So u still want Fields? Please read

[Myles]

37 minutes ago, chad72 said:

 

If they have to trade Fields, it would be done before the draft. However, if they keep Fields, they can trade down to No.4 and get a future 1st and other picks as well from the Colts while getting access to one of Anderson or Carter. They would get far more picks holding on to Fields and building a team around him than letting go of Fields that they have developed and invested in so far.

 

That is the way I see it. Opening up a bidding war for the No.1 pick while keeping Fields is what the Bears intend to do, IMO.

 

 

They could get allot of extra picks.   Trade down with Houston for extra picks, then trade down with the Colts for extra picks.   They could even trade down again for extra picks.  

[Myles]

25 minutes ago, Goatface Killah said:

 

 

 

But there is a caveat.......there is no way I give up the number 4 pick for him. Just the fact that they would do this suggests he isnt worth that pick. If he was, the Bears would never trade him. Id give them my 2nd for Fields, and if Will Anderson isnt there at 4, Im trading down and trying to recoup that pick. 

 

 

To be fair, the Bears do not know how to evaluate QB's.  

[ColtV]

15 hours ago, azcolt said:

Bears apparently rate Fields above the four qb draftees. Sobering thought as Colts pondering giving up a lot of assets to move up.

It is until you remember that the last great qb the Bears drafted and developed was Sid Luckman. 

[gspdx]

27 minutes ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

He was a very good passer in college. Funny how people just forget about that. 

 

What he did in college doesn't matter anymore.  Not to the Bears.  Plenty of guys are good in college and can't adapt to having to play the equivalent of a college all star defense every weekend in the NFL.

 

I am not saying Fields can't become a good QB.  I really have no idea.  And I have no idea how the Bears mgmt really feels about him.  But if they decide to trade him and pick up a new rookie QB I agree that we wouldn't want to give up much if we were interested in the trade. 

[Moosejawcolt]

1 hour ago, richard pallo said:

The Lombardi article just reinforces what I have been saying all along.  I think there is a very good chance the Bears will draft a quarterback with the 1st pick, most likely Young, and start over and trade Fields.  When they do their comparisons and for the reasons mentioned in the article I think they will draft a quarterback.  They will still be able to acquire draft capital for Fields so they are still in a good place.  And they have a lot of cap space as well.  I think Ballard and Shane would love Fields.  Shane seeing the potential of his prior Hurts situation.  Fields was a very good passer in college.  He just went to a team with no offensive talent and coaching changes.  I think he would do very well here and Ballard would also not have to trade the farm to move up.  Fields would fall into his lap.  

Yeah and if they are willing to stand pat with Fields that is scary.   What it tells me that the Bears r willing to move forward with  Fields and these rookies  dont move the needle and the Bears don't see them as franchise qbs. 

[chad72]

36 minutes ago, Myles said:

They could get allot of extra picks.   Trade down with Houston for extra picks, then trade down with the Colts for extra picks.   They could even trade down again for extra picks.  

 

Ideally speaking, they would want to spread their draft equity across drafts to be able to continue boosting their team with drafted talent, IMO.

[chad72]

9 minutes ago, Moosejawcolt said:

Yeah and if they are willing to stand pat with Fields that is scary.   What it tells me that the Bears r willing to move forward with  Fields and these rookies  dont move the needle and the Bears don't see them as franchise qbs. 

 

Completely disagree. As always, you want to see, like many other forum posters, only what you want to see to further an opinion.

 

No two GMs see things the same way. Lots go into QB development and coaching. Unless you are a can't miss prospect like Luck or Burrow, no matter who you draft, there is significant development to be done. Steichen has shown he works with the strengths of every QB he has worked with. In other words, if he gets Stroud, he will work with his strengths and if he gets Richardson, he will work with his strengths etc.

 

As long as they have a plan in place for each type of QB that is well thought of, there is nothing absolute in terms of being scared of a prospect. Panthers couldn't pass on Cam Newton hoping they will get a chance at Andrew Luck in the next draft. You have to take the swing when you get the chance and have a really good plan in place for whoever you think is going to be available at whichever spot you wish to trade to or if you stand pat. It is as simple as that, IMO.

[Two_pound]

The bears won't get anything for Fields. Why? It says you are giving up on a player after just 2 years in the league. You are telling the other 31 teams this guy can't play. They are stuck with Fields for atleast another 2 years unless they accept a 5th rounder for him, and that isn't going to happen.

[BlackTiger]

1 hour ago, chad72 said:

If they have to trade Fields, it would be done before the draft. However, if they keep Fields, they can trade down to No.4 and get a future 1st and other picks as well from the Colts while getting access to one of Anderson or Carter. They would get far more picks holding on to Fields and building a team around him than letting go of Fields that they have developed and invested in so far.

