Chicago Bears crafted least expensive offense in the NFL for upcoming season

[docc]

The Chicago Bears are leaving their cap space to use in the future. That might even be an understatement.Ryan Taylor
Tue, July 5, 2022 at 1:17 PM

Bears craft least expensive offense for upcoming season originally appeared on NBC Sports Chicago

The Chicago Bears are leaving their cap space to use in the future. That might even be an understatement.

According to a statistic from Warren Sharp of Sharp Football Analytics, the Bears are fielding the least expensive offense in the NFL next season, tapping out at $65 million.
most expensive offenses in 2022

top-10:

1. DET - $123M
2. DAL - $122M
3. WAS - $122M
4. TEN - $121M
5. ARI - $121M
6. KC - $120.4M
7. NE - $115M
8. BAL - $113M
9. CLE - $112M
10. SF - $111M

bottom-5:

28. HOU - $89M
29. SEA - $82M
30. ATL - $74M
31. PIT - $63M
32. CHI - $62M
10:20 AM · Jul 2, 2022

Ryan Taylor
Tue, July 5, 2022 at 1:17 PM

Bears craft least expensive offense for upcoming season originally appeared on NBC Sports Chicago

The Chicago Bears are leaving their cap space to use in the future. That might even be an understatement.

According to a statistic from Warren Sharp of Sharp Football Analytics, the Bears are fielding the least expensive offense in the NFL next season, tapping out at $65 million.

Cody Whitehair represents the highest paid offensive player next season with a base salary of $8 million. David Montgomery follows him with a base salary of north of $2 million from his rookie contract.

Here’s a chart of positional spending per offensive position plus NFL rank, via Spotrac.

Position


Players


Cap Dollars



With the losses of Allen Robinson (~$17 million cap hit), Nick Foles (~$6 million cap hit), Jimmy Graham (~$5 million cap hit), Andy Dalton (~$4 million cap hit) and a plethora of others, the Bears are saving their money for future use.

The Bears have an offense with plenty of rookie contracts like Teven Jenkins, Larry Borom, Cole Kmet, Darnell Mooney and Justin Fields.

They also signed multiple short-term, minimum salary contracts to the offense like Byron Pringle, Equanimeous St. Brown, Lucas Patrick and Darrynton Evans to bridge the gap of their rebuild.

General manager Ryan Poles set the blueprint for a cheap offense waiting to strike with cap usage next offseason. It is no question the front office will see the money on the field next season.

[Rusty Trombagent]

hey if you add in 50+ mil in dead money we're looking pretty respectable.

[Z Bear]

The name of the article could of been which teams do not pay a QB top tier money. HOU, SEA, ATL, and PIT all just shed themselves of a very expensive QB contract. The Bears got rid of Dalton and Foles which make up about 3/4ths of a top tier QB pay (not skill).

[Atkins&Rebel]

Yeah, rookie deals especially at QB will get you a cap friendly offense.

[Moriarty]

The name of the article could of been which teams do not pay a QB top tier money. HOU, SEA, ATL, and PIT all just shed themselves of a very expensive QB contract. The Bears got rid of Dalton and Foles which make up about 3/4ths of a top tier QB pay (not skill).

That's a fair point that O w QB and O wo QB both might be more informative.

However, from the original article, each position broken down:
https://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/c ... r%20alerts.

Position Players Cap Dollars NFL Rank
Quarterback 3 $6,819,081 -------------- 27
Running Back 5 $6,365,706 -------------- 29
Wide Receivers 13 $14,458,075 -------------- 30
Tight End 5 $6,583,882 -------------- 27
Offensive Line 16 $27,338,346 -------------- 31



It's not just the QB position. The Bears aren't spending anywhere on offense.

Part of that is because of all the dead money they had to eat, which isn't included here
Some is because they're saving for next year
Some is because they prioritized defense more


The dead money sucks, but can't be helped. That's what happens when the prior GM bombs.
Saving for next year - I'm in favor.
But I would have liked to see at least 1 more capable veteran OL landed. OL is the only position I felt spending some meaningful (above Comp) money on in 2022 was necessary.


