tukafan21

This all fell apart at "top tier QB talent" as I never once have thought Bryce was that, even at my highest point of optimism, it never reached that. He has a top tier QB brain, but not talent, significant difference between the two. I was hoping (and still do hope) that brain can overcome the physical limitations he has, and it's very possible that happens. But right now, his physical limitations actually look worse than I was even expecting, and that's not acceptable when we traded away everything we did to get him. It's risk vs reward and we took far too big of a risk given the limited upside of the reward.

Good for him, he's able to make his reads Doesn't mean poo if he doesn't have the physical abilities to make the plays. If only people could have seen him not be able to escape finger tip sacks and have the arm strength to make the necessary throws at this level.

What?!?!?! Being upset that we're not going to have our own Top 5 pick in a draft that will have possibly upwards of 4 or 5 QB's who could all go in the Top 10 of said draft is overvaluing it? That's absolute nonsense, just look at the value we gave up to move up to take a QB with serious question marks. Williams is widely viewed as the best QB prospect in a very long time, if we gave up what we did to take Bryce, if anything, i'm undervaluing our draft pick next year, not overvaluing it.

Right?!?! He's not a safety, he's not a NB, he's a LB who can be shifted around all over the field as needed on a per play call basis. His rookie year was about the only thing Rhule's staff ever got correct and he was looking like a future all-pro type of player. Ever since then, coaches have been trying to shove him into a neat little box and force him to play a position instead of just being a heat seeking missile out there attracted to the football. We will likely have too much cap space available this offseason to get comp picks in return if guys like Chinn walk as we're going to end up bringing in a couple decently paid FA's. So if that's the case and we're not going to try to actually use him, might as well try to get something for him now instead of having him on the sideline for 70% of the plays this year and watch him walk away for free in the offseason. At least Burns is out there on the field trying to help us right now, makes it at least easier to understand wanting to keep him around.

Totally fair I'm just a "what if" person in the back of my mind, and this entire season is going to be a bummer for me when with every loss I'll just be thinking, "what if we still had our first rounder next year and would be looking at Williams/Maye instead of having someone smaller than half the high school QB's out there" That sack he took where he was barely touched but just doesn't have the body strength to fight through it was exactly a fear of his size in terms of on the field and not even injury concerns. In today's NFL game, you can't have a QB who is sacked on plays like that, that's one that every other QB in the league would have shrugged off.

lol, you read my post wrong I've been the one telling people for the last 2 weeks that we'll easily be able to get 2 firsts for Burns, as worst case scenario we franchise tag him and someone will still sign him and get the 2 firsts that way, so someone will give that up at the deadline to get him to try and make a SB run this year. The, "won't get a first for him" was in regards to trading Chinn, who I really have zero interest in trading, I'd love to sign him to an extension right now and use him correctly. But the coaches seem to have no interest in doing that and I think some team out there might give up a 3rd rounder or something for him. I'd hate the trade, but it's better than only playing him 1/3rd of our defensive snaps and then watching him walk in free agency.

Oh, 100% But it just sucks to know that this all felt so obvious to so many fans, that we gave up far too much value in the trade to take a player who was going to have to become the biggest outlier in the history of the NFL at the QB position to be successful. We got fleeced, flat out, no way around it. Again, even if Bryce ends up an above average, or even a pro bowl level QB, we still gave up far too much value for the risk we were taking on. All we can do now is watch it unfold, but it unfortunately has sapped me of any optimism I have for this team for the next 2 seasons while we lose games and don't have our full compliment of picks to fix our issues with.

Need to trade Burns And honestly, he won't get us a first back, but at this point I'd probably trade Chinn as well. That one also has NOTHING to do with the player, but the coaching staff. They seem hell bent on not using him. What's the point in having a player with his versatility and talent to only have him on the field for 30% of the snaps?!?!?!?! Totally opposite of Burns, I want Burns here but feel like his trade value is what's best for this team. Chinn's playing ability is what is best for the team but the coaches seem to want to force him into being a slot NB only, which just makes no sense and is a waste.