I wouldnt trade to number one if im the colts unless someone behind us starts the bidding first.  

 

Why make that move if no one behind us is trying to jump us for a qb?  We simply cannot out bid the texans if we wanted to

 

As for fields, im not crazy about him.  If they trade him before the draft and stroud and young are gone by our pick that would suck for us imo.  Theres not much we could do to stop it

[chad72]

17 minutes ago, BlackTiger said:

I wouldnt trade to number one if im the colts unless someone behind us starts the bidding first.  

 

Why make that move if no one behind us is trying to jump us for a qb?  We simply cannot out bid the texans if we wanted to

 

As for fields, im not crazy about him.  If they trade him before the draft and stroud and young are gone by our pick that would suck for us imo.  Theres not much we could do to stop it

 

In theory, maybe because they have two first rounders. However, after trading away Watson and having the 2nd worst record in the league, their team needs far more help and like any other team, they would prefer to spread their draft equity loss across drafts, just like the Bears would like to get their draft talent addition across draft years. We have all heard that there are only about 15 blue chippers in this draft and the Texans are sitting at No. 20, very good chance the Bears will say just give me a future 1st I can parlay with multiple trade downs in the next draft if possible too.

 

But if you are sitting in the Bears' shoes, here the Texans are giving me a current 2nd, 3rd, and a future 3rd OR a future 1st for moving 1 spot. Then the Colts are offering a future 1st, current 2nd and future 2nd and possibly Kenny Moore for moving up 3 spots, what would you take, knowing you can still get a blue chip player at No.4? The answer is clear to me. 

 

There is a greater chance that the bidding can be finalized now to an acceptable level because, like flight prices, the closer you wait till the day of the draft, it is going to cost more. You could have a crazy owner like Mike Davis of Raiders say "we will give you two future 1st rounders to move from No.7 to No.1" and you are never going to beat that, only 15 minutes between picks to match bids or outbid, no GM should take that chance. I think crazier trades happen closer to the draft day than the ones finalized much earlier, IMO. You decide on a prize well before the draft and tweak it a bit but not go crazy.

 

Plus, if you think with Texans, Colts, Raiders, Falcons, Panthers all needing QBs and the Lions and Seahawks having the luxury of developing a QB, that no one will be bidding for No.1 pick, you are truly naive.  

[BlackTiger]

3 minutes ago, chad72 said:

But if you are sitting in the Bears' shoes, here the Texans are giving me a current 2nd, 3rd, and a future 3rd OR a future 1st for moving 1 spot. Then the Colts are offering a future 1st, current 2nd and future 2nd and possibly Kenny Moore for moving up 3 spots, what would you take, knowing you can still get a blue chip player at No.4? The answer is clear to me.

I doubt that it will come to a difference of a mid round pick or so.  they can offer something that no one can match and the bears will try and get that out of them

 

I wouldnt even want to pay a future first but the texans have a few of those to spare.  They can offer that easier than we can

 

 

 

[chad72]

Just now, BlackTiger said:

I doubt that it will come to a difference of a mid round pick or so.  they can offer something that no one can match and the bears will try and get that out of them

 

I wouldnt even want to pay a future first but the texans have a few of those to spare.  They can offer that easier than we can

 

 

First, you won't know if someone else is bidding unless you approach the Bears and inquire about their price. If the Bears do one of 2 things - either disclose if others are bidding or give a price that they won't go under, then you counter offer. If that doesn't work, and it is beyond the range of what you want to bid, you back out. Nothing complicated about that if you have a good plan that you can stick to in your mind. Think of it like an auction with less emotion because you are not under the gun like the draft with 15 minutes between picks. If the price is too high, I am out of the bid, an eBay auction describes it best once you have researched and decided on the highest you will go for the bid.  

[BlackTiger]

23 minutes ago, chad72 said:

First, you won't know if someone else is bidding unless you approach the Bears and inquire about their price.

 

A bidding war is how they would get the most, telling everyone to send a private offer doesnt favor the seller here.  They could get multiple rounds of offers by pitting teams against each other

 

For that to happen they have to give information about what other teams are offering 

[chad72]

14 minutes ago, BlackTiger said:

 

A bidding war is how they would get the most, telling everyone to send a private offer doesnt favor the seller here.  They could get multiple rounds of offers by pitting teams against each other

 

For that to happen they have to give information about what other teams are offering 

 

Even then, the Colts can back out if they feel they can't offer what someone else would. But if the Bears were interested in talking with the Colts, even if they slightly offer less than the Texans, the Bears will counter offer. It will be apples and oranges, comparing one's bid to move to No.1 from No.2 and moving to No.1 from No.4, so no 2 bids can be exactly the same with each team offering its own flavor of a bid. No team will engage and counter offer unless they felt the other team is somewhat in the ball park. If the Colts try to low ball, the Bears won't even counter offer, they will just say they are not interested.

