Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 484 of 501 FirstFirst ... 384434474482483484485486494 ... LastLast
Results 7,246 to 7,260 of 7514
  1. #7246
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    637
    Quote Originally Posted by Kyben36 View Post
    What if they ate a signifigant portion of his deal a la Foles?

    He has a 4 mil dead out next year so your really not investing that much in him.
    Yeah, maybe. I just don't think he has the explosion that he once had. Either way, looks like Montgomery is only going to miss 2-4 weeks.

  2. #7247
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Lynwood , IL
    Posts
    49,482
    Urlacher you idiot

  3. #7248
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    IL
    Posts
    27,592
    Quote Originally Posted by Stunner View Post
    Urlacher you idiot
    Yes I agree

    Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

    Click here to register!

    Hope to see some new posters around here soon.

  4. #7249
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    27,846
    Quote Originally Posted by KG2TB View Post
    Considering itís the very thing that will determine who starts, I think itís worth talking about in an overall dead forum.
    We can't even really know if there's any merit to the idea that practice performance is gonna matter. We have 3 years of Mitch and 9 of Foles. What does the team really think is gonna be any dramatically different about either player that hasn't been discovered yet? Even if it is, how do we know how practice is going? Because of the opinion of beat writers? It's not even just reaction to practice first-hand, it's reactions to opinion articles authored by people who are making a living dramatizing this stuff.

    Anyway, sure the forum is dead. I guess I need not complain, but meh. It's basically all speculation.
    Last edited by La_bibbers; 08-27-2020 at 06:07 PM.

  5. #7250
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Lynwood , IL
    Posts
    49,482

  6. #7251
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Lynwood , IL
    Posts
    49,482

  7. #7252
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    21,538
    Quote Originally Posted by La_bibbers View Post
    We can't even really know if there's any merit to the idea that practice performance is gonna matter. We have 3 years of Mitch and 9 of Foles. What does the team really think is gonna be any dramatically different about either player that hasn't been discovered yet? Even if it is, how do we know how practice is going? Because of the opinion of beat writers? It's not even just reaction to practice first-hand, it's reactions to opinion articles authored by people who are making a living dramatizing this stuff.

    Anyway, sure the forum is dead. I guess I need not complain, but meh. It's basically all speculation.
    I still read it because well...thatís all I got. Seems like foles is a bit ahead if you listen to the reporters.

  8. #7253
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    27,846
    Quote Originally Posted by KG2TB View Post
    I still read it because well...thatís all I got. Seems like foles is a bit ahead if you listen to the reporters.
    I mean, you already know my thoughts. If the Bears have any kind of common sense, Foles should be the starter no matter what unless he's hurt. We gave up a mid-round draft pick in a deep draft, took on his big contract, are in win now mode, and at this point, are committed to him longer than we are to Mitch.

    If they still believed in Mitch, they shouldn't have traded for Foles. I don't care how good Mitch looks in practice. Could've signed Dalton or Cam or Keenum for pennies on the dollar if all they were looking for was someone to tag in if Mitch sucks again.

    I get that's not really the point you're making - you're just talking about what the reporters are saying. Which, the reports matter, I'm definitely interested in inside info, I just don't care about the reporters' opinions on performance (they're often terrible). Especially in practice.
    Last edited by La_bibbers; 08-28-2020 at 10:12 AM.

  9. #7254
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    In a house in a Coldesac in Lake in the Hills, Il
    Posts
    28,121
    something I just saw that kinda caught my eye.

    https://youtu.be/fgOnPrq7X7I

    D Harris is miked up in Camp for this vid and one thing caught my eye. Jimmy Graham Doesnt look very big. And The I realized it has nothing to do with Jimmy..... It had to do with just how huge our TE room is compared to last year.

    Last year we had

    Burron 6-2
    Braunecker 6-3
    Horstead 6-3
    holtz 6-3
    Shaheen 6-6

    Average height of 6-3.4

    This year

    Greham 6-7
    Kmet 6-6
    Harris 6-7

    And Im unsure who the last 2 or 3 guys will be But its 6-3 unless Saubert makes it who is 6-5. Even so if u factor in 2 6-3 guys thats still a bump up in average height to 6-5.2"

    I think it would have been noticable had Camp been open though. I never recall our TEs standing out physically. Maybe Shaheen but he allways seemed to be out of practice anyway. Its like for the first time I can remember in recent memeory the TEs are actually bigger than our WRs.

  10. #7255
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    In a house in a Coldesac in Lake in the Hills, Il
    Posts
    28,121
    Quote Originally Posted by La_bibbers View Post
    I mean, you already know my thoughts. If the Bears have any kind of common sense, Foles should be the starter no matter what unless he's hurt. We gave up a mid-round draft pick in a deep draft, took on his big contract, are in win now mode, and at this point, are committed to him longer than we are to Mitch.

