Chicago Bears 2026
- Status
was looking for similar news outta LA for Nate
FlyNavy
- Los Angeles
Lots of confusion the the Rams, that's for sure. McVay claims he is looking at in-house candidates, but then brought in Kliff Kingsbury for a role to be determined.
Oh, and the Super Bowl champs will be starting a search for a play-calling OC...
Here are the home and road opponents for the Bears in 2026:
-Home: Lions, Packers, Vikings, Buccaneers, Eagles, Jaguars, Jets, Patriots, Saints
-Road: Lions, Packers, Vikings, Bills, Dolphins, Falcons, Panthers, Seahawks
-Home: Lions, Packers, Vikings, Buccaneers, Eagles, Jaguars, Jets, Patriots, Saints
-Road: Lions, Packers, Vikings, Bills, Dolphins, Falcons, Panthers, Seahawks
Illwinsagain
- Cary, IL
I was worried about the upgraded schedule, due to winning the division. That is offset by playing the NFC South.
The rest of our division also plays the NFC South but doesn't have the first place schedule.
Assuming the Bears make a couple additions via draft/trade, I think they will continue to improve and set their sight on the next Super Bowl.
Seahawks looked great against the Niners, but meh since.
It's a good time to be a Bears fan!
FlyNavy
- Los Angeles
I was curious, so I decided to write it out. 14 of the 17 opponents are the same within the NFC North; here are the three differences:
Bears: Eagles, @Seahawks, Jaguars - combined record: 40-11
Packers: Cowboys, @Rams, Texans - combined record: 31-19-1
Vikings: Commanders, @49ers, Colts - combined record: 25-26
Lions: Giants, @Cardinals, Titans - combined record: 10-41
Last year the Lions finished 9-8, tied for last, despite having the biggest point differential in the division. That's a very favorable draw for them.
Those 3 games make a lot of difference when the records are close, which they should be.
NFL is shooting for parity, good races until the end, etc.
EDIT thanks for doing the work.
Of course, this time last year you’d probably take our draw over that of the Packers or Vikings’… Things can change fast. They certainly did for Seattle.
I think we ought to keep Bagent. If Caleb goes down Bagent becomes the most important player on the team.
ChiefGritty
- Chicago, IL
I don't know if the Bears or anyone else for that matter actually knows if Bagent is any good or worthy of "best backup in the league" consideration, but you do need a backup QB, and that would be an expensive, annoying hole to fill in Bagent's absence, so I can't see an offer coming in that would be worth the Bears' while.
Also Johnson seems to be fan...
ESPN had this up a couple days ago.
Is Maxx really that good?
There are a half dozen free agent Edge's available, which wouldn't cost a pick or a starter, and would prolly be about the same salary cap hit.
eg: Trey Hendrickson from Cincinnati had 17.5 sacks in 2024, #1 in the NFL
Last edited:
No thanks
I don’t know what other guys might be available through free agency, but Crosby does have some advantages over Hendrickson. Whether they are enough to offset the trade cost associated with Crosby comes down to length of contract and salary cost for Hendrickson (or whoever else).
I don’t follow contracts that much, but seems like Hendrickson would want at least 3 years, and I’m going to also assume salary would be in the Crosby neighborhood. Crosby is signed for four years (ages 29-32). Trey will turn 32 late in 2026 season (Dec). Hendrickson is a great pass rusher when healthy, but doesn’t give you much else. I haven’t seen tons of Crosby, but doesn’t seem quite as gifted as a pass rusher (but still very good) at this point. However, I think he is a much more complete player from what I’ve seen.
Not sure what Bears have in available cap space. Would they need to cut another player(s) to take on a top FA pass rusher anyway? If so, might make sense to trade player and draft pick for guy you really want, assuming that is what Crosby is.
Did you watch him this year against us? Something tells me you didn’t.
Yes I did and I don’t want him
Noblesville Illini
- Nappanee, IN
- Status