2023 Free Agency News / Rumors / Transactions

[The Cooler King]

The options to improve the trenches are getting slim in FA. Really don't love leaving it all to the draft.

Mostly "just guys" left. Or older retreads who might have good treads or might just be old. Whereas Poles has been very narrowly focused on youth in FA so far.

[Ditka’s dictaphone]

With the way FA has gone laughter is the only weapon we have left.

(I almost didn't post this in case it caused Ditka's dictaphone to have a heart attack!)

He’s our #1 practicer

[IE]

It is abundantly clear that Poles' number for Monty was less than $6MM. Which means that Poles has his head on straight. I'm glad Monty found a payer of more, and I'm selfishly glad it is Detroit so I can cheer for him when he's not playing the Bears. He's going to fit in the D big time, being the hard-playing blue collar tough guy. But he's.... just....not....explosive. At all. They are going to miss Jamaal Williams' nose for the end zone.

Unfortunately I read on a Lions page that Williams was given that offer for Monty and passed on it. IF that is the case Jamaal is also someone I want to pass on as well. I liked Williams because he was better AND cheaper. 95% of running backs are a commodity, and both of those guys fit in that bucket. Either can be easily replaceable with a 5th round draft pick. It is simply true.

[Moriarty]

With the way FA has gone laughter is the only weapon we have left.

(I almost didn't post this in case it caused Ditka's dictaphone to have a heart attack!)

I COMPLETELY believed they were signing him to a large starter's extension until I got to the actual numbers.

[UOK]

So today around 3pm is where business will pick up. Remaining big names can visit and be courted. Look for reports of players on flights.

[dplank]

It’s slim pickin’s but there are still a few guys that can move the needle for us. Im withholding judgement until those guys are all signed. Poles needs to do something on the DL and OT for this to all make sense.

Side note: if Poles is planning for another tank season then he should be extending Kmet and Mooney and front loading their deals so he is in the catbird seat again next offseason with cap space.

[wab]

[dplank]

Interesting I don’t know much about either…are they good and do they fit our scheme?

[UOK]

[The Cooler King]

Interesting I don’t know much about either…are they good and do they fit our scheme?

Doesn't matter. Bears can't extend any second round RFA offers since they don't own their own pick.

[The Cooler King]

Huh. He was gonna bey fall back if the rest of the market passed us by. Lol

[crueltyabc]

We have a few Nijman fans on the board right?

[Moriarty]

Huh. He was gonna bey fall back if the rest of the market passed us by. Lol

So much for that safety net

[Moriarty]

Terence Steele??

That's almost as good a name as Max Power

[Grizzled]

No comment on this one....

[Yogi da Bear]

Interesting I don’t know much about either…are they good and do they fit our scheme?

Doesn't matter. Bears can't extend any second round RFA offers since they don't own their own pick.

I didn't know this. If a team puts a second round tender on a player, why can't you use any second rounder you own to match that tender? Doesn't make sense to me, but then a lot of NFL rules makes no sense whatsoever.

[dplank]

Terence Steele??

That's almost as good a name as Max Power

The Simpsons references have been on point this week

[The Cooler King]

Doesn't matter. Bears can't extend any second round RFA offers since they don't own their own pick.

I didn't know this. If a team puts a second round tender on a player, why can't you use any second rounder you own to match that tender? Doesn't make sense to me, but then a lot of NFL rules makes no sense whatsoever.

I get why it exists. You don't want a team to facilitate a trade down right before putting in the offer.

But anyways the exact wording is "(its own or better choices in the applicable rounds)" its referring to the new club.

I would just suggest a team should be able to substitute a better round pick. If Chicago had pick 30, they couldn't offer that up either since this no in the applicable round. So it's kind of a built in advantage for good teams who can play the draft board. That said, RFA comp tenders rarely pay out anyways.

[Moriarty]

CB Jamel Dean went back to TB, cheaper than all forecasts - 4/52

Yeah, it's a great year for draft CB, but we don't have enough picks for all the things we still need.

[The Marshall Plan]

Just read that Darius Slay was cut by Philly.

I’d love to sign that guy.

[Yogi da Bear]

I didn't know this. If a team puts a second round tender on a player, why can't you use any second rounder you own to match that tender? Doesn't make sense to me, but then a lot of NFL rules makes no sense whatsoever.

I get why it exists. You don't want a team to facilitate a trade down right before putting in the offer.

But anyways the exact wording is "(its own or better choices in the applicable rounds)" its referring to the new club.

I would just suggest a team should be able to substitute a better round pick. If Chicago had pick 30, they couldn't offer that up either since this no in the applicable round. So it's kind of a built in advantage for good teams who can play the draft board. That said, RFA comp tenders rarely pay out anyways.

The way I look at it is that the original team determined the amount of the tender. That's what the tender should and if a team can trade down to get a lower tender in the same round, why shouldn't they be able to do this? Why allow the better teams in the league, those with the lower draft pick, to pay less than the teams with worse records? Doesn't make sense to me.

And doesn't the original team have the option to match the offer anyway. So if they aren't happy with a pick lower in the round, they could just match, or not. Isn't that what happened with Meredith and the Saints (we refused to match). And didn't the Bills match us last year?

[The Cooler King]

I get why it exists. You don't want a team to facilitate a trade down right before putting in the offer.

But anyways the exact wording is "(its own or better choices in the applicable rounds)" its referring to the new club.

I would just suggest a team should be able to substitute a better round pick. If Chicago had pick 30, they couldn't offer that up either since this no in the applicable round. So it's kind of a built in advantage for good teams who can play the draft board. That said, RFA comp tenders rarely pay out anyways.

The way I look at it is that the original team determined the amount of the tender. That's what the tender should and if a team can trade down to get a lower tender in the same round, why shouldn't they be able to do this? Why allow the better teams in the league, those with the lower draft pick, to pay less than the teams with worse records? Doesn't make sense to me.

And doesn't the original team have the option to match the offer anyway. So if they aren't happy with a pick lower in the round, they could just match, or not. Isn't that what happened with Meredith and the Saints (we refused to match). And didn't the Bills match us last year?

Well both Meredith and Bates didn't have picks attached to their tenders.

It's just kind of an outdated system that's more a vestige of the pre UFA days than anything real intentional. Realistically speaking almost no one ever strikes the balance between being valuable enough for one team to part with a pick and their original team being happy having the player depart. So it's probably not worth fixing. Since it affects so few players, teams, who's gonna bring it up at the negotiation window next time a CBA is up.

[wab]

[The Cooler King]

Let Baker bake!

[Yogi da Bear]

Let Baker bake!

Isn't he done yet? I thought the timer went off last year. Now they're looking at really burnt frozen pizza. lol

[HurricaneBear]

Let Baker bake!

Isn't he done yet? I thought the timer went off last year. Now they're looking at really burnt frozen pizza. lol

Maybe they are making twice baked mayfields?

[wab]

[IE]

AKA "I'm not getting what I had hoped from the market". No thanks on one year deals. That was so '22 Tank-a-thon mode. Now it's long term only, baby.

[The Cooler King]

I'd be fine with a one year deal. Buying time to 2024 with high quality plug? Absolutely. Maybe even get back a comp pick.

[thefish7]

What in the hell is a defensive tight end?