Say the Bears go QB at #1 and trade Justin Fields...

[PanthersGTI]

8 minutes ago, Toomers said:

What does where he was drafted have anything to do with it?

  The Colts CUT Manning to draft Luck. Was Manning trash? And Fields has thrown the ball as well as any QB this team has had since Cam. With a bonus 1,100 rushing yds. 
 

   Make sure to use that pick on a QB who can’t handle college. If any are even left. 

They also but Manning because he was injured and nearing the end of his career. They NEEDED a restart. If the Bear feel like the already NEED to move on from Fields rather then take the trade and surround him with talent.....that is NOT a good sign not matter how you try and spin it. 

[SazmoRanger]

12 minutes ago, Toomers said:

What does where he was drafted have anything to do with it?

  The Colts CUT Manning to draft Luck. Was Manning trash? And Fields has thrown the ball as well as any QB this team has had since Cam. With a bonus 1,100 rushing yds. 
 

   Make sure to use that pick on a QB who can’t handle college. If any are even left. 

First, are you really comparing the situation with the Colts and Manning and Luck to the Bears and Fields? Where the hell is the Andrew Luck that the Bears could draft? Luck was a consensus generational QB coming out. He was a can’t miss prospect. That guy isn’t in this draft. Also, the Colts team was horrible and they needed to rebuild. Manning built that organization and they cut him so he could choose what team he wanted to chase a ring with. These two situations are NOTHING alike. 
 

Again, if the Bears are trading Fields for one of these rookies, why the hell would we want him? Again, none of these rookie QBs are anything like Luck/Lawrence. Fields is graded in line with all these QBs this year. Why would Chicago trade him unless they know more about him and what he’s NOT. 
 

I’m not saying I wouldn’t welcome Fields on this team, I’m just saying I’m not giving up the 9th pick and or more for him. 

[Toomers]

Just now, PanthersGTI said:

They also but Manning because he was injured and nearing the end of his career. They NEEDED a restart. If the Bear feel like the already NEED to move on from Fields rather then take the trade and surround him with talent.....that is NOT a good sign not matter how you try and spin it. 

Manning also went on to set passing records in Denver for 3 years. 
 

I’m not spinning it because Fields will be their QB. If they did make him available, he would go for much more than one pick. A QB on a rookie deal who improved a ton in one year would bring a haul. 

   Or you can draft AR and hope he progresses to the level of Fields despite all evidence to the contrary. This isn’t Sam Darnold that no teams want. This is a successful, cheap QB with a large upside. 

[Toomers]

Just now, SazmoRanger said:

First, are you really comparing the situation with the Colts and Manning and Luck to the Bears and Fields? Where the hell is the Andrew Luck that the Bears could draft? Luck was a consensus generational QB coming out. He was a can’t miss prospect. That guy isn’t in this draft. Also, the Colts team was horrible and they needed to rebuild. Manning built that organization and they cut him so he could choose what team he wanted to chase a ring with. These two situations are NOTHING alike. 
 

Again, if the Bears are trading Fields for one of these rookies, why the hell would we want him? Again, none of these rookie QBs are anything like Luck/Lawrence. Fields is graded in line with all these QBs this year. Why would Chicago trade him unless they know more about him and what he’s NOT. 
 

I’m not saying I wouldn’t welcome Fields on this team, I’m just saying I’m not giving up the 9th pick and or more for him. 

   They made a choice. The point was to show that the departing QB isn’t always trash. And they aren’t. 

   But you’re equating Fields to a Darnold type value and those two situations couldn’t be more different. Every QB needy team would line up and be glad to give more for him. What QB are you getting with that pick that has more going for him than Fields. The plan is to hope that one of two QBs falls to 9? If giving up 9 is out. What’s the plan. Show me a reasonable scenario that lands a QB better than Fields in CAR. This year or even next year? 

[XClown1986]

I don't see Fields being a starting QB for long in the NFL. So I would bet on one of the top guys in the draft. We passed on him for a reason.

[CamWhoaaCam]

50 minutes ago, CPcavedweller said:

Would we really give a conference opponent the ability to have the number 1 and number 9 picks while helping them offload a QB that they don't want? 

No. If they draft a QB at 1, you let them stew with it until they part with him for a 3rd. 

They have a new GM who didn't draft Fields.

[CamWhoaaCam]

26 minutes ago, PanthersGTI said:

They also but Manning because he was injured and nearing the end of his career. They NEEDED a restart. If the Bear feel like the already NEED to move on from Fields rather then take the trade and surround him with talent.....that is NOT a good sign not matter how you try and spin it. 

The Bears have a new GM who according to Cowherd wants to draft his own QB.

 

I think these rumors will heat up closer to the draft the Bears are not going to say publicly they will trade him as that will decrease his trade value.

[SazmoRanger]

2 minutes ago, Toomers said:

   They made a choice. The point was to show that the departing QB isn’t always trash. And they aren’t. 

