Bears 2022 Wide Receiver Watch

[soulman]

26 minutes ago, abstract_thought said:

I see arguments for either position:

Keep Pace:
He drafted Fields, he has the most familiarity with many existing players who are either up for new contracts or could be cut, and he has relationships with the existing staff, scouting department, and ownership.

Fire Pace:
He's not created a winning team over many years, he's had several high-profile failures, he's not shown a knack for hiring coaches, and the 2022 roster situation can be seen as a carte-blanche for a new GM who wants to rebuild.

Yup, there are positives and negatives on either side of this debate.

I'm not as much in favor or retaining Pace as I'm predicting that's what GMcC and Teddy Bears are likely to do.  Unless they already have top GM prospect lined up to take over January 10th they have little choice but to keep Pace as GM to lead the search for a new HC.  Pace's popularity with fans has also been submerged but by tossing in Nagy's firing as "red meat" they'll continue to slither by as they always have.  What other choice do rabid Bears fans have but to accept their decisions and they know this too.

[abstract_thought]

4 minutes ago, soulman said:

Yup, there are positives and negatives on either side of this debate.

I'm not as much in favor or retaining Pace as I'm predicting that's what GMcC and Teddy Bears are likely to do.  Unless they already have top GM prospect lined up to take over January 10th they have little choice but to keep Pace as GM to lead the search for a new HC.  Pace's popularity with fans has also been submerged but by tossing in Nagy's firing as "red meat" they'll continue to slither by as they always have.  What other choice do rabid Bears fans have but to accept their decisions and they know this too.

Another thing to consider is that they can start the coaching search early but IIRC they cannot interview GMs until the season is over. So if they want a new GM's input on a coaching hire, Bears could be forced to wait while other teams interview and offer HC jobs.

[soulman]

17 minutes ago, abstract_thought said:

Another thing to consider is that they can start the coaching search early but IIRC they cannot interview GMs until the season is over. So if they want a new GM's input on a coaching hire, Bears could be forced to wait while other teams interview and offer HC jobs.

They can only begin HC interviews if they fire Nagy or inform him that he will not be retained before week 17.  The first is not as likely as the latter.  If they really plan to replace Ryan Pace I believe we would have heard at least some kind of rumors floating around and we have not.

I don't believe they'll put themselves in a similar position to what they had to deal with after firing Emery and Trestman simultaneously due to the pressure of having to act as quickly to secure both positions at once.  It backfired on them quite obviously as far as pairing Fox with a much younger Ryan Pace who had a wholly different idea of how the Bears should be built around a much more modern passing offense.  They really can't afford to make that same mistake again.

So the bottom line is not whether we can trust Pace to hire another HC but rather do they trust him to do that.  IMHO they do somewhat because they have to but also due to Pace having shown he'd learned from his mistakes.  Yes, he drafted Mitch and not Mahomes and yes he hired Nagy but that was four and five years ago.  I believe they'll look more at what he's been able to accomplish more recently especially in his last two off seasons and drafts.  Fields and the two OTs will help.

The other reason I believe they'll retain Pace is that psychologically they will not want to be seen as endorsing another complete tear down and rebuild like Pace walked into.  Not when we have the contracts on the books that we do and far too few draft picks to do a full reboot.  Pace and his personnel guys know the roster pretty well and I believe some players will thrive much better when not playing for Matt Nagy and somehow trying to remain productive in a scheme that simply doesn't work.

I know many blame Pace for this roster but in all honesty can anyone tell what some of these guys are capable of when playing in Nagy's offense?  Players who have been more productive elsewhere have come here and floundered or they simply aren't being used correctly or in some cases at all.  The list over the four years of Nagy's reign is pretty extensive and I've even highlighted one or two each year who Pace brought in and they failed playing for Nagy whereas they did not fail elsewhere.

So there's a limit to just how much blame I'm willing to lay on Pace other than some of the foolish decisions he's made keeping vets around who should have been released or had their replacements drafted sooner than they were.  But is he has learned from those mistakes then maybe he is the right guy and we avoid another GM who'll have his own mistakes to make as well before he gets in synch with the teams needs.  I have no answers.  Only educated guesses.

[AZBearsFan]

On 12/6/2021 at 4:35 PM, JAF-N72EX said:

I wouldn't be against it but I don't think he would want to come back. Atleast not yet anyhow. Maybe some years down the line. It sucks too because he's not a bad option as a backup QB.

I’d be fine with Mitch as our #2 too. But, why would Mitch want to come here if he has any other option? He’s never ascending to QB1 here and he was treated mostly poorly by the fans here. Why put yourself through that when you will have other viable options? 

[AZBearsFan]

Back to the topic of WRs… Gallup would be an absolute home run signing for me. He’s young, versatile and super talented. He and Godwin would be options 1 and 1a for me. 

[JAF-N72EX]

On 12/7/2021 at 12:29 PM, abstract_thought said:

Yes

Therein lies the problem.