Which again is why people like myself are saying Bryce can still end up being a good QB and it still be looked at as a terrible trade. It's basically the choice between having Bryce or having DJ Moore, maybe a pass rusher with this past year's first, maybe a CB with the other 2nd we traded away, taking Caleb Williams or Drake Maye in next year's draft, and then still having the 2025 2nd rounder as well. You can't look at things in a vacuum, it's the whole of the parts, and we just opened our brand new birthday gift only to find out that not only were the batteries not included, but it's also missing a few key components to the toy's ability to function as well.

Are any of the anti-Young people hoping he fails or finding any enjoyment in the last 2 weeks? I know I sure as hell am NOT This is miserable, there is no enjoyment, and I desperately am hoping for Bryce to make me look like a complete fool. But unfortunately all we've seen so far are the things those who didn't want Young felt were glaringly obvious flaws with him in the NFL. Mainly that he doesn't have the arm or body strength to be an elite QB in today's NFL game and that he's a walking injury concern. And I know I can only speak for myself, but I think others feel the same way... Which is that we're not really all that upset at the way Bryce has played, but we felt that we gave up way too much in the trade to take a player with those risks and we're seeing the worst case scenario play out with us giving the Bears a Top 5 pick in a QB loaded draft instead of just being patient for one more year like a SMART franchise would have done. The pro-Bryce people keep conflating our concerns with the trade with our concerns of Bryce, which don't get me wrong, we clearly have serious concerns with him, but they wouldn't be so bad if we didn't trade away our franchise's future to take him.

And the Chargers used their own 2nd round pick on him. They didn't trade away 2 firsts, 2 seconds, and their best offensive player for him. People need to stop pointing out the bad rookie seasons by HOF QB's, for every HOF QB that had a bad rookie season, there are a dozen others who had terrible seasons and crapped out. I'm not saying Bryce will crap out, but just trying to point to the few HOFers who went through this, is just dumb.

The problem is that the QB's who need to sit because they have to develop, they have to develop mentally. Bryce doesn't have that problem, he already sees the game like a vet, he just frankly doesn't have the physical traits needed to execute yet on this level. Can he get there? Maybe, but it's not something that he'll develop by mid-season his rookie year, it's going to take years for him to work on building his body up the right way and increasing that body and arm strength. So sitting him to start the year wasn't going to do anything, might as well toss him out there, his mental side of the game was always going to have to carry him over his physical. I think one of two things happen, either Bryce proves me wrong and he develops significantly over this year and the next couple and we' re-sign him. Or I'm proven right and he's just not an NFL QB and thus we end up putting ourselves into the Arch Manning sweepstakes in the 2026 draft (which while it would suck for the next few years, could turn us into a contender for a long time).

Not that the rest of the post was bad so I deleted it, but you had this in there at the end, and it was the most important part of it all. I think too many of the Bryce supporters are struggling to understand that the people upset right now, are upset about this. It's never going to be "did Bryce end up as a good player" as much as "did Bryce end up a good enough player to justify what we gave up, knowing we'd likely have ended up with one of the top QB's in next year's draft anyways." What we gave up to take a player with Bryce's limitations and risks was WAY WAY WAY too much and it significantly hurts our ability to build out around Bryce. Had we just had he #1 pick and took him (or the 2nd or 3rd pick and took one of the other guys) and we sucked this year, nobody would be as concerned as we'd be looking at it knowing we'd have a high pick next year to try and get an elite WR with (not to mention still having DJ, last year's second and the 2025 second). Bryce literally has to win us a SB for the trade to be considered a success, especially if there ends up being a couple great QB's in next years class. If we gifted the Bears one of those QB's with our pick and that QB ends up better than Bryce, only a SB ring will make that remotely acceptable. So basically we bet on Bryce being the biggest outlier in NFL history at the QB position because of his brain, not his physical ability... seems.... dumb.

