Bears acquiring Foles for a 4th
Moderator: wab
- The Cooler King
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 5011
- Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2019 11:07 pm
- Has thanked: 1213 times
- Been thanked: 348 times
I wouldn't be so sure they'll spend too much of that extra money. With next year's cap outlook already tight, they could just let that extra cushion be there in case someone really good becomes a surprise cut (like Sitton several years ago), or let it role over to next year.
- The Cooler King
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 5011
- Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2019 11:07 pm
- Has thanked: 1213 times
- Been thanked: 348 times
Well, if he voids, its clear that entire $24M isn't going to come due. Whatever his base salary is for this year,is part of the guaranteed remaining (actually 21M, not 24M).Yogi da Bear wrote: ↑Wed Apr 01, 2020 5:01 pmNo that's guaranteed money. There's no way that Foles would agree to have it nullified. My guess is that his ability to void basically rests on his ability to win the starting job. At voiding, the entire 24 million would become due, making his 2020 salary 24 million. Same if he wins the job next year. That's starting QB pay. If he doesn't reach the incentive to void, he still carries over incentives made (probably starts as a backup).southdakbearfan wrote: ↑Wed Apr 01, 2020 4:34 pm Time will tell, but a couple articles made it sound like the incentives are guaranteed escalators for the following seasons salary. I.e. he does well his salary could jump to 14 million next season. There is also the foles out option so he could choose to hit the market. I haven’t heard if he exercises his out option what happens to the guaranteed salary, I would assume as a condition of the out clause it is nullified or there is a minimal payment.
Anyway it would appear they have 8 mill and change in cap space for 20 depending on the value of the Ifedi deal from what I read.
Anybody who looks at this contract and thinks we're trading Trubisky or that they want Foles to win the starting job is fooling themselves. It's clear from Foles' contract that they're giving Mitch an in to win the job.
So let's say his base salary this year is $8M all guaranteed. That leaves 13M left in guaranteed over 2021 and 2022.
If he can opt out of his deal, I don't know why it would be assumed that those 13M guarantees would remain in place. I'm admittedly pretty unsure of the ins and outs of player options in the NFL though, as I think they're pretty rare. I mean, what possible motivation is the Bears to put in that player option if they could be left holding the bag on the rest of the guaranteeds and not even have him on the roster- just to lock him in at 3/24 if Mitch wins the job? If Mitch can win the job, it would be dumb to continue to pay high end backup money because Mitch is then going to need to get paid. They'd end up with the highest QB and highest EDGE cap hits in the league and would be VERY limited to what else they can do - they'd be filling out the roster with UDFA and still having to cut other veteran players. They only have something like 20M projected next year in room, but thats on like 25 players.
- Yogi da Bear
- Head Coach
- Posts: 2584
- Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2018 4:43 pm
- Has thanked: 222 times
- Been thanked: 401 times
Really? Look at it from the player's point of view. If you have 24 million in guaranteed money, why in the HELL would you give up ANY of that money? I certainly wouldn't. His ability to void the deal, accelerates that money, just like if the Bears were to cut him. It brings it from backup money to starter money. Basically, the Bears have guaranteed themselves a solid backup QB for the next three years if Mitch wins out over Foles. But if Foles wins out, he's guaranteed to be paid as a starter.
- The Cooler King
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 5011
- Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2019 11:07 pm
- Has thanked: 1213 times
- Been thanked: 348 times
If I was Nick Foles and I lead the Bears to a SB like I did the Eagles a couple years ago (or even a deep playoff run), and I could:
Stay in my contract for, say 2/28 remaining with 13 guaranteed (adding in incentives) , or hit the market and sign a 4/88 with 50 guaranteed like his contract with Jax two years ago (and that's prob the floor) , yea I'd walk away from the guarantees. The guarantees are a protection for the player, if he were to retire he'd pay back "guaranteed money". If he opts out why would the a Bears agree to be on the hook for it.
Stay in my contract for, say 2/28 remaining with 13 guaranteed (adding in incentives) , or hit the market and sign a 4/88 with 50 guaranteed like his contract with Jax two years ago (and that's prob the floor) , yea I'd walk away from the guarantees. The guarantees are a protection for the player, if he were to retire he'd pay back "guaranteed money". If he opts out why would the a Bears agree to be on the hook for it.
