BearsFansOnline.com

The deal was restructured. Garafalo was saying the Jags took on 18m in dead money with the trade, and there deal finalized after some sort of restructure was agreed upon.

I read somewhere that there is $21M guaranteed that we are on the books for, waiting for that to be confirmed.

Regardless... Nick Foles is a hedge to Mitch Trubisky and a bridge to a rookie QB we take in 2021 if Trubisky fails. This is a wise move, IMO.

This dude won Super Bowl MVP in this offense. I'm not saying that's what we should be expecting, but in terms of competition for Mitch AND a bridge for a rookie QB in 2021, this is as good as it gets.

He has proven he can run this scheme with a top 5 defense and win a Super Bowl. That cannot be disputed.

Forebears wrote: ↑Wed Mar 18, 2020 1:09 pm Think they’ll try and move Trubisky and draft Foles backup in the 2nd rd (JalenH) or package the two 2nd rds (Pace love to do)to move up an grab a qb in the 1st if one drops.

I'm not sure I see a trade up. Even with both 2nds, Pace is pretty light on capital after just moving his 4th for Foles.

I would like to see them draft a guy. They can't force it at 43 or 50, but also, waiting until the 5th round will be a big risk if you're set on getting someone this year.

Foles contract calls for 21 million guaranteed, so he's at least getting that.

I'm not sure where this cash is coming from, but whatever.

Faizsportstalk covered this a week before it happened. One thing he said was Foles won't have that big an impact on the salary cap, and that was before more room was added. He would cost Da Bears 15 Mill this season then he could be cut the followinf year and it wouldn't cost Chicago anything.

G08 wrote: ↑Wed Mar 18, 2020 1:14 pm I read somewhere that there is $21M guaranteed that we are on the books for, waiting for that to be confirmed.

His 2020 salary + 2020 workout bonus + 2020 game roster bonus + 2021 roster bonus would get you to $21M. So it could be, but that would mean no restructure, and there are reports a restructure will be part of this.

G08 wrote: ↑Wed Mar 18, 2020 1:14 pm I read somewhere that there is $21M guaranteed that we are on the books for, waiting for that to be confirmed.

Regardless... Nick Foles is a hedge to Mitch Trubisky and a bridge to a rookie QB we take in 2021 if Trubisky fails. This is a wise move, IMO.

This dude won Super Bowl MVP in this offense. I'm not saying that's what we should be expecting, but in terms of competition for Mitch AND a bridge for a rookie QB in 2021, this is as good as it gets.

He has proven he can run this scheme with a top 5 defense and win a Super Bowl. That cannot be disputed.

He's also been trash everywhere outside of Philly.

Scheme similarity only goes so far. The Eagles had a phenomenal OL, one of the best TE's in the NFL, and an effective running game.

The Bears have.... none of those things.

I don't see why you keep Trubisky around. He's basically been demoted. I'm lukewarm on the acquisition. Foles had a magical SB run with the Eagles, but I don't know if he's even got anything left in his game.

wab wrote: ↑Wed Mar 18, 2020 1:14 pm Foles contract calls for 21 million guaranteed, so he's at least getting that.

I'm not sure where this cash is coming from, but whatever.

Foles guarantees can't be reduced, but who picks it up between Chi and Jax can change. 21M sounds right though as far as guarantees left ($5 of that technically becomes guaranteed on Friday)

Looks like we are following the SF model:
Step 1: Build a world class defense
Step 2: Have a pro bowl tight end (apparently any pro bowl tight end will do. Even one of not very recent vintage)
Step 3: Find a QB that does marginally more good than harm
Step 4: Win a whole bunch of games with stifling defense, (maybe?) good running game and hopefully competent game manager QB
Step 5: Avoid playing KC in the Super Bowl

For a 4, they'd better be eating a lot of that contract.

If Bridgewater wasn't given good starter assurances, Foles won't be.

