Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

The Bears and Russell


Mr. Scot
 Share

Recommended Posts

Before signing Andy Dalton, the Bears made a big pitch to Seattle for Russell Wilson. The Seahawks declined.

Details of the offer itself are now out.

According to Dan Patrick, Chicago offered three first-round picks, a third-round pick, and two unnamed starters for Wilson. The Seahawks, obviously, passed.

Link

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Ricky Spanish said:

If that's the floor for a Watson, count me out. 

Trade up to 2 or 3 for a fraction of that cost and get a rookie. 

With the Falcons restructuring Ryan which basically guarantees here there for another year, the Bears opting for Dalton instead of trading up, WFT/Fitzpatrick...

I realize none of these guys are long term solutions but maybe teams aren’t as high on this QB class as the media tries to make them out to be

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, *FreeFua* said:

With the Falcons restructuring Ryan which basically guarantees here there for another year, the Bears opting for Dalton instead of trading up, WFT/Fitzpatrick...

I realize none of these guys are long term solutions but maybe teams aren’t as high on this QB class as the media tries to make them out to be

The only team you mentioned in front of us is the Falcons. Ryan has a ton left in the tank to where they don't need to think about a new QB until 2 years from now. 

The others, well, we have more trade leverage. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Leeroy Jenkins Ph.D. said:

It wouldn't cost that much to move up to the 1st or 2nd spot in the draft and get a rookie QB on a rookie deal. 

That's been discussed as a possibility too.

I've said before that the idea makes me nervous because I have concerns about all of the runner-ups to Lawrence.

  • Pie 1
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Mr. Scot said:

That's been discussed as a possibility too.

I've said before that the idea makes me nervous because I have concerns about all of the runner-ups to Lawrence.

Which is why I think we’re seeing the moves we’re seeing. A lot of teams have their concerns over everyone not named Lawrence

  • Pie 1
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, *FreeFua* said:

Which is why I think we’re seeing the moves we’re seeing. A lot of teams have their concerns over everyone not named Lawrence

Well, the Panthers and everybody else have a little over a month to figure out just how scary or not scary those concerns are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Scott12345 said:

If Seattle was really offered that then they are idiots to say no

Patrick said part of the Seahawks rationale was that the Bears getting Russell would mean their future draft picks would be in the 20s or lower so it wouldn't be worth it.

Valid? No idea.

Edited by Mr. Scot
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

Patrick said part of the Seahawks rationale was that the Bears getting Russell would mean their future draft picks would be in the 20s or lower so it wouldn't be worth it.

Valid? No idea.

Merit in that...but 3 #1s, plus players?....even if they were lower first rounders you can build a team with that

id sure like to have 2 #1s for the next 3 yrs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

That's been discussed as a possibility too.

I've said before that the idea makes me nervous because I have concerns about all of the runner-ups to Lawrence.

In thinking back to the 2018 draft, there were 4 QBs that draftniks and analysts were discussing in the same breath as the infamous '83 draft.

Darnold and Rosen were perceived as the top pick and Mayfield was nipping at their heels. Week of the draft Mayfield vaulted into #1 slot and the Jets looked like the big winners when Darnold fell in their lap. Rosen was highly touted and Allen was the wild card that you had to be patient with. 

Fast forward, and I feel like this draft class is showing a lot of parallels to '18. Lawrence looks like a lock with three prospects vying for that next spot. Doubtful that all four end up as elite QB1s, so one could argue the gamble of moving up vs. a proven 26-year old is easier said than done. 

 

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Ricky Spanish said:

If that's the floor for a Watson, count me out. 

Trade up to 2 or 3 for a fraction of that cost and get a rookie. 

If that's the floor for Watson, hell, I'm at least calling Jacksonville. Of course they'll say no, but everything has a price or at least that's what I've been told.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Miller being less raw and more pro ready makes sense of why they picked him. With us having a capable starter in Walker the lower floor higher ceiling player makes sense for us as well. I agree with that. 
    • I'm from Michigan and have had this discussion with my Lions friends, and they all agree with me, they were never going to take Freeling over Miller.  As, yes, you are correct, they could have left Sewell at RT and taken Freeling, but they are in a SB contention window right now. An OL with Freeling at LT and Sewell at RT is not as strong as Sewell at LT and Miller at RT would be for this upcoming season and likely at least next year as well. 5 years it could be looked back upon as a long term "mistake" to take Miller over Freeling, but for a franchise like the Lions, you can't worry about the long term when you have current SB aspirations.  It's all about maximizing their current SB window over the next 1-3 years. And it's not about style, it's about day 1 readiness, and a lot of "experts" aren't even sure if Freeling is ready to play Week 1 yet at the position he's used to, let alone switching to a side he hasn't played before, but a career starting RT is going to be more than ready to fill that role for them Week 1. I'm 100% convinced that if our draft positioning was swapped, we'd have still taken Freeling, they'd have still taken Miller, and both teams would have got the OT that they preferred due to what each team needs right now and what their current realistic aspirations are for the 2026 season. We're in a position where we can let our drafted OT sit and learn for a bit, they needed a week 1 starter, for me that's where this discussion becomes very easy to understand why each team took the player they did.
×
×
  • Create New...