MAJBobby Posted September 1, 2018 Posted September 1, 2018 1 minute ago, Coach Tuesday said: Whaley and his scouts identified the players based on McD’s needs and directives. Ironically Whaley wanted to draft Watson... Who had the final say in that draft room. Thank you so yes this regime has drafted very good on a one year evaluation
fergie's ire Posted September 1, 2018 Posted September 1, 2018 I don't understand the almost universal desire to trade for Mack at any cost. I seem to remember that we were collectively unimpressed with him when we played the Raiders and someone who watches the Raiders regularly commented that while he makes spectacular plays, he also takes a lot of plays off. Yes....he is a very good player. But worth this much for a one or two year (with franchise tag) rental? Or willingness to sign to a 20 mill./year contract? I just don't see the value, particularly when we don't have an established quarterback or an offensive line. 2
whatdrought Posted September 1, 2018 Posted September 1, 2018 Man, the bears are all in on Mitchell. That’s the biggest take away here. The whole administration is willing to bet the whole team on him.
Buffalo_Stampede Posted September 1, 2018 Posted September 1, 2018 4 minutes ago, Brianmoorman4jesus said: You know where we are drafting already before week 1? We haven’t even made cuts or named a starting qb yet... I wonder if you penciled us in for the playoffs before last year? Also you know those guys won’t get hurt or have set backs in their season? The real question is, do you want a guy you already know is great? And all you had to give up was things you have no clue about? This is a bad football team that will be playing a rookie QB most of the year. 1
The_Dude Posted September 1, 2018 Posted September 1, 2018 If the Bears gave two 1’s then I’m glad we stayed put. Plus, we don’t got the rom to extend him right now. Listen, most pass rushers deteriorate after 31ish. Not all, but most. So why give up two 1’s for four years of production? It may be elite production, but one could expect an early 1st rounder for the Bills this year that may have a pass rusher we could have and get 10 years of production out of. Im glad the Bills did nothing on this.
aristocrat Posted September 1, 2018 Posted September 1, 2018 5 minutes ago, George C said: You are what your record says you are...The guy was absolutely horrible, and his record displayed that. Just ignore other variables that played into the record. The guy drafted more nfl talent in his tenure than any other gm in the league. 1
Zebrastripes Posted September 1, 2018 Posted September 1, 2018 12 minutes ago, MAJBobby said: People meed to stop undervalue 1st round picks and their 5 year cost controlled contract. Sorry that is way to much to ask for a non QB Are they really cost controlled for 5 years anymore? Just look at Mack and Donald. These guys are going to just start holding out earlier and earlier into their rookie deals. Soon enough the rookie wage scale is going to become irrelevant.
Coach Tuesday Posted September 1, 2018 Posted September 1, 2018 Just now, MAJBobby said: Ooo so we are in the Business of Comparing Rookies and Future Rookies to guys thay have been in the league 5 years two firsts and over 20M annually reduces the ability for this team to get alot better. Bears are in a better position to do this they are further along in their rebuild. If this was available next year I would have been a little more on board. Bills obviously were anyway but backed off when price got to high for a non QB. Good on them smart decision This team has exactly one star player who is probably in his last year here. They have massive holes along the offensive line, secondary, receiver and linebacking positions that have persisted for two offseasons. They had no problem overspending for defensive line help but the two veterans they overpaid for look like they may be out of gas. They are shaping up as a 3-4 win team this season. It’s time for this first-time GM to start showing some roster-building ability. 1
Buffalo_Stampede Posted September 1, 2018 Posted September 1, 2018 Just now, whatdrought said: Man, the bears are all in on Mitchell. That’s the biggest take away here. The whole administration is willing to bet the whole team on him. Rams surrounded Goff last year. I suspect next year the Bills spend a lot.
Doc Posted September 1, 2018 Posted September 1, 2018 25 minutes ago, Coach Tuesday said: They are trying to WIN GAMES. The Bills should consider it. Did you sleep through 2017?
Jay_Fixit Posted September 1, 2018 Posted September 1, 2018 45 minutes ago, Meazy26 said: Heartbroken. At least it wasn’t the Jets. Heartbroken? Seems dramatic.