 

I'd rather try for a bid and back out than not try at all, that is my contention. You can't go into a potential bidding war bidding beyond your comfort zone, which you have to stick to. I am sure the Colts will start slightly lower and work their way up to it, knowing in their minds that there is a "can't exceed" price they are willing to pay.

[Moosejawcolt]

5 minutes ago, BlackTiger said:

 

A bidding war is how they would get the most, telling everyone to send a private offer doesnt favor the seller here.  They could get multiple rounds of offers by pitting teams against each other

 

For that to happen they have to give information about what other teams are offering 

Here is my whole issue about trading up this year. I don't think anyone is worth it and i get it that we need the guy and that qbs are over valued. The problem i have is this. So lets say for example the Bears value the number pick as this years 4th pick plus next years number one and this year and next years 2nd rounders.  I know the number 1 is always over priced, but if the Bears value it so much, why would they not pick the qb and trade Fields who would probably notch a 3rd rounder? Do you think the Bears see Fields as having that much value as the number 1 pick overall? If they truly valued the number 1 pick as being a franchise qb, then why trade it if the qb you have is not a franchise qb and worth say a 3rd rounder?  I truly believe that if the Bears think that there is that guy there, they would not be trading out. They would trade Fields  and take insert name. That is why i am cautious  if the Bears don't want number one, as  I don't believe they  have a franchise qb. To me they are no different from the Texans, Colts, Raider and Panthers. Plus watch the Raiders and Panthers and  i think the Panthers especially. It is no secret that they wanted Watson and the owner wants 'the guy'. If they would settle for  a guy like Carr that would tell me that maybe they find this draft underwhelming and not worth moving up.    I truly believe that the Bears know internally that Fields is not that guy and they dont see the top 4 guys as a step up. I think i am making word salad lol. Simply put this way. If the Jags had the 1st pick in the draft this year do you think they are trading it? You betcha cause they got their guy and the league knows it . U could have  Andrew Luck sitting there and the Jags would still trade it.  If the Bears trade it , I don't believe it is because they have their guy. I believe it is because they are getting a haul from a desperate team and the top guys are not worth  a top pick and are not seen as franchise qbs by the Bears. People can say well its the Bears and what do they know and they maybe right, but i am not sure i am willing to bet the farm to prove them wrong.

[hoosierhawk]

I would like to see us trade Taylor for Fields straight up and trade down a few spots to a QB needy team and pick up their 1st and their 2nd rounders. We then draft either the best OT or WR available in the 1st and in the 2nd with our pick either the best OL or WR, whichever we didn't get in the first. With the 2nd round we got for trading down in the 1st round we take a CB or best player available and do so for the rest of the draft. 

We move on from Kelly, Moore and Cox  either by trade or cuts and pick up some cap money and reinforce the OL and a few other positions.

I know getting rid of Taylor is not popular but we have to sacrifice somewhere.

[tvturner]

Fields isn't a bad quarterback by any means

 

My only issue with trading for him is he's due up for a contract in 2 years

[tvturner]

1 minute ago, hoosierhawk said:

I would like to see us trade Taylor for Fields straight up and trade down a few spots to a QB needy team and pick up their 1st and their 2nd rounders. We then draft either the best OT or WR available in the 1st and in the 2nd with our pick either the best OL or WR, whichever we didn't get in the first. With the 2nd round we got for trading down in the 1st round we take a CB or best player available and do so for the rest of the draft. 

We move on from Kelly, Moore and Cox  either by trade or cuts and pick up some cap money and reinforce the OL and a few other positions.

You aren't netting Justin Fields for Jonathan Taylor

 

That's absurd

[Stephen]

3 hours ago, Myles said:

I doubt that.  So you are telling me that after 2 years on a bad team, they will all have 34 TD's, 21 INT's, 5675 yards or close to it?

After two years they will all have more passing yards and tds

[hoosierhawk]

1 minute ago, tvturner said:

You aren't netting Justin Fields for Jonathan Taylor

 

That's absurd

Throw in Moore.

[Moosejawcolt]

2 hours ago, Myles said:

To be fair, the Bears do not know how to evaluate QB's.  

and the Colts do? Reworking Brissett's contract when they wanted to treat him as a number one guy and get ahead of the game. Wentz and Ryan epic failures. You were saying and please dont put it all on Reich.

