2022 Free agency thread

[GBHalas]

If you look at this rationally everyone the Bears have signed on offense has to do more with potential than production.  I think they are hoping or assuming that this offense they are putting together will grow together and grow up together, and even possibly failing together.  This might be a throwaway season, but I think it will be an interesting one at least. 

[Madmike90]

9 hours ago, beardown3231 said:

You know I love you @Madmike90 but that dude loves EVERYONE that the Bears sign, trade for or draft.

It's not even a case of loving what Poles is doing...I don't think he has knocked a single one of these signings out of the park...I do however understand why we are brining these guys in...Ogunjobi is 27 years old and plays a primer position in this D so signing him to a 3 years deal makes sense...Patrick understands the scheme and brings a toughness inside which has been our biggest issues...would I prefer him for $4 million a year or Daniels for $10? Patrick everything...Morrow is a prototype undersized ex safety LB who will fly around to the ball that excels in this D...St. Brown is a H/W/S flier who for vet min I think is the type of player we should target as depth and hope we land on something...if he gives you 500 yards and 3-5 TDs this year that is a huge positive...Pringle just seemed like a real fit from day one coming off a productive season...do any make me super excited about watching them? No...but do I think when you are roster building and trying to clear up the last guys mess while also being committed to finding playmakers through the draft are these exactly the type of solid professionals you need? Absolutely...best care scenario is a few of these guys turn into Hicks like signings...worst case not a single one is here after two seasons.

[beardown3231]

10 hours ago, Heinz D. said:

Are you believing the internet argument that Fields is a bad QB? 

I didn't say he was bad. I said he was ineffective which he was. If he has just as ineffective of a year as he did last year, this team will be total garbage and then Poles has a decision to make

[chisoxguy7]

31 minutes ago, beardown3231 said:

I didn't say he was bad. I said he was ineffective which he was. If he has just as ineffective of a year as he did last year, this team will be total garbage and then Poles has a decision to make

It all starts at the top. Matt Nagy was incompetent and that showed up on game day. Fields had very limited reps with the 1's for most of last year and it was obvious his preparation and readiness took a hit from that. We are going to find out who he is this year, much like we will see who Mitch Trubisky really is for Pittsburgh this year.

[Nads786]

12 hours ago, Madmike90 said:

If he didn't believe in Fields he would be in Minnesota right now.

There could be non-Fields reasons for choosing the Bears. I don't think it's quite set in stone "Chicago has a QB." Fields is a mystery and if you were betting I don't think he would have better than 50/50 odds.

[Nads786]

12 hours ago, Heinz D. said:

What?

Explain. 

He's basically gutting the team and removing even decent players to help Fields. James Daniels's contract was moderate he could of easily signed him as a 2-3 year placeholder. Right on on paper we look like the worst team in the NFC. 

Usually you want to build around your second year QB but I'm not certain that's what Poles is going to do. 

[Nads786]

11 hours ago, Heinz D. said:

Are you believing the internet argument that Fields is a bad QB? 

I'm following my own eye test and the only game he had that wowed me was Pittsburgh. He also seems to be a turnover machine vs. what he did in college. Obviously I'm not throwing in the towel but he's probably not going to be a star QB. 

I distinctly remember watching Rogers / Mahomes play their first snaps and it was quite different vs. Fields. Sad to say but Mitch showed more signs in his first year. 

Second season will cast the dye.  

[GOGRIESE]

1 minute ago, Nads786 said:

 

Usually you want to build around your second year QB but I'm not certain that's what Poles is going to do. 

That is the silliest thing I've heard on here lately.

[Nads786]

Just now, GOGRIESE said:

That is the silliest thing I've heard on here lately.

I don't get why people are clinging to Fields like a certain value. If Poles can see he's not going to be the guy (and he's right) he's doing us a favor. It's more likely than not Fields will fail, most QBs do. 

Let's gut this thing if it's the right thing to do.

[Bigbear72]

1 minute ago, Nads786 said:

I'm following my own eye test and the only game he had that wowed me was Pittsburgh. He also seems to be a turnover machine vs. what he did in college. Obviously I'm not throwing in the towel but he's probably not going to be a star QB. 

I distinctly remember watching Rogers / Mahomes play their first snaps and it was quite different vs. Fields. Sad to say but Mitch showed more signs in his first year. 

Second season will cast the dye.  

Do you remember Manning and Aikman's first snaps. It wasn't pretty. The first year is hard to judge QBs. You are referring to the extreme exceptions and not the historical rule for how QBs develop.

[GOGRIESE]

1 minute ago, Nads786 said:

I don't get why people are clinging to Fields like a certain value. If Poles can see he's not going to be the guy (and he's right) he's doing us a favor. It's more likely than not Fields will fail, most QBs do. 

Let's gut this thing if it's the right thing to do.

Your already assuming that's the case. 

[beardown3231]

I was hoping to see a lot more splash plays from Fields last year. There's always excuses for Bears QB's off of the bat and the excuses (obviously) never look good in hindsight. Historically Fields' first year doesn't bode well for his future, but there are always outliers. I had a ton of optimism when he was drafted and I hope a new, non-idiotic coaching staff can get everything out of him

[Nads786]

Just now, Bigbear72 said:

Do you remember Manning and Aikman's first snaps. It wasn't pretty. The first year is hard to judge QBs. You are referring to the extreme exceptions and not the historical rule for how QBs develop.

I don't remember I never watched either of the start of their careers (started watching football seriously during the Jauron era). I think that's a somewhat valid point. I'm hoping I'm wrong and Fields lights it up. 

[Ty21]

3 hours ago, Madmike90 said:

if he gives you 500 yards and 3-5 TDs this year that is a huge positive

If he has a season with 150% the receiving total of his best year? He sucks lol. I don’t know how he didn’t perform better on a passing monster team with nothing but growing room for receivers not named DA

[Ty21]

1 hour ago, Nads786 said:

I'm following my own eye test and the only game he had that wowed me was Pittsburgh. He also seems to be a turnover machine vs. what he did in college. Obviously I'm not throwing in the towel but he's probably not going to be a star QB. 

I distinctly remember watching Rogers / Mahomes play their first snaps and it was quite different vs. Fields. Sad to say but Mitch showed more signs in his first year. 

Second season will cast the dye.  

Again, all those guys were playing in offenses built for them or built in a way that naturally played off their strong suits and weren’t coached by a guy that has a vendetta against you and anyone not named Andy Dalton. Rodgers and Mahomes are absolutely elite quarterbacks so I can’t imagine them playing super poorly even in Nagy’s offense but that offense on a strategic level felt like it was built by a middle school football coach that won a game show and got to be an nfl coach for a year.