Fields is going into a critical development year with a WalMart offense.
Not ideal.

[dplank]

The name of the article could of been which teams do not pay a QB top tier money. HOU, SEA, ATL, and PIT all just shed themselves of a very expensive QB contract. The Bears got rid of Dalton and Foles which make up about 3/4ths of a top tier QB pay (not skill).

That's a fair point that O w QB and O wo QB both might be more informative.

However, from the original article, each position broken down:
https://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/c ... r%20alerts.

Position Players Cap Dollars NFL Rank
Quarterback 3 $6,819,081 -------------- 27
Running Back 5 $6,365,706 -------------- 29
Wide Receivers 13 $14,458,075 -------------- 30
Tight End 5 $6,583,882 -------------- 27
Offensive Line 16 $27,338,346 -------------- 31



It's not just the QB position. The Bears aren't spending anywhere on offense.

Part of that is because of all the dead money they had to eat, which isn't included here
Some is because they're saving for next year
Some is because they prioritized defense more


The dead money sucks, but can't be helped. That's what happens when the prior GM bombs.
Saving for next year - I'm in favor.
But I would have liked to see at least 1 more capable veteran OL landed. OL is the only position I felt spending some meaningful (above Comp) money on in 2022 was necessary.


Fields is going into a critical development year with a WalMart offense.
Not ideal.

Great post, I don't understand why folks want to wash away the strategy by pointing at rookie QB cost to ignore the other positions. We aren't spending anywhere on offense, and spending 2nd to last in the league on OL is a disgrace IMO. 3rd to last at WR just enhances that problem and makes it super clear that we have not surrounded Fields with proper talent to break out. Notes for standard responses sure to follow: 1) This does not mean Fields can't and shouldn't improve on his own 2) This does not mean that none of the rookies can step up and play well 3) This does not mean that I'm trying to setup an excuse for Fields if he bombs. 4) This does not mean that I don't expect improvement from a better offensive scheme

This is a simple acknowledgement that we have failed to surround him with talent this year - that's a gamble. As Moriarty aptly describes it, going into a development year with a WalMart offense is not ideal - that's an understatement.

[IE]

I'll maybe go with Costco offense - not Walmart - under the concept that Poles has gone with quantiy at a good price. And let's not forget that some of "last year's inventory" was more along the lines of a brand name product sitting on a tourist trap shelf at 2-3x suggested retail.

I see continued conflation of cost and quality here. Would people be happier with Leno and Ifedi and Graham, Damien Williams and Dalton/Foles? No. Would this team be in better shape this year if ARob was still on board? Not really.

This is just the same discussion we've been having all over the place about narratives and uncertainty about "more recognizable names that didn't deliver" vs younger less certain prospects and such.

Here's a fact: If you want to introduce a legit new culture and set the tone, you do it with younger less experienced players. Because crusty old (more experienced) farts like ARob and some others are far less likely to buy in. Same with many FAs. With FAs you want the hungriest guys possible to build that culture. The team getting so much younger (and therefore cheaper) just shows that the new regime means business and is walking the talk. Just because the they're are doing this doesn't mean they won't be successful (and soon). There is a good chance they wouldn't be successful if they didn't.

[dplank]

I'll maybe go with Costco offense - not Walmart - under the concept that Poles has gone with quantiy at a good price. And let's not forget that some of "last year's inventory" was more along the lines of a brand name product sitting on a tourist trap shelf at 2-3x suggested retail.

I see continued conflation of cost and quality here. Would people be happier with Leno and Ifedi and Graham, Damien Williams and Dalton/Foles? No. Would this team be in better shape this year if ARob was still on board? Not really.

This is just the same discussion we've been having all over the place about narratives and uncertainty about "more recognizable names that didn't deliver" vs younger less certain prospects and such.