- The Cooler King
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 5011
- Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2019 11:07 pm
- Has thanked: 1213 times
- Been thanked: 348 times
Straight from the CBA:
Pace is an idiot if he negotiated a player opt out that doesn't void any remaining guarantees. He'd have been better off just sticking with the existing contract otherwise.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source= ... D46UKd8hdG
Voiding of Guarantees. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Section 9, a Club and player may negotiate the circumstances under which the guarantee of any unearned Salary (including, without limitation, Paragraph 5 Salary and/or future year roster bonuses, option bonuses or reporting bonuses) may be voided. This Subsection (g) only applies to the guarantee aspect of the contract provision, and not to the amount that can be earned, and in no way expands the permissible scope of Forfeitable Salary under this Section
Pace is an idiot if he negotiated a player opt out that doesn't void any remaining guarantees. He'd have been better off just sticking with the existing contract otherwise.
- Yogi da Bear
- Head Coach
- Posts: 2584
- Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2018 4:43 pm
- Has thanked: 222 times
- Been thanked: 401 times
Why would the Bears agree to it? Because they wanted Foles. Foles had 24 million guaranteed of the original 50 million guaranteed by Jacksonville. Why in the world would Foles EVER give that up. The way the Bears set it up, Foles would get paid that guaranteed money as a backup if he didn't win the starting job, or he would get the entire amount of 24 million if he voids the contract because he won the starter's job this year. If it takes him two years to win the job, the voidable amount would be only 16 million because 8 would have been paid for this year.
It makes sense from both sides. No way would any player "void" money that he was already guaranteed. At least I don't see it happening.
It makes sense from both sides. No way would any player "void" money that he was already guaranteed. At least I don't see it happening.
- The Cooler King
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 5011
- Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2019 11:07 pm
- Has thanked: 1213 times
- Been thanked: 348 times
Why would Fokes give up any of his money, unguaranteed or not, if he wasnt playing for a bigger payday. Voiding this guarantee would be totally in his hands and he only has to make that decision when they time arrives that someone is gonna backup the truck for his services. Not likes he's agreeing to void it now. He already agreed to waive A LOT of unguaranteed money in exchange for flexibility to opt out. But that opt out is apparently only triggered if he plays.
The Bears basically took away the upside on Foles deal. In any scenario where Foles is a good starter he opts out and geta 25m+ on the open market. He'd have been about 2/35-40 on his existing deal if he had broken out, with almost no dead hits- pretty team friendly
Now they may value him mostly as a well paid backup, but in that scenario I don't see why it will be the well paid backup to Mitch because in any reasonable scenario where Mitch is starting in 2021 or later, he going to make 25m+ as well. It's far more likely that they're looking ahead to the next cheap rookie contract in which case Foles as the well paid backup makes sense (and they probably lied to Foles about his chances to compete to start) .
Really that's the biggest thing for Foles. While he isn't giving up guaranteeds he is taking a big paycut. If he did that without a very good chance to start + perform + opt out into a bigger deal his agent should be fired. The price of exercising that levarage is then a pretty small 12.25 guarantee reduction (thats replaced with one last 100M+ payday)
The Bears basically took away the upside on Foles deal. In any scenario where Foles is a good starter he opts out and geta 25m+ on the open market. He'd have been about 2/35-40 on his existing deal if he had broken out, with almost no dead hits- pretty team friendly
Now they may value him mostly as a well paid backup, but in that scenario I don't see why it will be the well paid backup to Mitch because in any reasonable scenario where Mitch is starting in 2021 or later, he going to make 25m+ as well. It's far more likely that they're looking ahead to the next cheap rookie contract in which case Foles as the well paid backup makes sense (and they probably lied to Foles about his chances to compete to start) .
Really that's the biggest thing for Foles. While he isn't giving up guaranteeds he is taking a big paycut. If he did that without a very good chance to start + perform + opt out into a bigger deal his agent should be fired. The price of exercising that levarage is then a pretty small 12.25 guarantee reduction (thats replaced with one last 100M+ payday)
- The Cooler King
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 5011
- Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2019 11:07 pm
- Has thanked: 1213 times
- Been thanked: 348 times
Another way to think of it:
Waiving a bunch of unguaranteed salary and deferring guarantees just to be a backup:
Shitty deal for Foles
Showcasing Foles abilities at the risk he can opt out and you paid a 4th rounder and 20.25M for that 1 year:
Shitty deal for the Bears
Showacasing Foles abilities at a reduced Y1 salary for possible guarantee relief/deferral in 2021 and 22 and a big payday for Foles (either with Bears or with another team) :
Happy medium for both sides. Each take on some risk and some reward.
