Bears 2019/20; George McCaskey is on the clock

[Brothaman33]

So for me, this win doesn't and shouldn't change the hot seat that both Pace and Nagy should be on.

Now if they win out, which is highly unlikely because of Green Bay, we can have a deeper conversation about them possibly staying depending on the way they won out. I still think its only 50/50 they get fired anyways because in the grand scheme of things, the record isn't that bad and they seem to have not completely lost the team. This isnt 2 years of 4-12 or 3-13. They went 8-8 last year and look to be on the same track again. They arn't horrific, they are just meh and havent shown any improvement. I'm not saying I wouldn't fire them, but I can totally see the higher ups looking at things from that perspective.

I think the QB situation is an interesting one because, I don't see what you bring in other then a draft pick. I think Foles has to be done as a starter. Mitch isn't a high level starter but he probably is competant enough to win a few games with. I think you have to at least talk about bringing him back, depending on how these last games go. It's either that or you throw a Kyle Trask (or insert mid first round QB name here) with Pace picking it again.

If Pace isn't here it makes it more interesting because we don't know what a new regime would think of Mitch, especially with little for options outside of him.

[dice]

Drafting Trubisky alone with not firable, but the way he did it, was certainly.

I also believe the Mack trade was worth it and that if they had a competent defensive coordinator, he'd look like the best defensive player in the game.

first of all, nobody is gonna look better than aaron donald regardless of circumstances. secondly, it's not about mack's performance. anyone who doesn't fixate on sacks recognizes that he's still a monster. it's the reality that you CAN overpay for a great player. and the bears did that. ryan pace valued khalil mack more than any other team in the league did. and WAY more than the raiders did. i don't even think the raiders are a well run team, but they're better off for having made that deal

it is not a skill to outbid every other team in the league for a player. not when it's mitch trubisky and not when it's khalil mack. teams win with the QB position, with lots of quality players on rookie contracts, and with coaching. they rarely win by going in big on free agents, who are systematically overpaid on the whole because those on rookie deals are systematically UNDERpaid. but when it comes to free agents, much better to spend 12 mil a year of that budget on an akiem hicks than 24 mil PLUS draft picks for khalil mack (he might be worth the 24 mil, but not the picks on top). then you have assets left over to use on...oh let's say your offensive line

I disagree. Mack was close going to the Rams and Pace did what was necessary to close the deal.

yes, he valued mack more than everybody else did. including the rams. again, "doing what is necessary to close the deal" is not a skill

Where he did a bad job though is literally using all those picks on Mitchell Trubisky. That was awful.

that was worse only because it turned out that trubisky was not the best of that QB class. results-oriented thinking is surefire loser mentality

if trubisky was head-and-shoulders the best QB prospect, trading up would have made sense. but it seems that nobody except ryan pace and his scout(s) thought that was the case. the mack trade had no logic behind it whatsoever. every single team that was bidding for him was foolish. the bears happened to be the most foolish of them all

[dice]

this is the team that many people hoped the bears would be this season

so, big extension for trubisky?

[dice]

I don't care if he makes the playoffs. I think it's career suicide to resign him. If the Bears miraculously make the playoffs, I think you still let him go and try to get a line together thru the draft. They're screwed next year anyway with the cap so I don't know if they could afford Trubisky if he does somehow play good.

remember how so many people were pissed when cutler was re-signed...?

[thedarkstark]

I'll say what I've been since game 1 of last season: Michell Trubisky was being used improperly by a really really bad coach. He has never been the reason for our failures, but he's also not who we hoped we were getting when Pace traded up to get him.

He's basically Alex Smith, everyone can't wait to get rid of him but the Bears don't have anyone better waiting in the wings (another failure by Pace). The Bears are now in a position where if he continues to play well the rest of the year the Bears might be forced to franchise tag Trubisky which would be hilarious.

If the Bears finish 8-8 or 9-7 are they really going to go into 2021 with Nick ****ing Foles as their starter? And if so they'd presumably be doing it yet again without a developmental QB on the roster because I don't think anyone falls to the 15-20 range.

Another potential option: sign Newton or Winston who you passed on for $1mill to instead trade a 4th for Foles and his $20mill a year If Pace sticks around the optics on that would be mind-numbingly bad.

[Susan]

this is the team that many people hoped the bears would be this season

so, big extension for trubisky?

If you can get him to a reasonable contract (and he plays like he played since getting benched) would you?

Read on Twitter

Something along the lines of what Teddy Bridgewater got last year ($63M, 3 years, $33M guaranteed).

Or you can go ahead and try and draft another QB?