Here's a fact: If you want to introduce a legit new culture and set the tone, you do it with younger less experienced players. Because crusty old (more experienced) farts like ARob and some others are far less likely to buy in. Same with many FAs. With FAs you want the hungriest guys possible to build that culture. The team getting so much younger (and therefore cheaper) just shows that the new regime means business and is walking the talk. Just because the they're are doing this doesn't mean they won't be successful (and soon). There is a good chance they wouldn't be successful if they didn't.

I'd be happier if James Daniels was lining up at RG instead of Sam Mustipher, and I think we could withstand moving from 31st to like 25th in OL spending without keeping those drastic examples you gave above (which no one wants). Funny thing about Daniels is that by all accounts he would fit this new blocking scheme perfectly - like, a better fit than he's been with Castillo. Still young, home grown talent. I was ok letting him walk when while we were all assuming Poles meant what he said about OL and was going to attack the position - my assumption was he would bring in someone better. Now that we're staring down the barrel of Sam Mustipher, I'm no longer ok with letting Daniels go.

[Yogi da Bear]

I don't care where he's lining up now, but personally, I don't think there's any way that Mustipher is going to be our starting RG. In fact, I highly doubt that he even makes the team.

[Moriarty]

I see continued conflation of cost and quality here. Would people be happier with Leno and Ifedi and Graham, Damien Williams and Dalton/Foles? No. Would this team be in better shape this year if ARob was still on board? Not really.

I'd be happier if James Daniels was lining up at RG instead of Sam Mustipher, and I think we could withstand moving from 31st to like 25th in OL spending without keeping those drastic examples you gave above (which no one wants). Funny thing about Daniels is that by all accounts he would fit this new blocking scheme perfectly - like, a better fit than he's been with Castillo. Still young, home grown talent. I was ok letting him walk when while we were all assuming Poles meant what he said about OL and was going to attack the position - my assumption was he would bring in someone better. Now that we're staring down the barrel of Sam Mustipher, I'm no longer ok with letting Daniels go.

I'm not sure I'd bite on Daniels specifically in a long deal like that.

But I'd certainly be happier with a Leno or Daniels level talent playing G on a 1-2 yr deal. Even an Ifedi level talent (but fitting the new system, which Ifedi didn't, and being best at G, which Ifedi wasn't) would be helpful.
Right now RG is a huge black hole. Maybe one of the kids will work out and it will be fine. But then again, maybe a Day 3, small program, position changing rookie isn't going to be ready to be reliable in year 1. That's a huge gamble against your most valuable asset's development.
Yeah, Dozier's injury wasn't predictable, but him sucking anyway when healthy was, because when hasn't he?

[IE]

I liked Daniels. I don't know that we know at all who is going to start at RG.

But again that is just one thing - one position, and focusing on one position or guy is a distraction from the main objective of Poles and Flus - and that is to establish a real and strong culture across the board. If they had any indication Daniels wasn't going to buy in or wasn't their guy, that is the priority to get him gone. Because the overall performance of the team is going to be more dependent on the buy-in to the culture and work ethic, the consistent play and commitment. Talking about a given player or a FA is "missing the forest for the trees".

[thunderspirit]

I'm not sure I'd bite on Daniels specifically in a long deal like that.

Same.

I think Poles' saturation bombing approach was intended to find a diamond in the rough, and perhaps more than one.

It's always possible all four are misses, certainly. But the plan appears to be to give them enough runway to see if they develop into something, which was why we didn't see a lot of veteran FA movement.

[karhu]

Between the returning talent and the new coaching staff's preferences, we had an idea of what would work on defense and a few pieces of the puzzle already in place. Enough to build on.

We don't have those things on offense, and now's not the time to pretend that we do. Next year, with any luck, the offense will be in roughly the same position as the defense was when Eberflus came on board. That'll be the time to make investments.

All in lieu of simply posting "Good."