On 12/7/2021 at 12:29 PM, abstract_thought said:

after comparing depth charts with contracts set to expire for all 32 teams.

It doesn't seem like it based on the following.....

On 12/7/2021 at 12:29 PM, abstract_thought said:

The positions they will need to replace (WR, CB, LT, DT) are traditionally expensive. And they will have the 2nd worst total draft value of any NFL team

Otherwise you wouldn't have included LT as an "expensive" need seeing as how we already have a starting LT for next year in Jenkins.

You would've also noticed that 24 teams in the league have atleast 1 starting WR whose contract expires.

You would've also noticed that 23 teams in the league have atleast 1 starting CB with an expired contract and technically the Bears are not one of them.

Source: https://overthecap.com/premium/free-agency-chart/

It seems like your only applying certain rules for the Bears. But I guess we'll never know since you keep saying stuff without providing any facts so.....

[JAF-N72EX]

On 12/8/2021 at 1:49 PM, AZBearsFan said:

Back to the topic of WRs… Gallup would be an absolute home run signing for me. He’s young, versatile and super talented. He and Godwin would be options 1 and 1a for me. 

I would fine with Godwin, Mooney, Gallup, draft pick.  Gallup should be relatively cheap. But I also want Fields to have a true #1 and I dont think either of those 3 fit the billing. Don't get me wrong I like Godwin and would love for the Bears to get him but he's a good versatile #2 IMO and I don't see him as a true #1.

[beardown3231]

11 hours ago, JAF-N72EX said:

I would fine with Godwin, Mooney, Gallup, draft pick.  Gallup should be relatively cheap. But I also want Fields to have a true #1 and I dont think either of those 3 fit the billing. Don't get me wrong I like Godwin and would love for the Bears to get him but he's a good versatile #2 IMO and I don't see him as a true #1.

I don't see Gallup coming cheap. He's going to get at least 8M a year, although I guess with the going rate of WR's, that may be considered cheap by some

[abstract_thought]

12 hours ago, JAF-N72EX said:

Otherwise you wouldn't have included LT as an "expensive" need seeing as how we already have a starting LT for next year in Jenkins.

Jenkins hasn't played at all, is still recovering from a significant back injury, and is by no means a guaranteed starter.

12 hours ago, JAF-N72EX said:

You would've also noticed that 24 teams in the league have atleast 1 starting WR whose contract expires.

You would've also noticed that 23 teams in the league have atleast 1 starting CB with an expired contract and technically the Bears are not one of them.

You're not accounting for the quality of player being replaced or the totality of needs. How many teams are replacing a WR1? How many teams are replacing both a WR1 and a starting CB? How many are doing so with no 1st round pick?

Are there teams that have as many needs as the Bears? Absolutely. But I never stated otherwise. All I said was that many teams will have more flexibility to fill their needs. You're inferring a lot more doom and gloom than I ever intended. You can obviously find other teams with some of the same needs as the Bears. But there are many that have either fewer needs, more draft capital, more cap space, or some combination.

[AZBearsFan]

21 hours ago, JAF-N72EX said:

I would fine with Godwin, Mooney, Gallup, draft pick.  Gallup should be relatively cheap. But I also want Fields to have a true #1 and I dont think either of those 3 fit the billing. Don't get me wrong I like Godwin and would love for the Bears to get him but he's a good versatile #2 IMO and I don't see him as a true #1.

 

9 hours ago, beardown3231 said:

I don't see Gallup coming cheap. He's going to get at least 8M a year, although I guess with the going rate of WR's, that may be considered cheap by some

I’d bet money (and I like my money so I don’t say that lightly) that Gallup fetches $10M annually, if not more, in FA. A healthy Gallup in a real NFL offense is a 1000-1150 yard receiver IMO. Dude can ball. That across from Mooney (who’s got a real chance to get to 1000 himself this year) with a professional, veteran WR3 is a great place to start, and on a 5/50ish deal his year 1 cap number is probably like $5-6M which lets us stretch our FA dollars much further while also making a significant upgrade at a huge need spot. 

[JAF-N72EX]

7 hours ago, abstract_thought said:

Jenkins hasn't played at all, is still recovering from a significant back injury, and is by no means a guaranteed starter.

Why because you say so? Jenkins was seen as a consensus 1st round talent. Barring a career injury there's no way any coach in their right mind is going to give up on him just because he missed his rookie year to an injury. The chances of him being slated in as the starter next year is far greater than him being replaced. 

7 hours ago, abstract_thought said:

You're not accounting for the quality of player being replaced or the totality of needs.

No I'm not foolish enough to think I know single player on every team in the league well enough in order to fairly judge their quality. And neither do you.

I'm also not foolish enough to think I know how everything is gonna play out in the offseason either, or how each teams feels about each player on their roster, or who gets cut, or who gets resigned, or what adjustments each team is going to make.

Again a thousand different scenarios could happen.