The suspense will be "competition" vs "backing him up".

dave99 wrote: ↑Wed Mar 18, 2020 1:23 pm Looks like we are following the SF model:
Step 1: Build a world class defense
Step 2: Have a pro bowl tight end (apparently any pro bowl tight end will do. Even one of not very recent vintage)
Step 3: Find a QB that does marginally more good than harm
Step 4: Win a whole bunch of games with stifling defense, (maybe?) good running game and hopefully competent game manager QB
Step 5: Avoid playing KC in the Super Bowl

Minus the running game part, our coach periodically forgets those are an option.

Also, I'm shocked at meaningful, aggressive moves still happening here.

Haven't decided how much I like them yet.

Moriarty wrote: ↑Wed Mar 18, 2020 1:23 pm For a 4, they'd better be eating a lot of that contract.

If Bridgewater wasn't given good starter assurances, Foles won't be.

The suspense will be "competition" vs "backing him up".

I'm honestly pretty skeptical about the Bridgewater/starter report, fwiw. It defies pretty much any logic.

The Cooler King wrote: ↑Wed Mar 18, 2020 1:29 pm

Moriarty wrote: ↑Wed Mar 18, 2020 1:23 pm For a 4, they'd better be eating a lot of that contract.

If Bridgewater wasn't given good starter assurances, Foles won't be.

The suspense will be "competition" vs "backing him up".

I'm honestly pretty skeptical about the Bridgewater/starter report, fwiw. It defies pretty much any logic.

I agree. I just don't think Teddy wanted to play for the Bears. His OC from the Saints is the OC for the Panthers now. The Bears were simply used for leverage and setting the market for him.

eh, nevermind

Moriarty wrote: ↑Wed Mar 18, 2020 1:25 pm Also, I'm shocked at meaningful, aggressive moves still happening here.

Haven't decided how much I like them yet.

We've all been around long enough to know that "sunk cost" has all too frequently been a foreign concept to the Bears.

I like this year's signings to the extent that they're an acknowledgement that previous decisions have not worked out.

I do not give Pace a pass for the drafting of Floyd in particular, but I will still give him points for making the (correct) cost/benefit analysis on his own draft pick.

Don't like trading a 4th. That seems to be a round that has been magic for the Bears over time. I am just not sure about it. Foles is a mixed bag of avg. Sure he had the breakout SB year and the magical 2013 year, 27-2 (td-int). Then he kind to turn to shit.

Poor guy. Busts out, gets the big $$ from Jax. First game breaks his collarbone. Possibly signing here (not official yet) and who knows what this league year comes to. I believe you have an honest competition, not in words only. Maybe this will bring something out of 10, who knows. If it doesn't, bye. I still do nothing with the 5th yr option at this time.

Some are against a (very late) 4 being traded for a fairly competent quarterback that was good enough to win playoff games and a SB against elite competition?!?

and competing against a guy that has put up numerous stinkers in his 3 year career...scuttling what should have been a playoff contending team last year??

gimme a fucking break...wise up...people have jobs at stake

I am opposed to Pace remaining as GM, but I fully endorse this move....and I say this knowing that Foles is only a bridge QB not a long term answer. But at least he can manage a game against good teams.

Drone7 wrote: ↑Wed Mar 18, 2020 1:56 pm Some are against a (very late) 4 being traded for a fairly competent quarterback that was good enough to win playoff games and a SB against elite competition?!?

and competing against a guy that has put up numerous stinkers in his 3 year career...scuttling what should have been a playoff contending team last year??

gimme a fucking break...wise up...people have jobs at stake

I am opposed to Pace remaining as GM, but I fully endorse this move....and I say this knowing that Foles is only a bridge QB not a long term answer. But at least he can manage a game against good teams.

Its a 4th + potentially a pretty decent cap hit, for a team who hasn't addressed other needs. Its not a homerun move. Good reason for skepticism, IMO. Foles has fluctuated between Great and below average in his career.

Drone7 wrote: ↑Wed Mar 18, 2020 1:56 pm Some are against a (very late) 4 being traded for a fairly competent quarterback that was good enough to win playoff games and a SB against elite competition?!?

and competing against a guy that has put up numerous stinkers in his 3 year career...scuttling what should have been a playoff contending team last year??

gimme a fucking break...wise up...people have jobs at stake

I am opposed to Pace remaining as GM, but I fully endorse this move....and I say this knowing that Foles is only a bridge QB not a long term answer. But at least he can manage a game against good teams.