[Moriarty]

Here's a fact: If you want to introduce a legit new culture and set the tone, you do it with younger less experienced players. Because crusty old (more experienced) farts like ARob and some others are far less likely to buy in. Same with many FAs. With FAs you want the hungriest guys possible to build that culture. The team getting so much younger (and therefore cheaper) just shows that the new regime means business and is walking the talk. Just because the they're are doing this doesn't mean they won't be successful (and soon). There is a good chance they wouldn't be successful if they didn't.

On the balance, sure a rebuilding team establishing culture should lean younger than the average NFL team.

But using that as an excuse to maybe get your developing QB killed is taking it to a ridiculous extreme.


Poles kept Whitehair who's rich, experienced, and getting old (30)
He brought in Joe Thomas (31)
Brought in Trevor Siemien (30)
Brought in O'Shaunessy (30, 8th yr in the NFL)
Brought in Griffin (32)
Kept Eddie Jackson, who's really high on the "buy-in to the culture" question mark scale
Kept Mario Edwards and Antonio Blackson (8th yr in the NFL for both)

He's not allergic to having veterans on the team. He understands that sometimes the performance they can bring outweighs youth/upside/hunger in a lesser player.
One more vet isn't tipping your locker room into chaos and complacency. But 1 terrible player out of 5 on the OL can very easily mess that up completely.

[dplank]

I’ll just step out because Moriarty is owning this thread. Well put again.

[RichH55]

I can make a cheap Offense that is better than any in the NFL currently.

All you have to do is take guys on Rookie contracts

[RichH55]

I liked Daniels. I don't know that we know at all who is going to start at RG.

But again that is just one thing - one position, and focusing on one position or guy is a distraction from the main objective of Poles and Flus - and that is to establish a real and strong culture across the board. If they had any indication Daniels wasn't going to buy in or wasn't their guy, that is the priority to get him gone. Because the overall performance of the team is going to be more dependent on the buy-in to the culture and work ethic, the consistent play and commitment. Talking about a given player or a FA is "missing the forest for the trees".

Daniels - according to this thread - just got like 400% better this offseason. Tough blow for us.

[RichH55]

Ironically you know who would NOT bump us much up the paying money list - if we had cut Whitehair and signed Armstead - we'd actually be even CHEAPER this season on Offense.

[Heinz D.]

But using that as an excuse to maybe get your developing QB killed is taking it to a ridiculous extreme.

Good lord. Seriously?

Rant about the lack of weapons next.

You'll be all ready to join the mainstream football media. Jeezus.

[HisRoyalSweetness]

It's not just the QB position. The Bears aren't spending anywhere on offense.

Part of that is because of all the dead money they had to eat, which isn't included here
Some is because they're saving for next year
Some is because they prioritized defense more

Not sure about that last reason. Did they really prioritize defense more?

Top 5 highest cost players signed in free agency for both sides of the ball:

Defense (2022 Cap Hit per Spotrac)
Justin Jones ($4.6m) - 2 year $12m contract
Al-Quadin Muhammad ($3.5m) - 2 year $8m contract
Nicholas Morrow ($2.5m) - 1 year contract
Deandre Houston-Carson ($1.77m) - 1 year contract
Tavon Young ($1.365m) - 1 year contract
Total 2022 cap hit: $13.735m

Offense (2022 Cap Hit per Spotrac)
Byron Pringle ($4.125m) - 1 year contract
Lucas Patrick ($4m) - 2 year $8m contract
Ryan Griffin ($1.75m) - 1 year contract
Trevor Siemian ($1.635m) - 2 year $4m contract
Darrynton Evans ($1.005m) - 2 year $2.1327m contract
Total 2022 cap hit: $12.515m

The truth is that Poles did not prioritise spending on defense. He didn't spend on either side of the ball.

Even if you factor in 'spending' draft capital that suggestion doesn't hold water. Yes he spent his first two picks on Gordon and Brisker (and the consensus is that he got great value), but he then selected 2 offensive players with his next 2 picks and overall chose 4 defensive players, 6 offensive players and a punter. That's not a sign of a GM prioritising defense. Poles took the players he assessed were the best available with his high picks and then loaded up on offensive line prospects because he knows he needs to bolster that position group in particular.