[nitetrain8603]

first of all, nobody is gonna look better than aaron donald regardless of circumstances. secondly, it's not about mack's performance. anyone who doesn't fixate on sacks recognizes that he's still a monster. it's the reality that you CAN overpay for a great player. and the bears did that. ryan pace valued khalil mack more than any other team in the league did. and WAY more than the raiders did. i don't even think the raiders are a well run team, but they're better off for having made that deal

it is not a skill to outbid every other team in the league for a player. not when it's mitch trubisky and not when it's khalil mack. teams win with the QB position, with lots of quality players on rookie contracts, and with coaching. they rarely win by going in big on free agents, who are systematically overpaid on the whole because those on rookie deals are systematically UNDERpaid. but when it comes to free agents, much better to spend 12 mil a year of that budget on an akiem hicks than 24 mil PLUS draft picks for khalil mack (he might be worth the 24 mil, but not the picks on top). then you have assets left over to use on...oh let's say your offensive line

I disagree. Mack was close going to the Rams and Pace did what was necessary to close the deal.

yes, he valued mack more than everybody else did. including the rams. again, "doing what is necessary to close the deal" is not a skill

Where he did a bad job though is literally using all those picks on Mitchell Trubisky. That was awful.

that was worse only because it turned out that trubisky was not the best of that QB class. results-oriented thinking is surefire loser mentality

if trubisky was head-and-shoulders the best QB prospect, trading up would have made sense. but it seems that nobody except ryan pace and his scout(s) thought that was the case. the mack trade had no logic behind it whatsoever. every single team that was bidding for him was foolish. the bears happened to be the most foolish of them all

All of the draft capital to move up one spot was not a forgivable offense unless he ended up with Mahomes, a surefire HoF QB, who might be the greatest of his time. Even then, it would still be somewhat questionable. He gave that all up to move up 1 spot for a position player that no team was going to try to draft that high. Missing on Mahomes makes it worse. The fact that there was two other QBs who were better makes it worse, and the fact that he misevaluated the player so badly makes it thee worst.

[nitetrain8603]

this is the team that many people hoped the bears would be this season

so, big extension for trubisky?

If you can get him to a reasonable contract (and he plays like he played since getting benched) would you?

Read on Twitter

Something along the lines of what Teddy Bridgewater got last year ($63M, 3 years, $33M guaranteed).

Or you can go ahead and try and draft another QB?

I'd say that's fools gold and the Bears would be dumb to be suckered into doing even that deal - especially with their cap situation.

[Susan]

I'll say what I've been since game 1 of last season: Michell Trubisky was being used improperly by a really really bad coach. He has never been the reason for our failures, but he's also not who we hoped we were getting when Pace traded up to get him.

He's basically Alex Smith, everyone can't wait to get rid of him but the Bears don't have anyone better waiting in the wings (another failure by Pace). The Bears are now in a position where if he continues to play well the rest of the year the Bears might be forced to franchise tag Trubisky which would be hilarious.

If the Bears finish 8-8 or 9-7 are they really going to go into 2021 with Nick ****ing Foles as their starter? And if so they'd presumably be doing it yet again without a developmental QB on the roster because I don't think anyone falls to the 15-20 range.

Another potential option: sign Newton or Winston who you passed on for $1mill to instead trade a 4th for Foles and his $20mill a year If Pace sticks around the optics on that would be mind-numbingly bad.

I think you can unload Foles to Indy or some other team for a 5th or 6th given his contract. He's a good backup and good bridge QB and that contract isn't bad.

[Susan]

this is the team that many people hoped the bears would be this season

so, big extension for trubisky?

If you can get him to a reasonable contract (and he plays like he played since getting benched) would you?

Read on Twitter

Something along the lines of what Teddy Bridgewater got last year ($63M, 3 years, $33M guaranteed).

Or you can go ahead and try and draft another QB?

I'd say that's fools gold and the Bears would be dumb to be suckered into doing even that deal - especially with their cap situation.

https://overthecap.com/player/jared-goff/4714/

Drafting a QB is a crapshoot, getting a QB on a value deal isn't the worst thing in the world. If Mitch continues to play like how he played today, the clown is Nagy for benching him so early in favor of "his system" and thankfully they're coaching to Mitch's strengths now.

Paying for Trubisky, using the 1st rounder for an OT would be better short term and potentially long term if you believe that Nagy's system is/was fugazi.

[transplant]

The Bears were certainly due to have a good, complete game and they had it today...very good in all phases.

Though vocal fans have determined that Pace, Nagy and Trubisky are all gone after this season, in truth, their loud opinions don't matter much. To the people who actually have to make these decisions, they are all still open. The question at the end of this season will be what is best for the team to be most successful in 2021.

If you dump Trubisky, who is your QB? Foles? A trade for a 3rd or 4th tier player? A draft pick taken in the middle of the first round? I'm not saying that the Bears won't go in one of these directions, but I do believe a lot will depend on what happens in the next 4 games. Frankly, if Trubisky continues to play like he has since his benching, there's a very good chance that the Bears will be open to re-signing him to a heavily-incentivized contract.