Needing to sit Bryce the first half of the season would have made that trade so much worse than it already is. He was always supposed to be the most pro ready of any of the QB's this year, if you make that trade and take him, only to need to sit him at the start of the year, then it would be proof that he was the wrong player to take and you shouldn't have given all that up for him. I didn't want to make the trade up to 1 due to the cost, I didn't want to take Bryce once we made the trade, I tried to get my hopes up once we did take him and be optimistic about his "super brain" but his physical attributes have been so much worse than I ever expected. I'm not going to stop rooting for the Panthers, I'm not going to root against the kid, but I unfortunately have no optimism left at this point as I feel like this was all predictable. He's an elite QB brain in an average high school QB's body, that's not a good fit in the NFL. We let past screw ups at the QB position force us to make a bad trade because we thought we HAD to do it, but it would have just been smarter to use this season to build a good base with this new staff and then use our first rounder next year on a better QB prospect while keeping DJ and the rest of the picks.

They don’t count because I’m not talking about comparing it to smaller trade ups, I’m talking about the massive ones. You can’t compare this trade to ones that aren’t similar. If we only had to give up Moore to move up, or only had to give up next years first, then yes, they’d be comparisons to look at, but we gave up WAY more than that. If you expect 2nd rounders to be starters (which you should), then we basically gave up 5 starters to take a QB with limited physical attributes. With one of those assets likely being a Top 5 pick next year, you can’t compare giving up a Top 5 pick (on top of all the other significant assets) that next year to KC giving up a late first or Buffalo giving up 2 seconds. This was always why I didn’t want to trade up to #1, the cost was too high for the available prospects. I always was much more interested in trading up to #3 to take AR and likely have been able to keep Moore and maybe even one of the 2nds.

Mahomes doesn’t count, trading a future 1st that would be in the high 20’s to move from 27 to 10 is nowhere in the same category as giving up a future first, two 2nds, and Moore to move from 9 to 1. And again, that one is different as they already had a contending roster built out, their biggest/only hole was an elite QB, they weren’t giving up the picks they needed to re-stock their roster with young talent. And Allen doesn’t really count either, they gave up two 2nds to move from 12 to 7, again, compensation nowhere remotely close to what we gave up. Watson is another one where they gave up one future first to move from 25 to 12, hell, that’s no haul, that’s a steal to move up that much for only 1 future first. My point wasn’t about trading up never working out, it’s when you give up substantial player/draft assets to do it that it doesn’t work out. The massive trade ups I to the Top 3-5 to draft a QB just don’t work out, you lose too much young talent/picks in the process and continue to struggle.

Again, another person who can't separate the trade from the player. I personally don't think the kid has it, I never did and it's why I didn't want to draft him. But I'm also still not writing him off. My point with all of it is that we gave up entirely too much to move up for a player who is anything but a sure thing. The trade was bad, the player could still end up being good, but it doesn't mean we made a smart trade and there is a big difference between the two.

This is a fallacy that only fans believe can work out because they're so starved for a QB. Again, I can't think of a successful massive trade up for a QB in recent memory, it NEVER works out for the team trading up. Again, 19 teams in the league are starting QB's they drafted outside the Top 10 or acquired through other means than the draft. And those who drafted players in the Top 10 used their own picks to do it, not traded away their franchise's future to draft the QB there. Honestly, what is the most successful trade ups for a QB in the draft that you can think of, not counting Mahomes as they only traded 1 future first rounder to move way up the draft (27 to 10) and did that when they already had a contending roster built out and didn't have numerous holes already. Closest would be what, the Redskins trading up for RG3 and it working for 1 season?

Actually it's not, I was calling for us to trade him last Saturday night once it was clear there wasn't going to be a deal done before the game. I've never been a fan of having him play out the year because I think he's putting up 15+ sacks and will end up costing us more than Bosa at that point. I was yelling all off season to just pay him and get it done, but once we couldn't, I think the best thing for the franchise's future is to get a couple firsts for him and open up that cap space. What I've seen from them these two weeks only makes me feel stronger about the need to move him in what would essentially be a 4 for 1 of potential impact players, two firsts and splitting that $30-35 in cap space on 2 other starters. I mentioned it in another thread, I wouldn't hate the idea of trying to trade him to the Lions for Jameson Williams, their 1st and maybe a future 2nd or 3rd. They just lost a pass rusher as well as Gardner-Johnson, adding someone like Burns to rush opposite Hutchinson would help both the pass rush and back end. Now not sure the Lions would do that since they're going to have to pay Hutch in 2 years too, but I'd be open to a deal like that as well if one is out there.

