Jump to content

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, Tony said:

Right, that’s the sell job. He plays on 2nd down passing downs and 3rd down. He’s on a pitch count, and keeps everyone fresh. It would elevate an already scary D Corp. That’s the move right now, to me at least. 

Takes pressure on needing a playmaker at safety too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Kyyle23 said:

That division is in shambles, they have a huge opportunity to take it this season 

Can we take a moment to appreciate what has happened in the Steelers FO the last 2 seasons?

Start off pre-2017, they have one of the best sets of skill players in the NFL. Bell is a FA and they tag him for $12 million/1 year guaranteed. Negotiate a contract but don't reach an agreement, Bell plays the year, they lose to the Patriots at the end of the game on a catch call so bad that it leads to changes in the catch rule after the season, they lose the #1 seed and they get caught offguard by the Jags in the playoffs thinking they'd have an easy march to a rematch. 

Pre 2018, they extend Brown, putting something like $8 million on their cap but leaving them with a substantial future commitment. They franchise Bell again, putting $15 million in held money on their cap. They low-ball Bell, with a contract that has a $17 million guarantee - they coulda put a $30 million guarantee on the table before 2017 and had things done, but nope. Directly leads to a toxic environment as players are calling out other players before game 1 of the year, circus atmosphere. Bell holds out the whole year, so their $15 million in cap space is completely blown. Play out the season, Steelers even actually beat the Patriots but collapse in the 2nd half of the season, miss the playoffs. No playoff revenue, could have had a legit chance at the Super Bowl. Brown winds up making the atmosphere 10x worse, gets benched.

Steelers trade Brown, leaving them with another >$15 million in dead cap space for 2019. Maybe he'd have still blown up had the Steelers been on their way to the playoffs, Bell's mess didn't make him facebook stream a team meeting, but it certainly didn't help the environment. 

Altogether, they had Bell play for them affordably in 2017, had something like $32 million in dead cap space in 2018 and 2019, missed the 2018 playoffs, and had their QB get a couple years older.

This is epically bad. Sign Bell to a reasonable extension before 2017 and he's already through his guaranteed money and at the very least you've got a 2018 playoff run. Rick Hahn looks at this and shakes his head.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

Can we take a moment to appreciate what has happened in the Steelers FO the last 2 seasons?

Start off pre-2017, they have one of the best sets of skill players in the NFL. Bell is a FA and they tag him for $12 million/1 year guaranteed. Negotiate a contract but don't reach an agreement, Bell plays the year, they lose to the Patriots at the end of the game on a catch call so bad that it leads to changes in the catch rule after the season, they lose the #1 seed and they get caught offguard by the Jags in the playoffs thinking they'd have an easy march to a rematch. 

Pre 2018, they extend Brown, putting something like $8 million on their cap but leaving them with a substantial future commitment. They franchise Bell again, putting $15 million in held money on their cap. They low-ball Bell, with a contract that has a $17 million guarantee - they coulda put a $30 million guarantee on the table before 2017 and had things done, but nope. Directly leads to a toxic environment as players are calling out other players before game 1 of the year, circus atmosphere. Bell holds out the whole year, so their $15 million in cap space is completely blown. Play out the season, Steelers even actually beat the Patriots but collapse in the 2nd half of the season, miss the playoffs. No playoff revenue, could have had a legit chance at the Super Bowl. Brown winds up making the atmosphere 10x worse, gets benched.

Steelers trade Brown, leaving them with another >$15 million in dead cap space for 2019. Maybe he'd have still blown up had the Steelers been on their way to the playoffs, Bell's mess didn't make him facebook stream a team meeting, but it certainly didn't help the environment. 

Altogether, they had Bell play for them affordably in 2017, had something like $32 million in dead cap space in 2018 and 2019, missed the 2018 playoffs, and had their QB get a couple years older.

This is epically bad. Sign Bell to a reasonable extension before 2017 and he's already through his guaranteed money and at the very least you've got a 2018 playoff run. Rick Hahn looks at this and shakes his head.

Pretty sure that somewhere in the middle of all that they also did something with Roethlisbergers contract that will result in a large cap hit later

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Kyyle23 said:

Pretty sure that somewhere in the middle of all that they also did something with Roethlisbergers contract that will result in a large cap hit later

I think that comes this year. He's due for an extension soon. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was listening to some sports radio this morning on way to gym, a lot of consensus that Bell came out poorly. I agree in the perception in a team game of doing this is bad, and the contract is less than he initially sought.

But the whole reason players hate the franchise tag is even though you get one big year, you are at risk of long term security.

It is absolutely likely that he could have had a good year, made that $15(?) million int he bank, and found another $15 milll guaranteed in FA/re-signing.

However, he also could have gotten injured or slowed down this year, and then entered free agency as a player people were loathe to give guaranteed cash to.

This isn't best case scenario deal, but it also isn't worst case scenario, which would have been playing and having a catastrophic injury.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, bmags said:

I was listening to some sports radio this morning on way to gym, a lot of consensus that Bell came out poorly. I agree in the perception in a team game of doing this is bad, and the contract is less than he initially sought.

But the whole reason players hate the franchise tag is even though you get one big year, you are at risk of long term security.

It is absolutely likely that he could have had a good year, made that $15(?) million int he bank, and found another $15 milll guaranteed in FA/re-signing.

However, he also could have gotten injured or slowed down this year, and then entered free agency as a player people were loathe to give guaranteed cash to.

This isn't best case scenario deal, but it also isn't worst case scenario, which would have been playing and having a catastrophic injury.

Didn't the Steelers offer him more for an extension at one point?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Rowand44 said:

Didn't the Steelers offer him more for an extension at one point?

We don't know what was offered before the 2017 season as far as I know, there was a report that the steelers thought they had it done and then it turned out they didn't have it done before the deadline for signing tagged players, I don't believe we saw a dollar amount.

Pre 2018 they offered him a 5 year, $70 million deal that would have paid him just a little less than Gurley got on a per year basis, but that deal only included 1 year/$17 million guaranteed money. Considering the tag locked up $15 million of their cap space last year once they offered it, there was basically no new money in that deal, it was just a repeat of the franchise tag values and any time Bell got hurt or his performance dropped he could have been cut. If he twisted an ankle last year he could have been cut with only $3 million in dead cap space this season.  It was a frankly disrespectful offer from Pittsburgh's front office in the modern league, and conveniently they probably missed the playoffs because of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

 

Pre 2018 they offered him a 5 year, $70 million deal that would have paid him just a little less than Gurley got on a per year basis, but that deal only included 1 year/$17 million guaranteed money. Considering the tag locked up $15 million of their cap space last year once they offered it, there was basically no new money in that deal, it was just a repeat of the franchise tag values and any time Bell got hurt or his performance dropped he could have been cut.

Fair enough.  I stand corrected.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Tony said:

God, I LOVE the NFL offseason. Blows MLB away. 

Everything happens quickly but then there's nothing for what, almost half a year when games start? I guess there's the draft, but that's still far out any way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, soxfan2014 said:

Everything happens quickly but then there's nothing for what, almost half a year when games start? I guess there's the draft, but that's still far out any way.

There is the draft and then the June 1 cut date still, isn't there?   Nfl is keeping itself on the radar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Tony said:

Ok Bears...any time now....

I think the Bears made a mistake creating all this cap space when there weren't any major difference makers to go for. I think the smart thing would have been to keep ammunition for a future point in the time. I do not believe in create cap nightmares. This just wasn't the year, given how they were positioned in cap space and with draft picks to do this. And if they do make a move, it needs to be more like the Rams with a guy on more 1-2 year type deals where you aren't really locking up too much long-term. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, soxfan2014 said:

Everything happens quickly but then there's nothing for what, almost half a year when games start? I guess there's the draft, but that's still far out any way.

I think its better and healthier. Prior to it (feb-march) you have the speculation on who the team could sign plus the combine/draft stuff, and then you have the actual moves.

It's anticipation/build-up and then big event. 

In the mlb it's so spread out, the speculation becomes boring and the payout being spread out is less entertaining to me. In two days we got to see what the browns are likely to look like next year and judge those moves against others.

You can't judge how mlb teams fared in free agency even into spring training!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Chisoxfn said:

I think the Bears made a mistake creating all this cap space when there weren't any major difference makers to go for. I think the smart thing would have been to keep ammunition for a future point in the time. I do not believe in create cap nightmares. This just wasn't the year, given how they were positioned in cap space and with draft picks to do this. And if they do make a move, it needs to be more like the Rams with a guy on more 1-2 year type deals where you aren't really locking up too much long-term. 

Well, what would have made it cap hell is to splurge guaranteed, long term money on a player that will decline over next 4 years.

This isn't ideal, but it really isn't necessarily bad either. There will be june 1st cuts, there are still some names out there.

However, as big a fan as I am on the team Pace has built, he is operating more as he did his first few years which got a lot of mid level deals that could be cut. They didn't create structural issues for the bears, but they also didn't add talent. 

The bears are in a window, you don't want to prematurely shorten it, but you also don't want to put a ceiling on it. This free agency to me is more acceptable if we had 7 draft picks but we only have a hand ful, so I would have preferred they were more aggressive.

edit: obviously if they can get houston (I have been busy so don't know if he signed) that's good usage of money to me. You can't have enough pass rushers.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, bmags said:

Well, what would have made it cap hell is to splurge guaranteed, long term money on a player that will decline over next 4 years.

This isn't ideal, but it really isn't necessarily bad either. There will be june 1st cuts, there are still some names out there.

However, as big a fan as I am on the team Pace has built, he is operating more as he did his first few years which got a lot of mid level deals that could be cut. They didn't create structural issues for the bears, but they also didn't add talent. 

The bears are in a window, you don't want to prematurely shorten it, but you also don't want to put a ceiling on it. This free agency to me is more acceptable if we had 7 draft picks but we only have a hand ful, so I would have preferred they were more aggressive.

edit: obviously if they can get houston (I have been busy so don't know if he signed) that's good usage of money to me. You can't have enough pass rushers.)

I just think in this type of free agency, they should have been on the sideline and went bargain shopping. They just weren't positioned to do anything different. And if they wanted to take a different approach than they needed to launch for an impact name.  What they did was play in the middle and I don't think that was the best strategy given their position. I also firmly believe against mortgaging the future, especially in a game where injuries, etc can immediately shoot seasons down the tubes (at all to high of a frequency).

Said another way, I'd rather maintain flexibility to be able to strike where appropriate vs. make a move like this to free up cap space on a few mediocre players (maybe make you slightly better but not worth the future flexibility lost).  Strategically it is the way I operate.  

And on Houston...he hasn't been very good the past couple years (since his major deal), so I don't necessarily know that signing him would work much different than the Jared Allen signing. I could be wrong though and I certainly would hope if we did sign him and put him in a reps limit that maybe we get more "value" from him, but I don't view the opportunity cost of future cap space as being that worth it.  At this point though, the Bears forced their hand prematurely by making a decision with Mack without a ready impact move.

I'd personally want to make sure we have the cash/cap flexibility to pay people after we've hopefully paid Mitch (because he's earned the big paycheck).  I don't want to built a team that is great for 2 years and then falls apart. I want the  Bears to have a franchise for once that can hit great, but also maintain a long-term period of sustained success.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Chisoxfn said:

I just think in this type of free agency, they should have been on the sideline and went bargain shopping. They just weren't positioned to do anything different. And if they wanted to take a different approach than they needed to launch for an impact name.  What they did was play in the middle and I don't think that was the best strategy given their position. I also firmly believe against mortgaging the future, especially in a game where injuries, etc can immediately shoot seasons down the tubes (at all to high of a frequency).

Said another way, I'd rather maintain flexibility to be able to strike where appropriate vs. make a move like this to free up cap space on a few mediocre players (maybe make you slightly better but not worth the future flexibility lost).  Strategically it is the way I operate.  

And on Houston...he hasn't been very good the past couple years (since his major deal), so I don't necessarily know that signing him would work much different than the Jared Allen signing. I could be wrong though and I certainly would hope if we did sign him and put him in a reps limit that maybe we get more "value" from him, but I don't view the opportunity cost of future cap space as being that worth it.  At this point though, the Bears forced their hand prematurely by making a decision with Mack without a ready impact move.

I'd personally want to make sure we have the cash/cap flexibility to pay people after we've hopefully paid Mitch (because he's earned the big paycheck).  I don't want to built a team that is great for 2 years and then falls apart. I want the  Bears to have a franchise for once that can hit great, but also maintain a long-term period of sustained success.  

I guess I don't know how much Houston will go for. But I don't know that Allen was that bad of a signing, though important that Houston is 2 years younger than he was. The bad part was they needed Allen to be a dominant player on a bad defense.

For bears, Houston can just be an important veteran for depth that can still get after the QB. He is certainly better than Aaron Lynch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Houston was a FF machine last year and a pretty good year on the sack numbers. Not sure what the Chiefs are doing considering their defense was bad as it is. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Chisoxfn said:

I just think in this type of free agency, they should have been on the sideline and went bargain shopping. They just weren't positioned to do anything different. And if they wanted to take a different approach than they needed to launch for an impact name.  What they did was play in the middle and I don't think that was the best strategy given their position. I also firmly believe against mortgaging the future, especially in a game where injuries, etc can immediately shoot seasons down the tubes (at all to high of a frequency).

Said another way, I'd rather maintain flexibility to be able to strike where appropriate vs. make a move like this to free up cap space on a few mediocre players (maybe make you slightly better but not worth the future flexibility lost).  Strategically it is the way I operate.  

And on Houston...he hasn't been very good the past couple years (since his major deal), so I don't necessarily know that signing him would work much different than the Jared Allen signing. I could be wrong though and I certainly would hope if we did sign him and put him in a reps limit that maybe we get more "value" from him, but I don't view the opportunity cost of future cap space as being that worth it.  At this point though, the Bears forced their hand prematurely by making a decision with Mack without a ready impact move.

I'd personally want to make sure we have the cash/cap flexibility to pay people after we've hopefully paid Mitch (because he's earned the big paycheck).  I don't want to built a team that is great for 2 years and then falls apart. I want the  Bears to have a franchise for once that can hit great, but also maintain a long-term period of sustained success.  

I couldn't disagree more about your Houston/Allen comparison.  Houston won't take the starting job from Floyd or Mack, he won't be counted on like Allen was.  He will have to be in the Aaron Lynch rotational role

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Kyyle23 said:

I couldn't disagree more about your Houston/Allen comparison.  Houston won't take the starting job from Floyd or Mack, he won't be counted on like Allen was.  He will have to be in the Aaron Lynch rotational role

My point is you don't create future cap issues for situational / role players. You just don't.  If this was the Houston of 3 years ago, great, sign me up for robbing future cap space. We are robbing future cap space for situational type players. I don't like that one bad. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Chisoxfn said:

My point is you don't create future cap issues for situational / role players. You just don't.  If this was the Houston of 3 years ago, great, sign me up for robbing future cap space. We are robbing future cap space for situational type players. I don't like that one bad. 

I in general agree. However you never know what your window will be. Bears have talented roster but do not have a lot of draft picks, I want to maximize this roster now. With the exception of the patriots and the great job Andy Reid has done, even successful orgs have had basically two reboots in a decade. Look at Philly. Really good decade, two rebuilds in it. 

Bears cant just trust that trubisky will be elite and carry them during periods where they need to retool.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Chisoxfn said:

My point is you don't create future cap issues for situational / role players. You just don't.  If this was the Houston of 3 years ago, great, sign me up for robbing future cap space. We are robbing future cap space for situational type players. I don't like that one bad. 

We all want the Bears future to be incredibly bright for the long haul. But as you mentioned, injuries and just the randomness of football can change everything in a second. What we do know, almost for certain, is this core is locked up for the next few seasons. And they need to capitalize on that ASAP. It also goes without saying that Pace deserves the benefit of the doubt when it comes to understanding that money needs to be set aside from guys like Eddie Jackson and won't let role players get in the way of that. 

BUT, you need to get better. They can't sit around on the sidelines and do all bargain deals, especially when they don't have a 1st or 2nd. Everyone around you is getting better. The Bears were also incredibly lucky when it came to health and just ball luck last season, I'm not ready to say that's going to happen again. 

I wasn't really for Bell, I thought it would be fun as hell but it wouldn't be smart money. Adding to a strength, and making yourself even stronger with a guy like Houston is something I can get behind. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wasn’t really a fan of Larsen. Could have been a Fox issue and he was favored by FO, but certainly liked Kush and Wintzmann more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Tony said:

We all want the Bears future to be incredibly bright for the long haul. But as you mentioned, injuries and just the randomness of football can change everything in a second. What we do know, almost for certain, is this core is locked up for the next few seasons. And they need to capitalize on that ASAP. It also goes without saying that Pace deserves the benefit of the doubt when it comes to understanding that money needs to be set aside from guys like Eddie Jackson and won't let role players get in the way of that. 

BUT, you need to get better. They can't sit around on the sidelines and do all bargain deals, especially when they don't have a 1st or 2nd. Everyone around you is getting better. The Bears were also incredibly lucky when it came to health and just ball luck last season, I'm not ready to say that's going to happen again. 

I wasn't really for Bell, I thought it would be fun as hell but it wouldn't be smart money. Adding to a strength, and making yourself even stronger with a guy like Houston is something I can get behind. 

The thing is, the Bears don't really have a lot of holes that they NEED to address. I know it's fun when teams spend money but those teams- Oakland, Jets, Bucs, Dolphins- are doing this every year for a reason- they draft bad each year and need to find guys from other teams, a la what the Bears had to do for years. But now, the Bears are finding 2-3 good players every spring no matter the round, so they don't really have big problems.

They needed a runner, they needed receiver depth and the kick returning had to improve. Well they got better at back-up RB (Davis > Cunningham). They got better at WR (Patterson > Bellamy). They got better at KR (Patterson > Miller & Cunningham). People will argue that Skrine is terrible, but his ypt given up was a yard better than Callahan's in 2018 and his completion percentage against was 4% better than Callahan's in 2018. Does he take a lot of penalties? Sure, but now he won't have to defend for 5+ seconds on every snap.

They probably still need another rush linebacker. A strong safety would be ideal, but like Amos was, this SS will be the 9th or 10th best player on their defense anyway; not every starter will be great. They definitely still need a kicker. However they can address these spots in the draft and with UDFA's (punter and kicker).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×