Brianmoorman4jesus Posted September 1, 2018 Posted September 1, 2018 2 minutes ago, MAJBobby said: Yes I do follow football. Jesus but when people talk about over valuing picks they really are not to smart with how much one cost controlled contract provides in flexiblity to a team and roster management The cost control matters when a guy is good. Shaq Lawson and EJ Manuel were very recent firsts that we had cost control over. How much is that helping us? Had it over Sammy too. Cost control is wonderful when you get lucky and actually hit on a real good player like Russel Wilson. Then it mattered. Now it has had a reverse effect and destroyed that entire team. Funny how it worked out for the Raiders with Mack too. Obj...Donald....When you get a great player in round 1, they are going to make you pay them more. So the cost control point just really doesn’t matter that much to me. I will take the guy that I know is great already, over question marks. I know it doesn’t work that way. The NFL overvalues draft picks in a sickening way. Good players get traded for mid round picks. It’s mind boggling. After round 2, the entire draft of a crap shoot. The bears will never once regret or care about the 2 guys they won’t pick now. 2
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted September 1, 2018 Posted September 1, 2018 1 minute ago, Jay_Fixit said: Heartbroken? Seems dramatic. We must overreact immediately 1
george c Posted September 1, 2018 Posted September 1, 2018 Just now, aristocrat said: Just ignore other variables that played into the record. The guy drafted more nfl talent in his tenure than any other gm in the league. NO, he didn’t. Other choices like head coach, continuing by doubling down with a flawed EJ. , and ofcourse giving up two firsts for the third best reciever in that draft...while ironically ......passing on Mack. Sorry, we totally disagree, and so do 31 other NFL owners who don’t want his services as GM.
Sammy Watkins' Rib Posted September 1, 2018 Posted September 1, 2018 18 minutes ago, Brianmoorman4jesus said: Think about all of our 1st round picks over the last 15 years. How many pairs of them would you take over Mack? People need to stop overvaluing draft picks. Get good players. We have plenty of draft picks left over after these trades and we never pick the right guys anyway. I don't see this as all that different than when we signed Mario to a a huge contract in free agency. At least with the Mario signing we didn't also have to give up two first round picks. And let's face it, better than good chance that this years first would be a top 5 pick. And when we got Mario, he played well for us but did he really end up making a difference in the win/loss column? What are the odds Mack would make a difference the next couple of seasons with our young QB's?
Brianmoorman4jesus Posted September 1, 2018 Posted September 1, 2018 3 minutes ago, TheTruthHurts said: This is a bad football team that will be playing a rookie QB most of the year. Nobody knows any of this. Haven’t people learned yet to not get wrapped up in preseason? What are we basing this on? The last meaningful games that this team played, was from a playoff season. I also fully expect Peterman to start, to play well and to keep the job. For this year anyway.
MAJBobby Posted September 1, 2018 Posted September 1, 2018 4 minutes ago, Zebrastripes said: Are they really cost controlled for 5 years anymore? Just look at Mack and Donald. These guys are going to just start holding out earlier and earlier into their rookie deals. Soon enough the rookie wage scale is going to become irrelevant. Yes they are. The 5th year option is meant to do exactly what these players have done. One team re-signed the other by reports flipped the player for alot of assets 1
Doc Posted September 1, 2018 Posted September 1, 2018 1 minute ago, Sammy Watkins' Rib said: I don't see this as all that different than when we signed Mario to a a huge contract in free agency. At least with the Mario signing we didn't also have to give up two first round picks. And let's face it, better than good chance that this years first would be a top 5 pick. And when we got Mario, he played well for us but did he really end up making a difference in the win/loss column? What are the odds Mack would make a difference the next couple of seasons with our young QB's? It's the 2-1sts and a player that makes it a lot different.
Sammy Watkins' Rib Posted September 1, 2018 Posted September 1, 2018 6 minutes ago, fergie's ire said: I don't understand the almost universal desire to trade for Mack at any cost. I seem to remember that we were collectively unimpressed with him when we played the Raiders and someone who watches the Raiders regularly commented that while he makes spectacular plays, he also takes a lot of plays off. Also troubles some that his numbers have gone down in each of his last two seasons from his career high 15 sack season in 2015.
Recommended Posts