This team has shown nothing that gives any indication that we will be even remotely in the playoff chase this year (yes, I'm very confident in saying that after the preseason and 2 weeks where we've looked like hot garbage). We have far too many holes to fill and don't have the draft picks to work on filling them and will lose a large chunk of the cap room we have to re-sign guys like Burns and maybe Brown next year. The earlier in the season that we put him on the market, the more teams who think they have a chance to make a run this year to get involved in the bidding and help drive the price up on what we could get for him. I want Burns on this team, but what we'd get back for him plus the extra cap room with not signing him are more beneficial to this franchise right now with where we currently stand.

Was just looking at the list of NFL teams and it occurred to me, we are the only team in the NFL right now who has a starting QB that the team traded a massive haul to move up in the draft to get them. And it's not like those trades haven't been made in the last 10-15 years, those QBs just didn't work out. The Chiefs traded a 3rd and a future 1st to move up from 27 to 10 to take Mahomes, but not sure that counts as a haul and they did that when they already had a contending team fully built out. The massive trades to move up to take a QB just don't end up usually working out. Half because if there was a QB available in the draft that was THAT good, most teams would take them and trade/cut whoever they already had, like the Colts did with Luck/Manning or the Cardinals want to do with Williams/Kyler. And before people say "but we didn't have a QB, what do you want us to do, sit around and not make the move to get one?" Well, 19 of 31 teams (not counting the Cardinals right now as they would be starting Kyler) in this league are currently starting QB's that they either drafted outside the Top 10 or acquired through a trade or free agency. Those teams are also a combined 24-14 so far this year, so not like they're struggling.

The Bears have their own and our first round pick The Cardinals have their own and the Texans first round pick. There is a legitimate possibility that the Bears and Cardinals combine for picks 1-4 in some order. Odds are one would turn it into Williams and Harrison while the other would get the QB of their choice and then probably a haul for the other one to another QB needy team.

Unless whatever they did helped free up some cap room over the next couple of years, I'm actually surprised Mahomes wanted to do this. He's one of the few players who make ungodly amounts of money in endorsement deals, just figured he'd have been fine taking a little less than the absolute max that he could, so he could have some more players around him. Guys like Burrow, Hurts, Herbert, Lamar... while they all do well in endorsements, I'd bet good money that Mahomes dwarfs them with his. He also strikes me as the guy who wants the legacy and to beat Brady's numbers. Sacrificing 5-10 million a year when you're already making 40+ before endorsements seemed like something he'd do. Yea, just looked it up, in 2023 Mahomes will make $20 million in endorsements, only others above Burrow at $4 million are Dak, Wilson, and Rodgers at 13, 13, and 11 respectively.

Really? Nico Collins, Robert Woods, and Tank Dell are better skill players than Chark, Thielen, and Mingo? No, just no, give me some of whatever you're smoking, cause that poo's the bomb. I'd have said maybe Pierce or Shultz over Sanders or Hurst, but Pierce and Shultz haven't done anything yet this year. We have a significantly better line (they were missing 4 starters on their line yesterday) and better skill players, not to mention the "all star" offensive staff while Stroud's HC is a defensive minded guy. This isn't even me arguing for Stroud over Young, it's solely about everything else around the QB's, we're much better in that regard than the Texans, no question about it.

No chance Burns plays on the tag next year, not after he almost ended up sitting out this year. If we tag him, we'll either come to a long term deal or trade him. Hence back to my OP, at this point with where the team appears to be, we have too many holes to pay him what it's going to end up taking to keep him around given the alternative being 2 firsts and $30-35 million more in cap room. And to your point about getting injured, that's why I said I'd put him on the block and inactivate him each week until a trade is made, to not risk injury and hurt ourselves. Put him on the market, teams will come calling.