[richard pallo]

10 minutes ago, Moosejawcolt said:

Here is my whole issue about trading up this year. I don't think anyone is worth it and i get it that we need the guy and that qbs are over valued. The problem i have is this. So lets say for example the Bears value the number pick as this years 4th pick plus next years number one and this year and next years 2nd rounders.  I know the number 1 is always over priced, but if the Bears value it so much, why would they not pick the qb and trade Fields who would probably notch a 3rd rounder? Do you think the Bears see Fields as having that much value as the number 1 pick overall? If they truly valued the number 1 pick as being a franchise qb, then why trade it if the qb you have is not a franchise qb and worth say a 3rd rounder?  I truly believe that if the Bears think that there is that guy there, they would not be trading out. They would trade Fields  and take insert name. That is why i am cautious  if the Bears don't want number one, as  I don't believe they  have a franchise qb. To me they are no different from the Texans, Colts, Raider and Panthers. Plus watch the Raiders and Panthers and  i think the Panthers especially. It is no secret that they wanted Watson and the owner wants 'the guy'. If they would settle for  a guy like Carr that would tell me that maybe they find this draft underwhelming and not worth moving up.    I truly believe that the Bears know internally that Fields is not that guy and they dont see the top 4 guys as a step up. I think i am making word salad lol. Simply put this way. If the Jags had the 1st pick in the draft this year do you think they are trading it? You betcha cause they got their guy and the league knows it . U could have  Andrew Luck sitting there and the Jags would still trade it.  If the Bears trade it , I don't believe it is because they have their guy. I believe it is because they are getting a haul from a desperate team and the top guys are not worth  a top pick and are not seen as franchise qbs by the Bears. People can say well its the Bears and what do they know and they maybe right, but i am not sure i am willing to bet the farm to prove them wrong.

I don’t think the Bears have enough evaluation in place to make a decision on whether any quarterbacks in this class is a step up over Fields.  That’s why they are only “leaning “.  That’s why the interviews and testing is important and of course the measurements in Young’s case.  If they could start over with a rookie quarterback it makes sense.  It doesn’t mean Fields is bad it means being a last place team the coach and GM want to start over with their guy who they like better and can also build around.  

[Moosejawcolt]

11 minutes ago, richard pallo said:

I don’t think the Bears have enough evaluation in place to make a decision on whether any quarterbacks in this class is a step up over Fields.  That’s why they are only “leaning “.  That’s why the interviews and testing is important and of course the measurements in Young’s case.  If they could start over with a rookie quarterback it makes sense.  It doesn’t mean Fields is bad it means being a last place team the coach and GM want to start over with their guy who they like better and can also build around.  

Alot of smoke and mirrors. If the Bears trade out that tells me that this is not a strong group no matter if it is the Bears evaluating or not.  U dont pass up a franchise qb if you dont have one. That is a cardinal rule in the NFL and a cardinal sin if you give one up. The Bears are in position to pick the top qb in the draft. 

[Moosejawcolt]

2 hours ago, ColtV said:

It is until you remember that the last great qb the Bears drafted and developed was Sid Luckman. 

And who is the last qb that the Colts have drafted and groomed to greatness?? Please dont give me Luck and Manning cause even the Brown could not have screwed those 2 picks up lol

[Goatface Killah]

3 hours ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

He was a very good passer in college. Funny how people just forget about that. 

I just dont think that means anything in the NFL. The teams are too good. They will take away what you do best and make you perform regardless. I dont think many college programs are capable of doing that. 

 

The windows you have to hit in the NFL are so different from playing in college. 

 

I will say this. If there is a team I feel like could take on Fields and make it work, it would be a team like the Colts. Pairing him with a guy like Taylor would be the way to do it. 

 

 

[tvturner]

1 hour ago, hoosierhawk said:

Throw in Moore.

That's still not getting you Fields.

[Myles]

14 hours ago, Moosejawcolt said:

and the Colts do? Reworking Brissett's contract when they wanted to treat him as a number one guy and get ahead of the game. Wentz and Ryan epic failures. You were saying and please dont put it all on Reich.

The history of the Bears shows that they are awful at evaluating and grooming QB's.  When was the last time they developed a good QB?  They just have never been good at it.  Despite that, Fields improved in every category in year number 2.   