The Bears have now drafted 6 offensive linemen in the last two years. There is competition for places. I for one am interested to see how it all shakes out.

[RichH55]

Offense:
QB Justin Herbert 7.2
QB Mac Jones 3.5
HB Jon Taylor. 2.1
HB James Robinson 900 K
WR T McClaurin 3.1
WR Justin Jefferson 3.6
WR Claypool 1.8
WR Mooney. 965 K
WR Hollywood Brown 2.1
TE Tonyan 2.4
TE Kmet 2.1
OT Slater. 3.7
OG Trey Smith. 900 K
C - Creed Humphrey. 1.26
OG J Jackson 1.3 (You can add a pro bowler like E Jenkins for 4.7 or Dalton Risner for 3.7 - but IM NOT MADE OF MONEY!)
OT Wirfs 4.4

Backup OL - Pig Simmons 900 K
Borom 900 K
T Jenkins 1.9

IR - Armstead 3.99

49.015


What a crappy Offense! CHEAP! NICKELS LIKE MANHOLE COVERS!

[RichH55]

Here's a fact: If you want to introduce a legit new culture and set the tone, you do it with younger less experienced players. Because crusty old (more experienced) farts like ARob and some others are far less likely to buy in. Same with many FAs. With FAs you want the hungriest guys possible to build that culture. The team getting so much younger (and therefore cheaper) just shows that the new regime means business and is walking the talk. Just because the they're are doing this doesn't mean they won't be successful (and soon). There is a good chance they wouldn't be successful if they didn't.

On the balance, sure a rebuilding team establishing culture should lean younger than the average NFL team.

Moriarty - I'd note this - from following Bellichicks moves over the years etc (Theory he has - not mine - though Im claiming it)

One of the benefits to younger v. vet laden squad (not so much for Week 1)

You can practice harder and longer into the season with a Young Grouping. Rookies/2nd year guys don't get "Vet Days off" etc.

[dplank]

Offense:
QB Justin Herbert 7.2
QB Mac Jones 3.5
HB Jon Taylor. 2.1
HB James Robinson 900 K
WR T McClaurin 3.1
WR Justin Jefferson 3.6
WR Claypool 1.8
WR Mooney. 965 K
WR Hollywood Brown 2.1
TE Tonyan 2.4
TE Kmet 2.1
OT Slater. 3.7
OG Trey Smith. 900 K
C - Creed Humphrey. 1.26
OG J Jackson 1.3 (You can add a pro bowler like E Jenkins for 4.7 or Dalton Risner for 3.7 - but IM NOT MADE OF MONEY!)
OT Wirfs 4.4

Backup OL - Pig Simmons 900 K
Borom 900 K
T Jenkins 1.9

IR - Armstead 3.99

49.015


What a crappy Offense! CHEAP! NICKELS LIKE MANHOLE COVERS!

If only we had 15 draft picks a year and hit on every one, we’d be contenders.

[IE]

The "killed QB" narrative is absurd, and I'll just let anyone who wants to wallow in that nonsense continue to enjoy their own misery.

[rtd]

The "killed QB" narrative is absurd, and I'll just let anyone who wants to wallow in that nonsense continue to enjoy their own misery.

Well put IE. Many QBs have been hit alot in their early years. They make it through.
The way to not get your QB hit alot is :
1Run the ball well.
Move the pocket
Play action ....after making the run work.
Learn from your mistakes QB
At that point the game will slow down. He will know where to attack the defense before the ball is snapped.

[thunderspirit]

It's not just the QB position. The Bears aren't spending anywhere on offense.

Part of that is because of all the dead money they had to eat, which isn't included here
Some is because they're saving for next year
Some is because they prioritized defense more

Not sure about that last reason. Did they really prioritize defense more?

They certainly tried to, but Ogunjobi failed his physical..

I'm not nearly as down as some on the offensive in general, or on the offensive line in particular, but Poles' moves in free agency very much prioritized defense over offense.

