearsFan Posted March 4, 2020 Share Posted March 4, 2020 10 minutes ago, topwop1 said: Garoppolo is basically a more seasoned Trubisky. If we are going to trade high draft capital for a QB then he damn well better be really good. That’s the whole point. If SF, the team who knows most about what Garoppolo is and can be, thinks he’s really good then he won’t be available. It’s really that simple. If he’s made available to give Brady a Montana/Chiefs tour then they think he’s average. It’s really that simple. I don’t wanna trade for average Garoppolo any more than I want to trade for average Carr. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soulman Posted March 4, 2020 Share Posted March 4, 2020 3 hours ago, topwop1 said: Garoppolo is basically a more seasoned Trubisky. If we are going to trade high draft capital for a QB then he damn well better be really good. He got SF to the Super Bowl. How much "gooder" does he have to be? LOL I'm not certain what peoples expectation for a QB are but this much seems to be true. It cost you far less to trade for one than it cost us to trade for Mack yet a QBs impact overall is just as great if not greater. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soulman Posted March 4, 2020 Share Posted March 4, 2020 I believe it's safe to say a comment like this puts a final nail on the coffin of a trade for Carr or any other potential day one starter. ESPN's Matthew Berry talked to a Bears insider at the NFL Combine, and it sounds like Chicago's starting quarterback job is Trubisky's to lose at this point. I asked a Bears insider who will be under center for the first play of the 2020 season. The answer? "Mitchell Trubisky, and it's a handoff." And then they laughed. The expectation is the Bears will bring in a veteran to compete with or back up Trubisky, but while the leash is short, it's still Mitch's job for now. General manager Ryan Pace made it clear that the Bears will be bringing in quarterbacks this offseason, which only makes sense considering Trubisky is currently the only quarterback under contract in Chicago. Whether that quarterback is Dalton or another experienced veteran like a Case Keenum, it sounds like the Bears will give Trubisky one last chance to prove everyone wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dll2000 Posted March 4, 2020 Share Posted March 4, 2020 (edited) 14 hours ago, beardown3231 said: I seriously don't know why the Bears aren't rumored to be in on Brady. The receivers are decent, TE is lacking but it'll be addressed, OL stinks but this guy could actually make line checks and adjust things, and the D is great. Of course it's a long shot but the fact that "Brady" and "Bears" aren't being mentioned in absurd. Because if you were Brady and you could pick to play indoors in LV in its inaugural season. Outdoors in TN or LA vs. outdoors in Chi. Or indoors in Indy. What would you pick? LV has 2 first round picks, better TEs, better RB and better OL. TN has better WRs, better TE, better OL, better RB and a first round pick. It seems every other of those teams can offer more money as well. How can Chicago compete with that? Come here and play behind what was a really bad O line in 2019, one proven good WR, no TEs, for less money in crappy weather. Of yeah, we have no first round draft pick to add top rate talent and if we sign you we have no money for FA help. But hey the defense has some good talent. Common Tom you know you want to. Edited March 4, 2020 by dll2000 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beardown3231 Posted March 4, 2020 Share Posted March 4, 2020 (edited) 26 minutes ago, dll2000 said: Because if you were Brady and you could pick to play indoors in LV in its inaugural season. Outdoors in TN or LA vs. outdoors in Chi. Or indoors in Indy. What would you pick? Do you really think Brady cares about weather? He went to Michigan and just played a billion years in Massachusetts. LV has 2 first round picks, better TEs, better RB and better OL. Yeah, I bet Brady is factoring in those 1st round picks! TN has better WRs, better TE, better OL, better RB and a first round pick. Tennessee may be losing the TE you speak of, and that RB is going to get a ton of money from (most likely) another team in 3 weeks. It seems every other of those teams can offer more money as well. The Bears can offer as much as any other team. What a meaningless statement. How can Chicago compete with that? Come here and play behind what was a really bad O line in 2019, one proven good WR, no TEs, for less money in crappy weather. Did you not read what I said? They're obviously going to improve the OL and TE spot. Of yeah, we have no first round draft pick to add top rate talent and if we sign you we have no money for FA help. No top rate talent ever comes from the 2nd round on, yeah! But hey the defense has some good talent. Common Tom you know you want to. "Some good talent." Yeah, just some. Never did I say Brady would definitely come to the Bears, but the fact that the Bears- as far as we know- aren't involved with his courting is absurd to me. Edited March 4, 2020 by beardown3231 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dll2000 Posted March 4, 2020 Share Posted March 4, 2020 1 minute ago, beardown3231 said: Because its viewed as absurd that he would want to come here. Or they know he wouldn't from talking to his people. Or they feel they can't afford him and field a competitive team. So they don't embarrass themselves trying. Just because you can play in bad weather doesn't mean you wouldn't rather play indoors or in good weather. A lot of people from Illinois eventually move West or South because of taxes and weather. Why wouldn't you factor in two first round picks in a stacked WR class? That is added talent that can make a real difference offensively. Tennessee has more offensive talent top to bottom than Bears. Objectively. They have also had a lot of high picks in recent years. It isn't clear to me at all that Bears can pay Brady upwards of 30 million and also improve O line and TE with top FAs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
topwop1 Posted March 4, 2020 Share Posted March 4, 2020 8 hours ago, soulman said: He got SF to the Super Bowl. How much "gooder" does he have to be? LOL I'm not certain what peoples expectation for a QB are but this much seems to be true. It cost you far less to trade for one than it cost us to trade for Mack yet a QBs impact overall is just as great if not greater. I disagree that HE got them to the SB. IMO he rode on the strengths of a really good OL and skill position groups (RBs, TEs, WRs) plus a great defense. If Mitch was the QB in that offense it wouldn't be crazy to think that they would have still gotten far and potentially made the SB just because of the strong supporting cast that would be around him and Shanahan's brilliance with his offensive scheme, plus the great D like I mentioned. I also believe that Garoppolo didn't rise to the challenge in the big game. There were plays to be made and he didn't make them when they had the Chiefs by the jugular. Shahanhan can also be blamed for his weird play calling, but Jimmy could have been better. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
topwop1 Posted March 4, 2020 Share Posted March 4, 2020 12 hours ago, AZBearsFan said: That’s the whole point. If SF, the team who knows most about what Garoppolo is and can be, thinks he’s really good then he won’t be available. It’s really that simple. If he’s made available to give Brady a Montana/Chiefs tour then they think he’s average. It’s really that simple. I don’t wanna trade for average Garoppolo any more than I want to trade for average Carr. This is my same argument for trading for Derek Carr. Why would Bears value these guys way more than the teams that currently employ these QBs. Simply put, in my mind if they are really good franchise QBs then they wouldn't be me made available. And if people are going to use the argument that they are willing to give up on those players for a potential upgrade such as a Brady, then shouldn't the Bears be looking to do the same instead of taking the other team's scraps? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WindyCity Posted March 4, 2020 Share Posted March 4, 2020 7 minutes ago, topwop1 said: This is my same argument for trading for Derek Carr. Why would Bears value these guys way more than the teams that currently employ these QBs. Simply put, in my mind if they are really good franchise QBs then they wouldn't be me made available. And if people are going to use the argument that they are willing to give up on those players for a potential upgrade such as a Brady, then shouldn't the Bears be looking to do the same instead of taking the other team's scraps? The working assumption in this is that all teams involved have a similar level of talent at QB. The truth is that some teams "scraps" are much better than Mitch and would provide an upgrade to the Bears even if they are not considered to be a franchise QB by their current teams. Yes, the Bears should pursue Brady up until the point that he looks at the offensive roster and the picks and cash the Bears have and laughs Pace off the phone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.