Waiving a bunch of unguaranteed salary and deferring guarantees just to be a backup:
Shitty deal for Foles
Showcasing Foles abilities at the risk he can opt out and you paid a 4th rounder and 20.25M for that 1 year:
Shitty deal for the Bears
Showacasing Foles abilities at a reduced Y1 salary for possible guarantee relief/deferral in 2021 and 22 and a big payday for Foles (either with Bears or with another team) :
Happy medium for both sides. Each take on some risk and some reward.
- Hoog
- Player of the Month
- Posts: 390
- Joined: Sun Dec 29, 2019 4:51 pm
- Has thanked: 41 times
- Been thanked: 73 times
I think regardless of how this ends up, it's a much better deal now for the Bears. Worst case scenario we pay him $8M a year to back up someone. I'm good with that deal to be honest. My hope is Mitch clicks and steps up. If not then my hope is Nick meets and exceeds his incentives. Either way, just get us to the playoffs.
- The Cooler King
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 5011
- Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2019 11:07 pm
- Has thanked: 1213 times
- Been thanked: 348 times
I don't think the 8M backup salary will be a positive if it clicks with Mitch because your QB cap hit explodes with Mitch on a new deal. But that's just part of the risk I will take if Mitch somehow breaks out. The 2/16 (or up ton2/28) for 2021 and 2022 makes much more sense with an heir apparent rookie-contract QB in line to either start or learn the ropes for a year or two behind a bridge QB.Hoog wrote: ↑Wed Apr 01, 2020 8:11 pm I think regardless of how this ends up, it's a much better deal now for the Bears. Worst case scenario we pay him $8M a year to back up someone. I'm good with that deal to be honest. My hope is Mitch clicks and steps up. If not then my hope is Nick meets and exceeds his incentives. Either way, just get us to the playoffs.
- Yogi da Bear
- Head Coach
- Posts: 2584
- Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2018 4:43 pm
- Has thanked: 222 times
- Been thanked: 401 times
I just can't imagine anybody having 20 mill in guarantees and just walking away from it. But apparently I'm wrong and you're right. for believing a player would walk away from, well, I guess it would 12 million in guarantees after the first season.The Cooler King wrote: ↑Wed Apr 01, 2020 7:27 pm Why would Fokes give up any of his money, unguaranteed or not, if he wasnt playing for a bigger payday. Voiding this guarantee would be totally in his hands and he only has to make that decision when they time arrives that someone is gonna backup the truck for his services. Not likes he's agreeing to void it now. He already agreed to waive A LOT of unguaranteed money in exchange for flexibility to opt out. But that opt out is apparently only triggered if he plays.
The Bears basically took away the upside on Foles deal. In any scenario where Foles is a good starter he opts out and geta 25m+ on the open market. He'd have been about 2/35-40 on his existing deal if he had broken out, with almost no dead hits- pretty team friendly
Now they may value him mostly as a well paid backup, but in that scenario I don't see why it will be the well paid backup to Mitch because in any reasonable scenario where Mitch is starting in 2021 or later, he going to make 25m+ as well. It's far more likely that they're looking ahead to the next cheap rookie contract in which case Foles as the well paid backup makes sense (and they probably lied to Foles about his chances to compete to start) .
Really that's the biggest thing for Foles. While he isn't giving up guaranteeds he is taking a big paycut. If he did that without a very good chance to start + perform + opt out into a bigger deal his agent should be fired. The price of exercising that levarage is then a pretty small 12.25 guarantee reduction (thats replaced with one last 100M+ payday)
Here's a really good article explaining the contract. https://www.windycitygridiron.com/2020/ ... h-trubisky
Makes it a huge deal for the Bears. All I can say is that Foles really must have wanted to leave Jacksonville and come to Chicago. The Bears should be commended on this one. And those anti-Mitches out there who thought that Foles was definitely taking the starting role because of the dollars, just lost that argument.
- The Cooler King
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 5011
- Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2019 11:07 pm
- Has thanked: 1213 times
- Been thanked: 348 times
I agree it is a great article. From that article;Yogi da Bear wrote: ↑Wed Apr 01, 2020 8:32 pmI just can't imagine anybody having 20 mill in guarantees and just walking away from it. But apparently I'm wrong and you're right. for believing a player would walk away from, well, I guess it would 12 million in guarantees after the first season.The Cooler King wrote: ↑Wed Apr 01, 2020 7:27 pm Why would Fokes give up any of his money, unguaranteed or not, if he wasnt playing for a bigger payday. Voiding this guarantee would be totally in his hands and he only has to make that decision when they time arrives that someone is gonna backup the truck for his services. Not likes he's agreeing to void it now. He already agreed to waive A LOT of unguaranteed money in exchange for flexibility to opt out. But that opt out is apparently only triggered if he plays.
