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!

     

[Warren Sapp] Bears are trading Justin Fields to draft Bryce Young


thunderraiden
 Share

Recommended Posts

VERY hard pass

Zero interest in Fields, he’s an even worse passer than Lamar and will want a huge contract after next year.

I’ve said from the start that the Bears should trade him and start a new clock on a QB contract extension with one with better passing upside, but that’s also why I wouldn’t want us to take him on.

  • Pie 9
  • Beer 1
  • Poo 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, tukafan21 said:

VERY hard pass

Zero interest in Fields, he’s an even worse passer than Lamar and will want a huge contract after next year.

I’ve said from the start that the Bears should trade him and start a new clock on a QB contract extension with one with better passing upside, but that’s also why I wouldn’t want us to take him on.

Lamar is not a bad passer, which makes your post null and void. 

His career passer rating is 96.7. 

 

  • Pie 8
  • Flames 1
  • Poo 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If that happened,  more than likely Young and Stroud would go 1 n 2. Therefore  depending  on where  Fields got traded, we could be in a dilemma. It'd push Levi stock up(which I see rising after the combine anyway) and we need to circle all options asap. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, thunderraiden said:

https://www.nbcsports.com/chicago/bears/warren-sapp-says-bears-are-trading-justin-fields-draft-bryce-young

 

More than likely Sapp is talking out of his ass... but if not we instantly become favorites to land Fields right? #9 and 2 2nds gets it done right?

 

Do not want.

If a team drafts you that high and wants to dump you two years in then that tells us all we need to know about you

 

  • Pie 8
  • Poo 2
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

    • I liked Sanders field reading abilities in general but his ceiling is fairly low and his shenanigans as a pro are, quite frankly, bizarre.  I don't think he is doing himself any favors by being a distraction while also being buried on the depth chart. Don't get me wrong, the media would attempt to make him a distraction regardless but it's not smart to feed into it when you aren't having a role at all. This can also be said of XL, BTW. We are no stranger to this. It's a lot easier to excuse Cam dressing like a deleted scene Harry Potter character at press conferences when he is looking like a man among boys on the football field. 
    • I hear Huddlers throwing things similar about Sanders whenever his name comes up, but to put it bluntly, we don't know that to be true. What we do know is that plenty of Browns fans thought that Sanders had the best camp out of the bunch, notwithstanding not being given the opportunity to play with the ones. What has been reported is that Dillon Gabriel is Stefanski's guy, and Andrew Berry thought that Sanders should be prioritized (even if it meant that he would eventually trade Sanders due to Sanders having more value). The fact that many Browns fans preferred (and prefer now) Sanders, and that there was a split---or difference of opinion between Stefanski and Berry, isn't really up for debate. It's true.  What this all means, at the end of the day, is that we don't know how Sanders compares to Hooker or anyone else because he really hasn't had an opportunity to play for whatever reasons. 
    • I don't think with a roster this bad we should be spamming picks at subpar QB's for development purposes. When the roster is a little more fleshed out, I would fully support that. Also, with our persistent evaluation problems, I can only imagine who we would have likely overdrafted in the past few years.
×
×
  • Create New...