Well I think I speak for all of us that we are relieved that you finally fully endorse a move that the Bears have made.

Mikefive wrote: ↑Wed Mar 18, 2020 12:54 pm

The Cooler King wrote: ↑Wed Mar 18, 2020 12:44 pm

Foles is definitely better than Daniel. He's better than Trubisky is today as well. Trubisky does still have some upside, but today Foles should be the clear starter.

If we don't trade Trubisky, I worry about their ability to fill the remaining holes with the cap, though I guess how a Foles restructure looks will matter.

Everyone seems to think that Foles is the annointed starter. Are we sure about that?

I agree with the last post above. Foles is definitely better than Daniel. It's all about the $$$. The thing is... Foles is an outstanding PERSON. He will roll with being a backup if needed. And he'll be prepared to play if needed. If your plan is that you want to give Biscuit every chance to start and succeed, this is a good of a personality outcome you could have hoped for. Now if we're completely cap strapped, then that's a problem. But we need to see what Jax is doing to mitigate the $$$ factor for us.

Foles isn't who I wanted, but as I've thought about it, I see the upside (pending contract adjustment) being as follows -- It's reasonable to assume that the offseason program is likely going to be significantly shortened due to global pandemic. Good or bad, Foles clearly has strong familiarity with the system and the coaches in place, so of the potentially available QBs, Foles or Alex Smith were likely the safest possibilities in terms of ability to pick up and run system with minimal preparation, without a period of the coaching staff having to adjust to getting to know this person.

I believe Foles is the benchmark. Trubisky has to meet or exceed what he does in the offseason to be the starter. If Trubisky can rise to the challenge and win a QB competition, Foles has value as a better safety-net/pinch hit QB who still gives us a chance to make a playoff run if Trubisky goes down (at least more so than with Chase Daniel). If Trubisky can't beat Foles in an open competition, he's released at the end of the year, Foles is the bridge QB, and we're looking for someone next year or at worst the year after.

wab wrote: ↑Wed Mar 18, 2020 12:41 pm

The Cooler King wrote: ↑Wed Mar 18, 2020 12:39 pm Do we put Trubisky on the block now? Who'd have interest? NE? I'd dump him for a 6th or 7th.

Hell no. Foles isn't a starter. He's a garbage QB. He's a bigger Chase Daniel with a better arm.

The problem with your statement is Chase Daniel with a better arm IS NOT Chase Daniel. That’s Chase Daniel’s problem...he doesn’t have an arm. Chase Daniel doesn’t/can’t/won’t win playoff games and doesn’t/can’t/won’t beat Tom Brady and the Patriots in the SB.

Well, I aim to please, wab

I just fail in that regard too often...

guess I'm a poor man's Ryan Pace

Not sure exactly what all that would mean. Hopefully he lowered his base salaries in exchange for the opt outs.

Now draft Tate and my homer Arizona dreams will come true.

The Cooler King wrote: ↑Wed Mar 18, 2020 2:26 pm

Not sure exactly what all that would mean. Hopefully he lowered his base salaries in exchange for the opt outs.

i guesssss this answers my question, which was "why would he restructure if he wasnt being promised a starting spot?" if he's coming here to be a backup, he can just as easily stay there in nicer weather... and be a backup.

I think i feel better about Foles than I would newton or dalton. teddy wanted too much $ and Foles has had success in this system.

cant be much worse than mitch last year, so lets just see. We likely draft a rookie and wait it out on mitch's 5th year option.

Im more concerned with how we now handle allen robinson.

Foles is an upgrade over Chase Daniel ... I do not believe this deal was done with the idea he is the starter

that said, once training camp gets rolling, Foles could play his way to the number 1 if Trubisky doesn't make a stride or 2

Boris13c wrote: ↑Wed Mar 18, 2020 2:37 pm I do not believe this deal was done with the idea he is the starter

Money suggests otherwise.