The Bears basically took away the upside on Foles deal. In any scenario where Foles is a good starter he opts out and geta 25m+ on the open market. He'd have been about 2/35-40 on his existing deal if he had broken out, with almost no dead hits- pretty team friendly
Now they may value him mostly as a well paid backup, but in that scenario I don't see why it will be the well paid backup to Mitch because in any reasonable scenario where Mitch is starting in 2021 or later, he going to make 25m+ as well. It's far more likely that they're looking ahead to the next cheap rookie contract in which case Foles as the well paid backup makes sense (and they probably lied to Foles about his chances to compete to start) .
Really that's the biggest thing for Foles. While he isn't giving up guaranteeds he is taking a big paycut. If he did that without a very good chance to start + perform + opt out into a bigger deal his agent should be fired. The price of exercising that levarage is then a pretty small 12.25 guarantee reduction (thats replaced with one last 100M+ payday)
Here's a really good article explaining the contract. https://www.windycitygridiron.com/2020/ ... h-trubisky
Makes it a huge deal for the Bears. All I can say is that Foles really must have wanted to leave Jacksonville and come to Chicago. The Bears should be commended on this one. And those anti-Mitches out there who thought that Foles was definitely taking the starting role because of the dollars, just lost that argument.
Soooo we done?First and foremost, because the guarantees are all tied to base salary, if Foles did void the remaining two years after 2020, that $12.125 million ($20.125 million total guaranteed - $8 million guaranteed 2020 base salary) would disappear. So, the Bears likely wouldn’t be on the hook beyond 2020… but they also wouldn’t have a quarterback on the roster.
- southdakbearfan
- Head Coach
- Posts: 4624
- Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2011 11:23 pm
- Location: South Dakota
- Has thanked: 795 times
- Been thanked: 336 times
Foles wanted two things, out of jacksonville and to bet on himself again similar to when he paid 2 million to the eagles to opt out of his contract there.
If Pace took on the Jacksonville contract as it was written I would say it was a bad deal for a 4th as the Jags really wanted out of that contract as well.
Good for both sides. Pace/Nagy get their backup plan, Foles gets stability with the possibility to cash in mildly or wildly depending on the season.
If Pace took on the Jacksonville contract as it was written I would say it was a bad deal for a 4th as the Jags really wanted out of that contract as well.
Good for both sides. Pace/Nagy get their backup plan, Foles gets stability with the possibility to cash in mildly or wildly depending on the season.
- Yogi da Bear
- Head Coach
- Posts: 2584
- Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2018 4:43 pm
- Has thanked: 222 times
- Been thanked: 401 times
Yup, unless you want to do a little jig and gloat about it for the next two years, bringing it up at every opportunity, as some are wont to do. You were right and I was wrong.
- The Cooler King
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 5011
- Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2019 11:07 pm
- Has thanked: 1213 times
- Been thanked: 348 times
Sorry I took your last post as sarcastic for some reason! haha. My bad, bud.
- southdakbearfan
- Head Coach
- Posts: 4624
- Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2011 11:23 pm
- Location: South Dakota
- Has thanked: 795 times
- Been thanked: 336 times
If they do have a good/great season, regardless of who it is, they would be looking at franchising which one did well as Trubisky's deal would be up and Foles would opt out as he would get more money via the tag or a new deal.
Or they both shit the bed, Trubisky is let go as a FA and Foles doesn't opt out but isn't breaking the bank as a bridge QB and they go back to the draft.
Actually, it's a decent set up regardless.
Or they both shit the bed, Trubisky is let go as a FA and Foles doesn't opt out but isn't breaking the bank as a bridge QB and they go back to the draft.
Actually, it's a decent set up regardless.
-
- Crafty Veteran
- Posts: 934
- Joined: Mon Jan 20, 2020 12:09 am
- Has thanked: 675 times
- Been thanked: 128 times
Yes Yogi, Mitch is still getting his chance. But I don't think he succeeds and Foles takes over as I outlined in an earlier post. Yea, I'm not a Biscuit believer.
I'm gone. Have a nice life. I'm clearly not wanted here.
- Yogi da Bear
- Head Coach
- Posts: 2584
- Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2018 4:43 pm
- Has thanked: 222 times
- Been thanked: 401 times
Foles can't void the contract unless he hits certain incentives. If Mitchell wins out, he could very well be stuck as a backup at 8 mill per for the next three years.southdakbearfan wrote: ↑Wed Apr 01, 2020 11:26 pm If they do have a good/great season, regardless of who it is, they would be looking at franchising which one did well as Trubisky's deal would be up and Foles would opt out as he would get more money via the tag or a new deal.
Or they both shit the bed, Trubisky is let go as a FA and Foles doesn't opt out but isn't breaking the bank as a bridge QB and they go back to the draft.
Actually, it's a decent set up regardless.
- BreadNCircuses
- Assistant Coach
- Posts: 513
- Joined: Tue Sep 10, 2019 1:34 pm
- Has thanked: 26 times
- Been thanked: 83 times
"Stuck" here is relative. That's top-end backup money, 2 mil a year above the highest paid backup last year.Yogi da Bear wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 2:41 amFoles can't void the contract unless he hits certain incentives. If Mitchell wins out, he could very well be stuck as a backup at 8 mill per for the next three years.southdakbearfan wrote: ↑Wed Apr 01, 2020 11:26 pm If they do have a good/great season, regardless of who it is, they would be looking at franchising which one did well as Trubisky's deal would be up and Foles would opt out as he would get more money via the tag or a new deal.
Or they both shit the bed, Trubisky is let go as a FA and Foles doesn't opt out but isn't breaking the bank as a bridge QB and they go back to the draft.
Actually, it's a decent set up regardless.
Good work if you can get it.
2023 Preseason Downside prediction:
5-6 wins, never really healthy all season, a constant shuffling.
We're potentially in a position to draft in the Top 5 again, depending on the Carolina team, and probably have a low-teens (or better) pick ourselves.
5-6 wins, never really healthy all season, a constant shuffling.
We're potentially in a position to draft in the Top 5 again, depending on the Carolina team, and probably have a low-teens (or better) pick ourselves.
- southdakbearfan
- Head Coach
- Posts: 4624
- Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2011 11:23 pm
- Location: South Dakota
- Has thanked: 795 times
- Been thanked: 336 times
Ballpark where Bridgewater was last year. I think his was 7.2 with escalators up to 12.BreadNCircuses wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 7:26 am"Stuck" here is relative. That's top-end backup money, 2 mil a year above the highest paid backup last year.Yogi da Bear wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 2:41 am
Foles can't void the contract unless he hits certain incentives. If Mitchell wins out, he could very well be stuck as a backup at 8 mill per for the next three years.
Good work if you can get it.
- The Cooler King
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 5011
- Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2019 11:07 pm
- Has thanked: 1213 times
- Been thanked: 348 times
Yea, in the scenario where Mitch proves everyone wrong and enters 2021 on either the transition tag or 5th year option at 25-27M, and they're paying 8M to Foles as the backup, AND they have like 40M+ cap hit tied up into two OLBs.... things will get ugly. Next year is already a tight cap year, with only 25 guys currently under contract, and most the cap space spoken for. That's only half a roster. Robinson, Cohen, RRH and all 3 specialists also will be FA.Yogi da Bear wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 2:41 amFoles can't void the contract unless he hits certain incentives. If Mitchell wins out, he could very well be stuck as a backup at 8 mill per for the next three years.southdakbearfan wrote: ↑Wed Apr 01, 2020 11:26 pm If they do have a good/great season, regardless of who it is, they would be looking at franchising which one did well as Trubisky's deal would be up and Foles would opt out as he would get more money via the tag or a new deal.
Or they both shit the bed, Trubisky is let go as a FA and Foles doesn't opt out but isn't breaking the bank as a bridge QB and they go back to the draft.
Actually, it's a decent set up regardless.
That's basically I think the downside of this deal for the Bears. The upside is if Foles does repalce Trubisky and opts out you've upgraded your QB play pretty cheap for 1 year, and then have the flexibility to re-evaluate the situation in 2021, whether that's Foles mid-long term or Foles as a bridge to a draft pick.
Part of the calculus with Foles could be not to just go and spend that cap savings in 2020. Between the incentives or the above scenario, if you leave that 8M savings as cap cushion, you would still just roll it forward to 2021 if he doesn't hit the incentives.
- wab
- Mod
- Posts: 29880
- Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2008 12:49 pm
- Has thanked: 130 times
- Been thanked: 1995 times
Only one of Mitch/Foles will be on the roster next season. And it's possible neither will.
