Future QB Discussion

[Heinz D.]

1 hour ago, WindyCity said:

He has made 3 significant moves at QB and all 3 have sucked.

Glennon was never going to be the guy. A lot of folks thought he deserved a shot at starting somewhere, though. Sure, they were wrong, but Pace wasn't on an island with that one, and the hope was that Glennon would at least be decent while Mitch held the clipboard and learned. So I suppose you're not way off by saying the move sucked, but it was a band-aid move with low expectations.

The Foles trade was totally understandable, and had the line protected him better (and the play-calling would have been more appropriate), I doubt you'd qualify the move as "sucking". The trade WAS a desperation move, though, and I've said that all along. There is no way that Pace should have been forced into a desperation move. Keeping Daniel and Bray on the roster for so long is just plain idiotic. 

52 minutes ago, G08 said:

My interpretation was that it's "known" that the Colts offered two second round picks plus a potential third or fourth.

The team he spoke to said that we (being the other team) made a better offer than the reported Colts offer.

I'm sure that's it. I was under the impression the Tweeter was an Eagles guy. (And if he really is an Eagles guy, he needs to work on his writing skills.)

29 minutes ago, RunningVaccs said:

I think Pace is setup to fail again this year, and I don't get why he's still here.  Either we cripple future drafts, or we get insanely lucky at pick 20 (or move and also get insanely lucky).  Do the Bears seem like a lucky team?

I have no idea why Pace, at the very least, wasn't fired. It's not as if the only mistake he's made was drafting Mitch. Last year's draft was absolutely moronic. All that being said, there is still a decent chance he can get the QB right this go-round. He's got a couple of really good offensive minds (plus whatever Nagy is) giving him advice now. I'm not at all worried about drawing from future drafts, either, as Pace's best attribute is getting quality guys late, or even UDFA.

23 minutes ago, WindyCity said:

Mitch was a bad pick.

But his development plan was moronic as well.

He spent his rookie year with Fox and the worst weapons in the entire world.

And if I remember right, we all pretty much gave Mitch a break because of that.

Still...if I were in Pace's shoes, there were enough bad aspects to Mitch's game that first year that I would have turned around and drafted a late round developmental guy the following year. And maybe the year after that, and so on...

Edited February 13, 2021 by Heinz D.

[BEAR FACE DOWN ARROW]

To your points about Glennon and Foles kinda making sense at the time, they're both also notable as gigantic overpays in terms of Glennon getting 18m a year and giving up draft capital for Foles when all the other FA QBs ended up released right after that. 

The only thing I really  fault in your post though is that the change of Pace getting the QB right now is "decent" I really think if it's Wentz, we're assuming he can be good again which is a big if.  If we stay at 20, we're assuming the Jones or whoever is going to be good, and there's a good reason that QBs we could get are still on the board... barring a huge trade we're getting a QB (or two) with big risks, just based on what the Bears are able to afford.  I understand you're saying there's a chance, but I think almost anything we do is more likely than not to flop. Best case: we get lucky. Second best case: we don't get lucky, but also don't give up too much future capital or salary. 

[AZBearsFan]

1 hour ago, Heinz D. said:

I'm becoming even more convinced that I'd rather they grab Darnold and/or Minshew than Wentz. The whole Wentz thing is too scary, too much of a gamble, imo. And Nagy isn't Frank Reich, who'd likely have more success anyway.

To me financials are the only reason (and 100% legitimately so) to consider Darnold or Minshew as lesser gambles than that of Wentz. He had 3 years of legitimate NFL success before last year. Darnold has had essentially no success at all in 3 years. Bad situation? Sure. But so was Mitch’s situation and he doesn’t get (nor deserve) a complete pass for it (and he’s been more productive than Darnold). To me acquiring Darnold is akin to acquiring Mitch of 12 months ago. I think that’s pretty meh.  Minshew to me just doesn’t have the ceiling. To me he’s a guy from whom you’re always going to be looking for an upgrade. That’s not really a solution to me. To me the financial risk on Wentz is acceptable because of the upside. I 100% understand if anyone thinks otherwise. 

[Heinz D.]

56 minutes ago, RunningVaccs said:

The only thing I really  fault in your post though is that the change of Pace getting the QB right now is "decent" I really think if it's Wentz, we're assuming he can be good again which is a big if.  If we stay at 20, we're assuming the Jones or whoever is going to be good, and there's a good reason that QBs we could get are still on the board... barring a huge trade we're getting a QB (or two) with big risks, just based on what the Bears are able to afford.  I understand you're saying there's a chance, but I think almost anything we do is more likely than not to flop. Best case: we get lucky. Second best case: we don't get lucky, but also don't give up too much future capital or salary. 

I wasn't as clear as I hoped to be. I meant that if the Bears move up in the draft the chance they land a good one is decent. (I think they'd have to move up to even be able to draft Jones or Lance.) 

I don't know how I'd qualify the chances of Wentz, Darnold, or Minshew working out in Chicago. If I was Pace, I don't think that is the direction I'd even go in. 

23 minutes ago, AZBearsFan said:

To me financials are the only reason (and 100% legitimately so) to consider Darnold or Minshew as lesser gambles than that of Wentz. He had 3 years of legitimate NFL success before last year. Darnold has had essentially no success at all in 3 years. Bad situation? Sure. But so was Mitch’s situation and he doesn’t get (nor deserve) a complete pass for it (and he’s been more productive than Darnold). To me acquiring Darnold is akin to acquiring Mitch of 12 months ago. I think that’s pretty meh.  Minshew to me just doesn’t have the ceiling. To me he’s a guy from whom you’re always going to be looking for an upgrade. That’s not really a solution to me. To me the financial risk on Wentz is acceptable because of the upside. I 100% understand if anyone thinks otherwise. 

