What Bagent is up to

[Rakshir]

Interesting interview with Tyson Bagent on youtube talking about what he's up to in the offseason.

[Mikefive]

Love that kid.

Imagine the following... Team wants to let Caleb Williams (or whichever drafted QB) sit and absorb the offense the first year and just hang onto Fields to wait for an injury to wake up the trade market. Week 2 it happens and a team throws us a high draft pick in 25 for Fields, who departs. Consider the following arguments for Tyson Bagent to start:
- Team STILL wants to let Caleb sit the first year
- Bagent has already learned the playbook (he did that last year)
- Bagent outperforms rookie in camp, because...
- He has a year of NFL experience
- He has already worked against NFL defenses
- He has 4 NFL starts and was 2-2
- Walks in with mild familarity with the offense, since there have to be some features and nomenclature that Getsy also brought.

Could happen. Not saying it will. But I think what he did in college (hint... mostly ran around and made something out of nothing with a bad OL) is going to take some time to transition into a timing based offense against NFL defenses. Bagent showed last year that he fits that style of play.

[Moriarty]

If the plan is to sit Caleb

a) Strongly believe you need 2 vets ahead, so that one injury doesn't ruin your plans
b) I'm not at all comfortable with locking myself into 17 games of Bagent, no matter what

I'm grabbing somebody like Bridgewater, if that's the plan

[Mikefive]

If the plan is to sit Caleb

a) Strongly believe you need 2 vets ahead, so that one injury doesn't ruin your plans
b) I'm not at all comfortable with locking myself into 17 games of Bagent, no matter what

I'm grabbing somebody like Bridgewater, if that's the plan

So you don't like Brett Rypien? lol

Fair point.

Worth pointing out, which I haven't seen mentioned anywhere... Right now, our starting QB is Tyson Bagent.

[HisRoyalSweetness]

I'm grabbing somebody like Bridgewater, if that's the plan

[Rusty Trombagent]

I'm grabbing somebody like Bridgewater, if that's the plan

But with a steady hand like Bridgewater, we could eschew any potential development in exchange for winning maybe 1 or 2 more games a year!




Yeah, I dont get it either.

[southdakbearfan]

You lose qb#1 more than a few games you are hosed. Bagent got playing time,proved to be a quick study and went .500. That’s ok for a backup and superb for a rookie UDFA. He’s mobile, athletic and learning NFL limitations.

Rypien knows the offense and coach, he is the new peterman being the “coach” in the locker room.

Bridgewater or the like is a waste of time, cap and roster space for a young up and coming team. A used up statue QB that didn’t have a lot of upside when he was young, no thank you.

[Moriarty]

But with a steady hand like Bridgewater, we could eschew any potential development in exchange for winning maybe 1 or 2 more games a year!




Yeah, I dont get it either.

Well, maybe because that's the exact 180 degree polar opposite of the reason to get him?

[Rusty Trombagent]

But with a steady hand like Bridgewater, we could eschew any potential development in exchange for winning maybe 1 or 2 more games a year!




Yeah, I dont get it either.

Well, maybe because that's the exact 180 degree polar opposite of the reason to get him?

Yeah but what you fail to realize is that Bagent is a future hall of famer.

[Ditka’s dictaphone]

Well, maybe because that's the exact 180 degree polar opposite of the reason to get him?

Yeah but what you fail to realize is that Bagent is a future hall of famer.

No he’s a future hell of a farmer

[Rusty Trombagent]

Yeah but what you fail to realize is that Bagent is a future hall of famer.

No he’s a future hell of a farmer

[southdakbearfan]

Well, maybe because that's the exact 180 degree polar opposite of the reason to get him?

Yeah but what you fail to realize is that Bagent is a future hall of famer.

He’s the next minshew.

[Yogi da Bear]

Not until he grows a moustache.