    If they still believed in Mitch, they shouldn't have traded for Foles. I don't care how good Mitch looks in practice. Could've signed Dalton or Cam or Keenum for pennies on the dollar if all they were looking for was someone to tag in if Mitch sucks again.

    I get that's not really the point you're making - you're just talking about what the reporters are saying. Which, the reports matter, I'm definitely interested in inside info, I just don't care about the reporters' opinions on performance (they're often terrible). Especially in practice.
    you so realize that the jags ate a ton of Foles deal and he is basically on 2 year 11 mil deal with a 10 mil 3rd year option right? He is basically paid as much as Keenum the next 2 years.

    You bring up the finances 2x in this post and the reality is we see none of his "monster contract". And you can debate if we were better off waiting till post draft for Dalton to be realeased..... or Way longer for Cam. But honestly we had zero idea how the FA would pan out. That Dalton and Cam would basically have no real options. That the Patriots would just sit in wait and the Chargers were content with Taylor.

    And I still maintain that a 4th is nothing to pay for Your guy..... especially considering the offsesson we are having and getting a guy with experience in a similar system should help.

    I mean under your two scenarios if we had faith in Mitch would you rather us have used a 4th round pick on a backup QB instead and let it ride. Probably not. we would probably still be crying we should have signed a backup like Keenum or Even a Dalton or Cam. But honestly I dont think Dalton or Cam Settle for what they did with the bears either. Dalton would not be the clear backup like he is in Dallas. And Cam could we really sit on Cam for months and Poker face our way with Mitch that we had a good option in front of him. I doubt it.

    so I dont like any of the arguments for Foles honestly. If foles is better he is better. They money or Pick comp was not rediculous to warrant a guy being locked into any sort of guarunteed role. And if you want to make that basis of your argument The bears spent a first on Mitch and he is due more money this year. The fact is there is only 1 reason Foles should start over Mitch. And that is if he is better. And if Mitch is what he was last year its likely Foles is better than him.

  11. #7256
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Depaul
    Posts
    2,239
    If Foles can't beat out Mitch and doesn't look good if he does play, that's going to look like really really bad money.

    It's a 2 year 13.3 million, but he still has a 3.6 million cap hit if cut after 2 years. Sick of paying backups without much potential this much money. At least he's better than Daniels worst case.

    A 4th plus that money is ridiculously stupid if he isn't your starter given the Bears circumstances.

  12. #7257
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    27,846
    Quote Originally Posted by Kyben36 View Post
    you so realize that the jags ate a ton of Foles deal and he is basically on 2 year 11 mil deal with a 10 mil 3rd year option right? He is basically paid as much as Keenum the next 2 years.

    You bring up the finances 2x in this post and the reality is we see none of his "monster contract". And you can debate if we were better off waiting till post draft for Dalton to be realeased..... or Way longer for Cam. But honestly we had zero idea how the FA would pan out. That Dalton and Cam would basically have no real options. That the Patriots would just sit in wait and the Chargers were content with Taylor.

    And I still maintain that a 4th is nothing to pay for Your guy..... especially considering the offsesson we are having and getting a guy with experience in a similar system should help.

    I mean under your two scenarios if we had faith in Mitch would you rather us have used a 4th round pick on a backup QB instead and let it ride. Probably not. we would probably still be crying we should have signed a backup like Keenum or Even a Dalton or Cam. But honestly I dont think Dalton or Cam Settle for what they did with the bears either. Dalton would not be the clear backup like he is in Dallas. And Cam could we really sit on Cam for months and Poker face our way with Mitch that we had a good option in front of him. I doubt it.

    so I dont like any of the arguments for Foles honestly. If foles is better he is better. They money or Pick comp was not rediculous to warrant a guy being locked into any sort of guarunteed role. And if you want to make that basis of your argument The bears spent a first on Mitch and he is due more money this year. The fact is there is only 1 reason Foles should start over Mitch. And that is if he is better. And if Mitch is what he was last year its likely Foles is better than him.
    No, I actually didn't realize that. Thanks for the correction. It doesn't change my personal feelings about Mitch, but sure, there's much more justification to let him play with that removed.

  13. #7258
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    10,487
    Alec Ogletree was brought in for a workout... that seems kinda significant

  14. #7259
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    9,397
    Ogletree has to be better than some of these guys. Sign him up

  15. #7260
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    IL
    Posts
    27,592
    Beast

    Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

    Click here to register!

    Hope to see some new posters around here soon.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •