Chisoxfn

Yeah - Why take that risk now vs. a couple years from now stepping up the game and getting a few more years (where you are more confident in the risk profile). It would be another story if this was like a 10 year deal at $100M. This just seems too much, unless he is rounding up from like $75M and we are talking an 8 yr deal of $75M (and he's just grossly rounding that up to $100M). 8/75YR's I could probably get on board with. Albeit, going that long you are taking real risk (given just how little he's played at the big league level).

Crazy. These numbers seem very high for a player who has yet to play a major league game. There has to be more years to it than just this (to ultimately get to the 100M).

Lets just remind everyone that his first two years, I believe he was the 2nd most productive back in rushing yards in the NFL (or something like that) and his YAC was fantastic. He is limited and had a rough 3rd season in the league, but the dude was a beast his first two years with the Bears.

Does this mean we had a team offering us multiple 3rd round picks?

Yes - This.

I would have negotiated knowing I could get the space if needed. Basically agree to the deal with a wink wink nudge nudge from Mack.

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 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 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.

Some speculation Bears might be investing in a wideout vs. running back with the newly freed up cap space. Are there any vets out there or on the block who are shorter-term deals that would be big pick-ups?

Welp. I see why the Bears didn't sign Amos. Still he's a very durable quality safety so not a bad move for the Packers. Lot of up-front guaranteed money. Bears are going to go short on Earl Thomas.

How much did Amos end up getting paid?

I don't really like the Bears moving all this cap space related to Mack to make "marginal" moves. My presumption is they are going to do something big here. If it is for Mike Davis and the new nickle, that is more meh to me. Will be interesting to see what they do. I'm presuming they are going to land Bell or Ingram (and no that isn't a move I would have made).

I can't imagine he's getting a big pay day? Is he?

Iowa couldn't beat a DII school at this point, so it should be a pretty easy draw for you.

You just have to hope that Amos/Callahan aren't on that first tier of guys. If I'm the Bears, I'm waiting for free agency vs. being aggressive in free agency at this point.

Lol. Sticking it to AB haha. That said good idea to get a strong wide out for their young QB.

Very nice to see the momentum they have right now. I hope this can continue and put the franchise in a nice spot heading into the offseason. Than we need lottery odds to fall in our favor and who knows what happens from there on the free agency/trade front. Boylan also deserves credit as do Lavine and Lauri for taking big steps forward.

I like Rosen. Dude can sling it. He had zero weapons and zero talent around him and was a rookie. I think if someone buys low on him they are winning out. The only downfall is he's going to have to start back over at square one with a new franchise. If they really look to trade him, I wonder if the Pats would be interested. Broncos would have been a great fit had they not made their annual QB move already.

This. There was some sloppy play as everyone got tired but what a fun game and it is great seeing all the young guys grow.

I have my delusional one-sided Bulls trade idea. Bulls trade Dunn, Valentine and some 2nd round picks for Lonzo Ball. Lakers need D in Dunn and move away from Ball. No possibility but I would love Lonzo (sans his dad) on the Bulls. I don't know what would be worse though, Bulls training staff with Zo or Lavar with Gar?

So I have to ask. Was Dunn really hurt or did he literally no show practice because he didn't play in the 4th quarter? I'll give him the benefit of the doubt as he's always seemed to be a team first guy, but I really am baffled at how athletic he looked a year ago vs. how he's looked this entire season. He never could shoot but last year he could get into the paint with ease. This year he can't do that and we obviously know he isn't a knock down shooter (or a strong passer). Will Wendell Carter be back this year? Sounds like Hutchinson might be a couple weeks away (started shooting today), but any update on Carter Jr? Its been about 4 weeks and he was listed as 8-12?

Yep - I'm already expecting the Lakers to miss the playoffs and than win the lottery.

It's nice to see their progress, most notably Lavine and Mark. On flip side, it is amazing how far back Dunn has fallen. That run last year before he got hurt seems so long ago. Anyone know how longOtto will be Out?

I said it before and I’ll say it again. Selling a super star free agent as a last place franchise is a really hard sell and Sox were never going to throw stupid money at any free agent. Not their mo. The reality is with or without Manny they were only going to be as good as the young players development and the franchise is still a ways away. Manny would have been a great piece in the long term but wouldn’t have moved the needle to the team being an immediate contender (no way the current roster is too bad). This means the Sox technically have ability to be patient. Missing adds urgency but isn’t an epic disaster in a silo. The big equation is whether the Sox can do player development or not. That has long been what worries me about the front office.