7 hours ago, abstract_thought said:

How many teams are replacing a WR1? How many teams are replacing both a WR1 and a starting CB?

Again you keep trying to apply certain rules only to the Bears and creating arbitrary cutoffs to fit this doom and gloom narrative that are not based on any facts.  If you did indeed base your opinion on facts, like you claimed you did, then shouldn't you already have this information?

Well here's your answer anyways based on FACTS.

---There are exactly 16 teams in the league that do NOT have atleast 1 hole to fill at BOTH the starting WR and CB positions and the bears are one of them.

NYJ, CLE, CIN, TEN, DEN, NYG, DAL, PHI, WAS, CHI, DET, MIN, CAR, NO, ARI, LAR, SEA.

---There are only two teams in the league that don't have ANY holes to fill at either position. TEN and NYG.

8 hours ago, abstract_thought said:

How many are doing so with no 1st round pick?

How many teams with a 1st round pick are also going to be looking for a starting QB? Or as you put it an "expensive position".

Right now there are 3 starters with expiring contracts (PIT, DEN, NO) and that's not including the multiple of question marks surrounding others teams such as; NYG (Jones), MIA (Tua), ATL (Ryan),  GB (Rodgers), SEA (Wilson), HOU (Mills/Watson), WAS (Heinicke), CAR (Darnold), PHi (Hurts), DET (Stafford).

And this doesn't even include QBs who are eligible for extensions like Lamar and Mayfield.

See, alot of these teams may have cap room and draft capital now but they also have their own internal issues at the most important position too.

 

[JAF-N72EX]

35 minutes ago, AZBearsFan said:

 

I’d bet money (and I like my money so I don’t say that lightly) that Gallup fetches $10M annually, if not more, in FA. A healthy Gallup in a real NFL offense is a 1000-1150 yard receiver IMO. Dude can ball. That across from Mooney (who’s got a real chance to get to 1000 himself this year) with a professional, veteran WR3 is a great place to start, and on a 5/50ish deal his year 1 cap number is probably like $5-6M which lets us stretch our FA dollars much further while also making a significant upgrade at a huge need spot. 

Yep, I can see him getting something similar to Tyler Boyd's 4/43 extension deal. 8M in year 1 and 10M in years 2, 3, and 4.

A 5/50 deal could play out much the same way. 6M in year 1, 8 in year 2, and 10 in years 3, 4, and 5. That's pretty cheap for a guy with his upside.

What do you guys think about Juju Smith? I wouldn't mind a 3-5 year deal for him either. He was supposed to be AB's replacement and fell short of expectations so far but you can't deny the mans talent and potential.  He's about to become a free agent if the Steelers don't extend him by February or if wants to test the market. Both are possibilities. Last year he turned down 9M offers from KC, BAL, GB, and PHI to stay with the steelers but then felt slighted when they offered a 1/8 deal.

[blkwdw13]

19 hours ago, JAF-N72EX said:

Well here's your answer anyways based on FACTS.

---There are exactly 16 teams in the league that do NOT have atleast 1 hole to fill at BOTH the starting WR and CB positions and the bears are one of them.

NYJ, CLE, CIN, TEN, DEN, NYG, DAL, PHI, WAS, CHI, DET, MIN, CAR, NO, ARI, LAR, SEA.

---There are only two teams in the league that don't have ANY holes to fill at either position. TEN and NYG.

Not having a dog in this pissing match, but your "facts" are interesting in that both Cleveland and Denver have both their starting CBs for next season, Denver also has their WR slots filled. But you also have Ten and NYG as both needing to fill spots and not having any holes, these are some good facts.

[abstract_thought]

19 hours ago, JAF-N72EX said:

Jenkins was seen as a consensus 1st round talent.

No he wasn't. He was seen as a potential 1st round talent with enough concerns to fall into the 2nd. Which he did. That was before he sustained a significant back injury. Counting on him as an NFL starter without spending at OT would be a significant risk.

9 minutes ago, blkwdw13 said:

Not having a dog in this pissing match, but your "facts" are interesting in that both Cleveland and Denver have both their starting CBs for next season, Denver also has their WR slots filled. But you also have Ten and NYG as both needing to fill spots and not having any holes, these are some good facts.

CAR, CIN, DAL, LAR, MIN, NYJ, PHI, SEA, NO all have their top 2 WRs locked for 2022.

19 hours ago, JAF-N72EX said:

Right now there are 3 starters with expiring contracts (PIT, DEN, NO) and that's not including the multiple of question marks surrounding others teams such as; NYG (Jones), MIA (Tua), ATL (Ryan),  GB (Rodgers), SEA (Wilson), HOU (Mills/Watson), WAS (Heinicke), CAR (Darnold), PHi (Hurts), DET (Stafford).

Many of these teams could use their 1st round pick on a QB and still have more draft capital than the Bears. And some of them have question marks at QB the same way the Bears have a question mark at QB.

[soulman]

Ricky Proehl; Wide Receiver

Ricky Martin; Tight End