   But you’re equating Fields to a Darnold type value and those two situations couldn’t be more different. Every QB needy team would line up and be glad to give more for him. What QB are you getting with that pick that has more going for him than Fields. The plan is to hope that one of two QBs falls to 9? If giving up 9 is out. What’s the plan. Show me a reasonable scenario that lands a QB better than Fields in CAR. This year or even next year? 

Yeah, but you can’t compare Justin Fields to one of the greatest QBs of all time haha. 
 

I haven’t said one thing about Darnold? If you’re saying that I’m comparing Fields’ value the same as Darnold’s because we sent the Jets a 2nd round pick, I would tell you then and now that we overpaid for Darnold… he wasn’t worth a 2nd. I wouldn’t have even given a 4th for Darnold at the time… I would’ve drafted Fields haha. 
 
My point is if the Bears DO take a QB, Fields’ stock plummets as it pertains to the Bears. Not that Fields’ skill or whatever does, but teams shouldn’t give up a 1st for him because they then know the Bears have to get rid of him and aren’t keeping him and a rookie. 
 

If I’m giving up picks, it’s for Young. IMO, he’s special. Im taking him over any of these dudes. 

[FugginPoo]

I’d rather give Reich/mckown a shot at repairing Darnold who is only 25 before wasting too much draft capital on Fields

[Toomers]

2 minutes ago, SazmoRanger said:

Yeah, but you can’t compare Justin Fields to one of the greatest QBs of all time haha. 
 

I haven’t said one thing about Darnold? If you’re saying that I’m comparing Fields’ value the same as Darnold’s because we sent the Jets a 2nd round pick, I would tell you then and now that we overpaid for Darnold… he wasn’t worth a 2nd. I wouldn’t have even given a 4th for Darnold at the time… I would’ve drafted Fields haha. 
 
My point is if the Bears DO take a QB, Fields’ stock plummets as it pertains to the Bears. Not that Fields’ skill or whatever does, but teams shouldn’t give up a 1st for him because they then know the Bears have to get rid of him and aren’t keeping him and a rookie. 
 

If I’m giving up picks, it’s for Young. IMO, he’s special. Im taking him over any of these dudes. 

His stock plummets with the Bears. Then it becomes an auction for half the league to participate in. He makes 5M. Less than many backups. They don’t have to take any offer until someone meets their price. 
 

 And so compared the Darnold situation because it fits your scenario much more than Fields. Fields has value. Darnold was a punchline.
 
 So you would give 9, both 2nds, and next years 1st to draft a 5’10, 180 unproven player over giving a pick for a player who improved as much as any QB not named Trevor and ran for more yards than all but one QB. Ever. Good Luck with that. 

[AggieLean]

The 9th pick for Fields? Hell yea, I’d do that deal. 
 

It’s not going to happen, though. Chicago would be foolish to give up on him now. So since it won’t happen, I’m still all in on going up for Stroud.

[SazmoRanger]

34 minutes ago, Toomers said:

His stock plummets with the Bears. Then it becomes an auction for half the league to participate in. He makes 5M. Less than many backups. They don’t have to take any offer until someone meets their price. 
 

 And so compared the Darnold situation because it fits your scenario much more than Fields. Fields has value. Darnold was a punchline.
 
 So you would give 9, both 2nds, and next years 1st to draft a 5’10, 180 unproven player over giving a pick for a player who improved as much as any QB not named Trevor and ran for more yards than all but one QB. Ever. Good Luck with that. 

We all have our opinions, but yes I like Young over the rest. He’s the best QB coming out from every stat/ability besides size.
 

Obviously, I wouldn’t want to give up that much, but since I think Young is that guy, I don’t care what we give up. We have a decent roster and a ton of money in 2024. Get your guy and build around him. 
 

[CRA]

1 hour ago, XClown1986 said:

I don't see Fields being a starting QB for long in the NFL. So I would bet on one of the top guys in the draft. We passed on him for a reason.

We were also lead by a clown.  Who did a lot of stupid things at that time.  And he did a lot of stupid things in relation to the QB spot right before he fell to us.  Like overspend on a trash QB when it was widely believed all the QBs would be gone before our pick. 

So, saying Matt Rhule passe on him for a reason doesn't mean much. 

and still, Fields did near historic stuff on the ground in his first year as the planned started.  And had a better completion % than most years Cam had despite having no weapons. 

Once the game slows down for Fields and they actually have a decent offensive roster, I think Fields is going to be nice. 

[pantherj]

Our scouts and Fitt didn't like Fields and passed on him. He hasn't done much since then. There is no way we want Fields. We're likely to take whichever QB falls to 9th out of the top 4 QB prospects imo. If CJ starts falling we are highly likely to jump in front of Atlanta to try and grab him. We don't want CJ going to Atlanta, and rumors are floating around that we are high on CJ. 

Edited February 14, 2023 by pantherj