I certainly get what you're saying. But Darnold's only 23, and Mitch's situation has been much better than Sam's. I've also seen Darnold make plays that Mitch could probably never make, so there's that, too. 

I'm alone on Minshew, I realize that. I'm not convinced he's bound for greatness, or anything, but he's done fairly well in a situation that isn't even that much better than Darnold's. I've seen folks peg him as having a weak arm, but it appears adequate from what I've seen. Minshew also seems to have a good set of intangibles, and his teammates absolutely freakin' love the guy. 

Edited February 13, 2021 by Heinz D.

[BEAR FACE DOWN ARROW]

21 minutes ago, Heinz D. said:

 

I'm alone on Minshew, I realize that. 

YUP

 

Anyway, I think I understand your point a lot better, and agree, that if we're going to trade any future capital I would like it to be on a drafted QB.  Any of the Bears options save Watson is a roll of the dice, but if you're playing for a rookie QB in the first round your chances of success aren't that different than the rookies we could trade for, plus you've got a younger player with less miles, on a cheaper contract for 5 years.  Anything to get the Bears out of this "You could probably make the playoffs if a couple things go right" quagmire 

[Heinz D.]

3 minutes ago, RunningVaccs said:

Anyway, I think I understand your point a lot better, and agree, that if we're going to trade any future capital I would like it to be on a drafted QB.  Any of the Bears options save Watson is a roll of the dice, but if you're playing for a rookie QB in the first round your chances of success aren't that different than the rookies we could trade for, plus you've got a younger player with less miles, on a cheaper contract for 5 years.  Anything to get the Bears out of this "You could probably make the playoffs if a couple things go right" quagmire 

A Wentz acquisition would almost definitely point to Pace thinking he had the problem solved, and the Bears playoff chances were good. Oof. Don't know about that...

I think if they get Darnold or Minshew, they HAVE to get another guy. Maybe Newman, if he falls. Make another trade for Eason, if the Colts end up with Wentz. Whatever. Just SOMETHING. You can't count on Darnold or Minshew to be the guy. If they got them both, that's cool. You're at least hedging your bets that way. 

[WindyCity]

The Wentz money is a big problem. We are going to have to redo his deal, Mack, Fuller, Hicks and Jackson to be functional.

[AZBearsFan]

1 minute ago, WindyCity said:

The Wentz money is a big problem. We are going to have to redo his deal, Mack, Fuller, Hicks and Jackson to be functional.

I ran some numbers last night I may post later and was able to get us an additional ~$46M in cap space with new deals for Hicks, Mack and Fuller, cuts of Graham, Massie, Skrine and Wims and a small restructure for Whitehair with nothing that overly compromises us in the future financially. You could tweak Wentz’s deal very easily in a way to which I doubt highly he’d object (pay this year’s $10M guaranteed roster bonus split 50/50 this and next year instead with no other changes) reducing his hit this year by $5M. That leaves us ~$30M to retain ARob and fill out the roster pre-draft. It’ll be tight for sure but can be done, especially if they do a contract with ARob over the tag. 

[Heinz D.]

45 minutes ago, AZBearsFan said:

I ran some numbers last night I may post later and was able to get us an additional ~$46M in cap space with new deals for Hicks, Mack and Fuller, cuts of Graham, Massie, Skrine and Wims and a small restructure for Whitehair with nothing that overly compromises us in the future financially. You could tweak Wentz’s deal very easily in a way to which I doubt highly he’d object (pay this year’s $10M guaranteed roster bonus split 50/50 this and next year instead with no other changes) reducing his hit this year by $5M. That leaves us ~$30M to retain ARob and fill out the roster pre-draft. It’ll be tight for sure but can be done, especially if they do a contract with ARob over the tag. 

Can we hire you as GM? 😉

[WindyCity]

1 hour ago, AZBearsFan said:

I ran some numbers last night I may post later and was able to get us an additional ~$46M in cap space with new deals for Hicks, Mack and Fuller, cuts of Graham, Massie, Skrine and Wims and a small restructure for Whitehair with nothing that overly compromises us in the future financially. You could tweak Wentz’s deal very easily in a way to which I doubt highly he’d object (pay this year’s $10M guaranteed roster bonus split 50/50 this and next year instead with no other changes) reducing his hit this year by $5M. That leaves us ~$30M to retain ARob and fill out the roster pre-draft. It’ll be tight for sure but can be done, especially if they do a contract with ARob over the tag. 

If you tag Arob that leaves 12 million dollars to sign 10-12 players and then 4-5 million for our draft pool.

It isn’t tight. It is razor thin.

[WindyCity]

Whatever Glennon was meant to be. He was a horrendous evaluation. We paid a bad backup QB 18 million dollars to start 4 games 

[G08]

6 minutes ago, WindyCity said:

Whatever Glennon was meant to be. He was a horrendous evaluation. We paid a bad backup QB 18 million dollars to start 4 games 

I still think it was misdirection, but at this point it doesn't matter.

[Sugashane]

I'd imagine Pace and Nagy try to make the Wentz deal or go with a rookie that they choose together.

Nagy is a .500+ HC because of mediocre QB play with a solid team to take pressure off him. I'd imagine that they are forced to take that approach again unless they overpay for Wentz. 

[Heinz D.]

1 hour ago, WindyCity said:

Whatever Glennon was meant to be. He was a horrendous evaluation. We paid a bad backup QB 18 million dollars to start 4 games 

I don't get this post. Yeah, the move failed. But does Glennon count against this year's cap, or something? 

[Sugashane]

2 minutes ago, Heinz D. said:

I don't get this post. Yeah, the move failed. But does Glennon count against this year's cap, or something? 

Hes talking about Pace's terrible history of QB evaluation and overall choices at the position.