- crueltyabc
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 5133
- Joined: Mon May 04, 2009 7:36 pm
- Location: Dallas TX
- Has thanked: 81 times
- Been thanked: 234 times
I'm feeling good about this signing after I see the numbers. I still would have maybe preferred Dalton but I'm happy to see that the Bears will have options in 2021. My early prediction is Mitch plays badly, and Foles plays OK.
xyt in the discord chats
- The Cooler King
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 5011
- Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2019 11:07 pm
- Has thanked: 1213 times
- Been thanked: 348 times
If Mitch busts out in a big way, I think they'd both be on the roster, unless you found a taker for Foles in a trade. He'd be a pretty tradeable contract at that point, at least, for a team in need of a bridge QB or high quality backup.
That said I don't expect Mitch to. But its a remote possibility.
- G08
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 20609
- Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2008 12:34 pm
- Location: Football Hell
- Has thanked: 221 times
- Been thanked: 785 times
So the contract details were released... $8M per season for Mr. Foles, with a QB option to opt out at any point.
That's less than Mr. Trubisky.
"follow the money"
This further cements in my mind that Foles wasn't brought here to be the starter verbatim. I think this is, at minimum, a hedge to Trubisky sucking. At most? A legit competition for the starting job in 2020.
Barring injury or Trubisky shitting the bed in camp/pre-season, I bet Trubisky starts week 1 2020 for us.
That's less than Mr. Trubisky.
"follow the money"
This further cements in my mind that Foles wasn't brought here to be the starter verbatim. I think this is, at minimum, a hedge to Trubisky sucking. At most? A legit competition for the starting job in 2020.
Barring injury or Trubisky shitting the bed in camp/pre-season, I bet Trubisky starts week 1 2020 for us.
9 PLAYOFF APPEARANCES IN THE PAST 35 SEASONS
"Wallet white, phone is pink, case is clear, nails are clear, lips are pink – your girl LOVE 'em!"
"Wallet white, phone is pink, case is clear, nails are clear, lips are pink – your girl LOVE 'em!"
- Yogi da Bear
- Head Coach
- Posts: 2584
- Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2018 4:43 pm
- Has thanked: 222 times
- Been thanked: 401 times
You're missing the scenario where Mitch wins out and signs for 21 million (the amount that Bridgewater signed for to start in Carolina). Then Foles' 8 mill doesn't look so heavy.wab wrote: Only one of Mitch/Foles will be on the roster next season. And it's possible neither will.
- southdakbearfan
- Head Coach
- Posts: 4624
- Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2011 11:23 pm
- Location: South Dakota
- Has thanked: 795 times
- Been thanked: 336 times
In that scenario I would assume they would try to trade foles.Yogi da Bear wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 3:23 pmYou're missing the scenario where Mitch wins out and signs for 21 million (the amount that Bridgewater signed for to start in Carolina). Then Foles' 8 mill doesn't look so heavy.wab wrote: Only one of Mitch/Foles will be on the roster next season. And it's possible neither will.
- The Cooler King
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 5011
- Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2019 11:07 pm
- Has thanked: 1213 times
- Been thanked: 348 times
If Mitch wins out I think he's more than a 21m QB. Not a lot of middle ground for him, IMO.Yogi da Bear wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 3:23 pmYou're missing the scenario where Mitch wins out and signs for 21 million (the amount that Bridgewater signed for to start in Carolina). Then Foles' 8 mill doesn't look so heavy.wab wrote: Only one of Mitch/Foles will be on the roster next season. And it's possible neither will.
- The Cooler King
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 5011
- Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2019 11:07 pm
- Has thanked: 1213 times
- Been thanked: 348 times
I wouldn't be so sure about though. The best piece of info we could have is what the criteria for Foles opt out is, but we likely won't get that info.G08 wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 1:41 pm So the contract details were released... $8M per season for Mr. Foles, with a QB option to opt out at any point.
That's less than Mr. Trubisky.
"follow the money"
This further cements in my mind that Foles wasn't brought here to be the starter verbatim. I think this is, at minimum, a hedge to Trubisky sucking. At most? A legit competition for the starting job in 2020.
Barring injury or Trubisky shitting the bed in camp/pre-season, I bet Trubisky starts week 1 2020 for us.
If his opt out is relatively high, say 12 starts, I think he knows he is the favorite to win the job now. If it's lower, like 6 games, he knows it's a situation where Mitch is the favorite, but he may take over by midseason. He's really the guy who's viewpoint you have to consider in this because he had little motivation to restructure his contract and give up base salaries.