Chicago Bears 2023
Certainly hoping to see a smart use of the #1 pick, trading down if possible while still getting the impact DLineman they need. Hoping for a splash WR signing as well to help JF1. Expecting a Jacksonville type turnabout in 2023.
I like the sounds of this. Use it to get more offers, take the biggest offer.
I would prefer Quinton Nelson and picks. A man can dream.
Nelson plus first for Bears first and a 3rd, 6th and maybe another 3rd next year. Nelson is worth a LOT.
Colts pick to Jets for Fields old running mate Garrett Wilson and Jets pick at 13.
Shores up OL and WR. Still a high pick for best available position of need. It cuts in to available cap $$$ a bit, because Nelson is closer to a big payday, but still leaves quite the pile of cash for at least 2 big FA Signings.
Nelson plus first for Bears first and a 3rd, 6th and maybe another 3rd next year. Nelson is worth a LOT.
Colts pick to Jets for Fields old running mate Garrett Wilson and Jets pick at 13.
Shores up OL and WR. Still a high pick for best available position of need. It cuts in to available cap $$$ a bit, because Nelson is closer to a big payday, but still leaves quite the pile of cash for at least 2 big FA Signings.
illini80
- Forgottonia
I think it has to be talked about whether there is any real intention of it or not.
I agree with Illini80
It doesn't matter if the Bears have any intention on trading him or not. Once a team gets the #1 pick you have to look at every single option available and listen to what teams will offer you for the #1 pick, other picks in the Draft, Fields, random players, etc.
Bears GM has to nail the pick whether they stay at #1 or trade down. If it comes down to QB and he feels Young for example will be much better than Fields than he makes the move. He would reset the QB contract with Young, get multiple picks/players and still get whatever for Fields. The Bears need multiple positions and they will get it keeping Fields, drafting Young, etc.
I actually think DeForest Buckner is the more likely player to get from the Colts but there's talk about Michael Pittman Jr. being included too. I'm more in the "load up on future picks if you can" camp. It'd be great to me if you could get a Herschel Walker type return which would be an extra second round pick this year, an extra first and second in 2024 and an extra first and second in 2025. If you could pull this off you can have lots of high draft picks on rookie contracts after Justin Fields signs his extension. It's also fun to have teams to root against because you have their picks.
Potentially, the Colts make the trade from 4 to 1 to guarantee themselves the first choice of QB and to hop Houston. Then one of the Raiders, Falcons, or Panthers trade up to 4 to get the 3rd QB off the board which might take all the QB's with 1st round grades off the board. This assumes that Bryce Young, CJ Stroud, and Will Levis are the in-demand QB prospects. In the 7-9 range you can probably get the best OL on your board, or a DE like Myles Murphy or Tyree Wilson. I think if you trade #4 down into the Titans/Jets/Commanders level the level of prospects you can get drops a lot.
If you can't trade out of #4, maybe because Arizona trades out of #3, then take Jalen Carter or Will Anderson if you think a ~245 lb. player can be a stud 4-3 DE.
ILLINIShox24
Orange Krush '04 & '05
PFF Grades for Quenton Nelson by Season:
2019 — 91.2
2020 — 86.2
2021 — 69.1
2022 — 68.4
Do not like the idea of trading for Nelson and his huge contract when his play has declined.
Having multiple 1sts in 2024 would be huge because the QB class is expected to be generational. Hoping we trade down with the Texans to 2 and then Indy comes up to 2 and we drop to 4.
2019 — 91.2
2020 — 86.2
2021 — 69.1
2022 — 68.4
Do not like the idea of trading for Nelson and his huge contract when his play has declined.
Having multiple 1sts in 2024 would be huge because the QB class is expected to be generational. Hoping we trade down with the Texans to 2 and then Indy comes up to 2 and we drop to 4.
I agree that the Bears should trade the pick rather than Fields.
But I think it's important to take the accurate perspective.
Because the Bears are in possession of both assets, Fields and Bryce Young will be linked and compared to one another their whole careers.
Fields through two seasons is a poor NFL passer who has shown very little development in that regard. He's had incredibly poor situations to try and make those developments, but he's not a rookie forever and he WILL NOT be an elite QB if he's a below average passer and will probably have a short career because of the punishment a passing-limited game inflicts on his body.
And if Fields winds up down that path, and if Young is a superstar, choosing Fields over Young becomes an era-defining catastrophe for the Bears, a list-topper for worst and most costly decisions in the history of professional football.
I feel like the incredible largeness of the stakes on this decision aren't being accurately processed by Bears fans currently. Everyone gets that trading Fields would be an affirmative choice for Bryce Young which could be a disaster. But the vice versa is equally true.
It would be great if Fields develops into an elite QB and the Bears can use draft pics and free agency to build a competitive ball club.
The key question is: Is Fields a below average passer because he lacks skill or because of the lack of a a good offensive line and elite receivers?
You also have to ask questions about Young too.
My biggest fear with Fields is durability. I've seen enough to think he can be an entertaining and impactful QB (if perhaps not a truly elite one) who gives the Bears a chance to win so long as he can stay on the field, I just wonder how long that's gonna be.
But my biggest fear with Young is also durability. He's even smaller than Tua who does not seem able to hold up under the punishment his similarly buccaneering playing style subjects him to at the NFL level.
If there were a can't miss Lawrence or Andrew Luck type it would be different, IMO. Young has that kind of arm talent and moxie, but not that type of measurables and health track record.