[karhu]

Well put IE. Many QBs have been hit alot in their early years. They make it through.
The way to not get your QB hit alot is :
1Run the ball well.
Move the pocket
Play action ....after making the run work.
Learn from your mistakes QB
At that point the game will slow down. He will know where to attack the defense before the ball is snapped.

And as a precondition of all of that:

Stop the other team from putting your QB in must-pass situations.

It's not like a good defense doesn't help the QB.

[The Marshall Plan]

Obviously I'm not arguing the point about the perceived, or realized, lack of talent on offense for OL, WR and TE. We need upgrades there without question.

What I will say is that having a QB and two or three OL on rookie deals throws off the numbers a lot.

Add back in a cap hit of $45M or more to normalize that and we aren't at the bottom.

[HisRoyalSweetness]

Not sure about that last reason. Did they really prioritize defense more?

They certainly tried to, but Ogunjobi failed his physical..

I'm not nearly as down as some on the offensive in general, or on the offensive line in particular, but Poles' moves in free agency very much prioritized defense over offense.

One player does not equal 'prioritising' and if you replaced Ogunjobi's contract with Jones who wouldn't have been signed then Poles still wouldn't have spent massively more on defense than offense ($7.5m per year on average over the course of their respective contracts).

As it is, Poles has spent no more significant money on defensive players than he has on offensive players. He just hasn't spent much full stop.

I don't know why so many seem so worried or annoyed by what Poles has done so far. He clearly has a plan that he's working to and this would be the one he presented at his interview. It impressed George McCaskey et al so much they hired him. Let's be patient and see how it pans out.

[Moriarty]

It's not just the QB position. The Bears aren't spending anywhere on offense.

Part of that is because of all the dead money they had to eat, which isn't included here
Some is because they're saving for next year
Some is because they prioritized defense more

Not sure about that last reason. Did they really prioritize defense more?

Top 5 highest cost players signed in free agency for both sides of the ball:

Defense (2022 Cap Hit per Spotrac)
Justin Jones ($4.6m) - 2 year $12m contract
Al-Quadin Muhammad ($3.5m) - 2 year $8m contract
Nicholas Morrow ($2.5m) - 1 year contract
Deandre Houston-Carson ($1.77m) - 1 year contract
Tavon Young ($1.365m) - 1 year contract
Total 2022 cap hit: $13.735m

Offense (2022 Cap Hit per Spotrac)
Byron Pringle ($4.125m) - 1 year contract
Lucas Patrick ($4m) - 2 year $8m contract
Ryan Griffin ($1.75m) - 1 year contract
Trevor Siemian ($1.635m) - 2 year $4m contract
Darrynton Evans ($1.005m) - 2 year $2.1327m contract
Total 2022 cap hit: $12.515m

The truth is that Poles did not prioritise spending on defense. He didn't spend on either side of the ball.

Even if you factor in 'spending' draft capital that suggestion doesn't hold water. Yes he spent his first two picks on Gordon and Brisker (and the consensus is that he got great value), but he then selected 2 offensive players with his next 2 picks and overall chose 4 defensive players, 6 offensive players and a punter. That's not a sign of a GM prioritising defense. Poles took the players he assessed were the best available with his high picks and then loaded up on offensive line prospects because he knows he needs to bolster that position group in particular.

The Bears have now drafted 6 offensive linemen in the last two years. There is competition for places. I for one am interested to see how it all shakes out.

Admittedly, cap-wise the difference is not heavily pronounced. (I do see Morrow at 3M now, although it was originally reported to be closer to 5M with easily made incentives). So, I would summarize as 3 signings of significance on D, 2 on O, with the largest being on D. (Also, don't forget, he tried to make a huge one on D that would have been more than all the O ones you listed combined - circumstance thwarted his intentions there.)

Draft-wise, however, I strenuously disagree. You can't just say "first 2 picks went D and next 2 went O" and act like those balance out.
A typical trade value chart puts the 2 defensive pick values at 930 and the first 2 offensive ones at 263. That's a multiple of over 3.5x in difference.