[MikeCurtis]

21 hours ago, BlackTiger said:

Who said they wanted Fields to the Colts?  Maybe somebody out there but its not popular

 

If the Bears do draft a QB though it could leave us in a tough spot, Fields might be better than Will Levis or Richardson 

Fields is NOT my first choice, but if QB1 and QB2 are gone before our pick, (With Chicago making the pick) at QB)

it MIGHT come down to that

 

I like Fields better than Levis or Richardson

 

Its one of several possible options this year

[MikeCurtis]

19 hours ago, BlackTiger said:

If they trade him before the draft and stroud and young are gone by our pick that would suck for us imo.  Theres not much we could do to stop it

Thats a key point

 

We cant control the picks before us..

 

Both Stroud and Young MIGHT WILL be gone before we pick at 4

 

 

[BlackTiger]

19 hours ago, Moosejawcolt said:

Here is my whole issue about trading up this year. I don't think anyone is worth it and i get it that we need the guy and that qbs are over valued. The problem i have is this. So lets say for example the Bears value the number pick as this years 4th pick plus next years number one and this year and next years 2nd rounders.  I know the number 1 is always over priced, but if the Bears value it so much, why would they not pick the qb and trade Fields who would probably notch a 3rd rounder? Do you think the Bears see Fields as having that much value as the number 1 pick overall? If they truly valued the number 1 pick as being a franchise qb, then why trade it if the qb you have is not a franchise qb and worth say a 3rd rounder?  I truly believe that if the Bears think that there is that guy there, they would not be trading out. They would trade Fields  and take insert name. That is why i am cautious  if the Bears don't want number one, as  I don't believe they  have a franchise qb. To me they are no different from the Texans, Colts, Raider and Panthers. Plus watch the Raiders and Panthers and  i think the Panthers especially. It is no secret that they wanted Watson and the owner wants 'the guy'. If they would settle for  a guy like Carr that would tell me that maybe they find this draft underwhelming and not worth moving up.    I truly believe that the Bears know internally that Fields is not that guy and they dont see the top 4 guys as a step up. I think i am making word salad lol. Simply put this way. If the Jags had the 1st pick in the draft this year do you think they are trading it? You betcha cause they got their guy and the league knows it . U could have  Andrew Luck sitting there and the Jags would still trade it.  If the Bears trade it , I don't believe it is because they have their guy. I believe it is because they are getting a haul from a desperate team and the top guys are not worth  a top pick and are not seen as franchise qbs by the Bears. People can say well its the Bears and what do they know and they maybe right, but i am not sure i am willing to bet the farm to prove them wrong.

 

Personally i would only trade up to number one if somebody behind us tries to do it first.  If the texans want to do it i would let them, Im not interested in a bidding war with a team that has more than us to trade

 

 I dont love the value in trading up but i dont want to go into next year with no QB either.  Id do it if thats the only way we get a qb.  Im not going to just tank for years with no QB

[Stephen]

18 hours ago, Moosejawcolt said:

And who is the last qb that the Colts have drafted and groomed to greatness?? Please dont give me Luck and Manning cause even the Brown could not have screwed those 2 picks up lol

Im quite sure they could have

[MikeCurtis]

22 minutes ago, BlackTiger said:

 

Personally i would only trade up to number one if somebody behind us tries to do it first.  If the texans want to do it i would let them, Im not interested in a bidding war with a team that has more than us to trade

 

 I dont love the value in trading up but i dont want to go into next year with no QB either.  Id do it if thats the only way we get a qb.  Im not going to just tank for years with no QB

Actually

 

If Houston is sold out for Young...... let them trade up

THEN................... WE trade with the Bears for pick 2, and we pick Stroud

 

I would be very happy with that outcome, and it wont cost as much

 

The Bears can STILL get a top DL player at 4 (And a pile of picks that they need to build the team)  

 

The Bears/Colts/Texans ALL STILL win in this scenario

 

But oterwise.......

 

If the Bears take Young......  I believe that HOU picks Stroud

 

THEN....... I would strongly consider QB3 or QB4

 

OR.....  work a trade for Fields

 

IMHO Fields is less a risk than QB3 or QB4

 

 

[ColtV]

21 hours ago, Moosejawcolt said:

And who is the last qb that the Colts have drafted and groomed to greatness?? Please dont give me Luck and Manning cause even the Brown could not have screwed those 2 picks up lol

Luck and Manning! 

 

Quite honestly Jeff George's tenure here is a wild success compared to their record of developing a qb they drafted. 

[masterlock]

On 2/28/2023 at 11:13 AM, richard pallo said:

The Lombardi article just reinforces what I have been saying all along.  I think there is a very good chance the Bears will draft a quarterback with the 1st pick, most likely Young, and start over and trade Fields. 

Yep, and they just have to find a team dumb enough to take him.