In total agreement!
Fields has some passing drills to work on but he also has that Lamar Jackson type ability when on. Not always going to make the smart/right throw but can make up for it in so many other ways. If Fields can improve in the passing game(I think he can) than he has a chance to be in the NFL for a long time. Lamar Jackson had back to back 1,000 yard rushing seasons and has played 12 games each of the last 2 seasons now. Besides staying healthy NFL teams study so much tape that either you evolve or your opponent will expose that particular weakness.
I think the Bears win if they draft DE Anderson Jr or DT Jalen Carter. Anderson Jr could still go #1 either way and I am real big on the young man. The main thing the Bears have to do is stay put/trade down to where they want to land the #1 guy on their board if also collecting picks. (Love NFL but don't have a particular team)
Kyler Murray measured 5 ft 10+1⁄8 in and 207 pounds at the combine. Bryce Young in this picture looks both shorter and skinnier. I think there is a chance that Bryce won't let himself be measured at the combine if he's actually shorter than 5ft 10in. Drew Brees, who everyone considered small measured 6 ft 0+1⁄4 in and 213 pounds at the combine. I think that Bryce has major durability concerns even if he can produce numbers like Kyler did over his first few seasons.
Bryce Young is also from So Cal and went to school in the South. He's probably never played a game in colder than 60 degree weather. So if you're a northern team you don't know how well a small QB will acclimate to cold weather games.
I think Justin's durability will be fine if they can improve the OL and have the OC stop running QB power.
If the Bears go with a trade down plan to accumulate future picks this year and Justin is bad next year, then the ability should still be there to get a top QB next year.
Sounds like the Bears are closing on Arlington Park soon….seeing rumblings on twitter and per the article below.
www.yardbarker.com
Report: Chicago Bears moving to close on Arlington Heights property?
There are a lot of story lines surrounding the Chicago Bears’ franchise in the 2023 offseason, headlined by having the No. 1 overall pick in the 2023 NFL draft and a lot of cap space to work in free agency.
www.yardbarker.com
It’s happening. They don’t bring in Kevin Warren if they aren’t fully intending to build a new stadium.Sounds like the Bears are closing on Arlington Park soon….seeing rumblings on twitter and per the article below.
Report: Chicago Bears moving to close on Arlington Heights property?
There are a lot of story lines surrounding the Chicago Bears’ franchise in the 2023 offseason, headlined by having the No. 1 overall pick in the 2023 NFL draft and a lot of cap space to work in free agency.
Bears have closed on the purchase of the Arlington Park property:
IlliniMike_Aurora
Straight outta Champaign
they are trading Fields, from Soldier to Arlington
I am sure closing the deal on the same day as the governor presented his budget to the General Assembly, significantly cutting back on press coverage of his speech, endeared the Bears to the governor, making him much more likely to cooperate with the Bears requests for public money. /s/.
illini80
- Forgottonia
Getting the General Assembly to support public funds for moving the team out of the city will be a tall task.
Mr. Tibbs
- southeast DuPage
I think the only real part of this they are seeking any public funding is the infra structure for the non stadium part of the project.
Really no different than if Company X or Company Z were looking to build the largest shopping mall or office complex in the history of the state. This is why they hired Kevin Warren and 10 other lobbyists/public relations people are on retainer.
The McCaskeys just need to stay in the background on this one
This is supposed to be the largest private development in the history of the state. 1000's of construction jobs and permanent ones.
Why would Pritzker not want to be part of this ?
Really no different than if Company X or Company Z were looking to build the largest shopping mall or office complex in the history of the state. This is why they hired Kevin Warren and 10 other lobbyists/public relations people are on retainer.
The McCaskeys just need to stay in the background on this one
This is supposed to be the largest private development in the history of the state. 1000's of construction jobs and permanent ones.
Why would Pritzker not want to be part of this ?
From "Economic Research - Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis" May, 2017:
"In spite of all of these economic arguments, economists generally oppose subsidizing professional sports stadiums. When surveyed, 86 percent of economists agreed that "local and state governments in the U.S. should eliminate subsidies to professional sports franchises." Perhaps economists just do not like sports? Actually, many economists love professional sports—including former Federal Reserve Chair Ben Bernanke, an ardent Washington Nationals fan. Rather, it is the provision of taxpayer money in the form of subsidies that economists generally oppose. In a 2017 poll, 83 percent of the economists surveyed agreed that "Providing state and local subsidies to build stadiums for professional sports teams is likely to cost the relevant taxpayers more than any local economic benefits that are generated." In their book, Sports, Jobs, and Taxes, Roger Noll and Andrew Zimbalist present a comprehensive review of stadium investments. In all cases, they find a new sports facility to have extremely small (or negative) effects on overall economic activity and employment. Furthermore, they were unable to find any facilities that had a reasonable return on investment. Sports economist Michael Leeds suggests that professional sports have very little economic impact, noting that a baseball team (with 81 regular-season home games per year) "has about the same impact on a community as a midsize department store." His research suggests that if every professional sports team in Chicago (including the Cubs, White Sox, Bears, Bulls, and Blackhawks) were to suddenly disappear, the economic impact on Chicago would be a fraction of 1 percent."
St. Louis knows something about public funds invested in private sports facilities.
I am a huge sports fan. I have enjoyed each of the Chicago and St. Louis sports venues. I just don't want my tax dollars being used for so little return.