IIf you wanted to include most of NFL media and lots of NFL people in with these vocal fans,you could as well. The overall point stands, but it’s not just fans.

agree

[nitetrain8603]

If you can get him to a reasonable contract (and he plays like he played since getting benched) would you?

Read on Twitter

Something along the lines of what Teddy Bridgewater got last year ($63M, 3 years, $33M guaranteed).

Or you can go ahead and try and draft another QB?

I'd say that's fools gold and the Bears would be dumb to be suckered into doing even that deal - especially with their cap situation.

https://overthecap.com/player/jared-goff/4714/

Yep, such an awful deal. That deal and Gurley - terrible. It does give hope for Bear fans to turn it around quickly.

[Dresden]

Let's see how Mitch and the offense look the rest of the year. If they continue to play as well as they have the last two games, I think it will mean something, no matter how bad the competition is. It's still the NFL. They were dominant today, putting up 36 points, 30 in the first half.

You at least have to consider staying with Mitch and Lazor, if not Nagy. What would the options be? Maybe if Mitch continues to do really well, and you don't like the qb's available where we pick in the first round, you don't use that pick on QB. Get one later in the draft. I do think they should still draft one, because you can't just overlook how bad Mitch has been for most of his career. But maybe the time on the bench did something, or maybe it's Lazor calling signals.

We'll see. I'd be very surprised if they continue to look this good the rest of the year, so it's a pretty academic question, really.

[chicagoballer]

As much as mitch has let everyone down the last couple years, unless you love a QB prospect, you go with mitch next year. Pace and Nagy need to go unless the rest of year is phenomenal. Beef up the O-line, resign A-rob. get another receiver, see if the defense can pull off a great year out of the hat. if not, its complete rebuild time.

Things are different if you have a top pick and love a prospect. but our pick will be middle of first round at best. I would put money on mitch being better than a middle of the round QB who you maybe dont regard as highly.

[CjayC]

this is the team that many people hoped the bears would be this season

so, big extension for trubisky?

If you can get him to a reasonable contract (and he plays like he played since getting benched) would you?

Read on Twitter

Something along the lines of what Teddy Bridgewater got last year ($63M, 3 years, $33M guaranteed).

Or you can go ahead and try and draft another QB?

If you can sign him to something fair, that's easy to cut ties with, and doesn't hurt cap flexibility I'd probably do it. I really don't know what's available on the Free agency market though.

I'd also double dip and try to find his replacement, early in the draft. Definitely not fooled by his performances over the last few weeks, but I want us to be relatively watchable and competitive as well. Unless there's an obvious Andrew Luck, Trevor Lawrence type prospect, I'm not really a fan of tanking in Football. I think it demoralizes the team in a different way as compared to the NBA or Baseball.

[Kurt Heimlich]

The compromising thoughts of this thread are making me a little sad. If the Bears buy into Trubisky being an actual answer at QB then the Bears will truly earn what they deserve as a classical perpetually lost treadmill 7-9 to 9-7 team. I'm honestly in a bit of shock how some people can be so easily swayed into believe in a person like Trubisky for that position.

[CjayC]

The compromising thoughts of this thread are making me a little sad. If the Bears buy into Trubisky being an actual answer at QB then the Bears will truly earn what they deserve as a classical perpetually lost treadmill 7-9 to 9-7 team. I'm honestly in a bit of shock how some people can be so easily swayed into believe in a person like Trubisky for that position.

I've seen pretty reasonable takes on him though. If he's that bad I think the bottom will fall out on it's own. Also there's no reason they shouldn't be attacking the draft for a QB if they do sign Mitch. I don't know how they can spin going into the next year with Foles though, either way it goes. It seems like every other year there's a QB who outplays his draft slot/should've went higher in hindsight, so a Top 5 pick would be nice, but I don't think it's a necessity if they pick right.

[Jeffster81]

Something along the lines of what Teddy Bridgewater got last year ($63M, 3 years, $33M guaranteed).

Or you can go ahead and try and draft another QB?

If you can, you do both. You HAVE to draft a QB this year. I think you can get Mitch for less than what Bridgewater got because he's not going to be a "in demand" guy unless he blows up between now and the end of the season.

[thedarkstark]

I can't wait for Trubisky to go on and have a successful career outside of Chicago. Bears are tied with the Eagles for the worst fanbase in sports. I can't wait to bring in the next Kyle Orton because this crybaby fanbase couldn't get over the fact that Trubisky isn't as good as Watson or Mahomes. If one of the top QB prospects falls and you draft them that's fantastic but if not then Mitch should be the starter next season.

[molepharmer]

Regardless of whether they bring back Mitch next year or not, the Bears have other problems on the offense that need to be addressed (e.g. O-line and #1 WR). Taking something from O Kreutz's post game rant, 'Look at Houston, they have their QB and spent big on the O-line but Watson has no receiver's that can get open. you have to look at the whole offense package'. Basically fixing one area isn't enough.