[dplank]

All kidding aside, isn't all of this a bit of an endorsement for Bagent? Rypien blows. So it looks like we are going into the season with a Rookie starter and Bagent as the primary backup - that's an endorsement of sorts IMO.

[Otis Day]

Teddy retired and is going to coach high school football.

I agree dplank. I think with the work that Bagent puts in he will just be a more solid backup.

[Moriarty]

Teddy retired and is going to coach high school football.

I agreed dplank. I think with the work that Bagent puts in he will just be a more solid backup.

Yikes
There's really very little left out there to bolster the room.

Bagent's got some upward potential. But I'm iffy on going with him for an extended time, if necessary.
And beyond that, I'd like to have a supportive veteran voice for Caleb - and a guy with 4 starts and 1 rookie year really doesn't fill the bill.

[grendel2000]

Teddy retired and is going to coach high school football.

I agreed dplank. I think with the work that Bagent puts in he will just be a more solid backup.

Yikes
There's really very little left out there to bolster the room.

Bagent's got some upward potential. But I'm iffy on going with him for an extended time, if necessary.
And beyond that, I'd like to have a supportive veteran voice for Caleb - and a guy with 4 starts and 1 rookie year really doesn't fill the bill.

I dunno... Maybe I'm wrong but as awesome as things are starting to look for the future, I just don't look at 2024 as a year where I care if we're competitive - I look at it as a staging year to prepare for NEXT year. I believe that CW - or ANY other rookie QB - needs to be given a year to learn the ropes. So given that, why kill ourselves trying to hedge bets for THIS year?

This is my same reasoning for picking a WR at 1.9. Get the young WR in now and give him the year to meld with CW and learn from the vet WRs. We can pick up DE and DT EARLY next year to cement the D, putting the last of the pieces in place to be competitive on all levels.

[Moriarty]

Yikes
There's really very little left out there to bolster the room.

Bagent's got some upward potential. But I'm iffy on going with him for an extended time, if necessary.
And beyond that, I'd like to have a supportive veteran voice for Caleb - and a guy with 4 starts and 1 rookie year really doesn't fill the bill.

I just don't look at 2024 as a year where I care if we're competitive - I look at it as a staging year to prepare for NEXT year.

Same
But for some reason, every time you mention a veteran QB, people think you're out for immediate wins.
I want a veteran primarily for Caleb's benefit. Someone who can teach and mentor him.
A secondary concern is just to make sure you keep the offense functional and competitive so people get a year of running the new offense correctly and fully, if he should be hurt. Can Bagent do that? Maybe. And maybe not. Which is a point for having someone else.


But guys who are experienced, smart, functional, not expensive, not a Giant Douche, and willing to be a backup are just about depleted already.

[wab]

Bringing in an established vet doesn't move the needle for me. Just get a guy like Rypien that knows the system. He can teach just fine from the bench.

If something goes south with Williams, does playing someone like Bryan Hoyer or Josh Dobbs over Bagent or Rypien really do anything?

[Moriarty]

If something goes south with Williams, does playing someone like Bryan Hoyer or Josh Dobbs over Bagent or Rypien really do anything?

Yes, if they can run the offense better.
Although I'm not necessarily opposed to letting Bagent have first try.

[ramentaschen]

Wouldn’t it be wild if Poles traded down from #1 multiple times for extra picks then started Bagent for 2024?

[G08]

Yeah but what you fail to realize is that Bagent is a future hall of famer.

No he’s a future hell of a farmer

I lol'd

[dplank]

That sig is ridiculous and makes every thread go to multiple pages because it's so long. Maybe just type it out in text format instead of posting the image.

[RichH55]

Wouldn’t it be wild if Poles traded down from #1 multiple times for extra picks then started Bagent for 2024?

People joke....but don't threaten me with a good time

[o-pus #40 in B major]

That sig is ridiculous and makes every thread go to multiple pages because it's so long. Maybe just type it out in text format instead of posting the image.

And it leaves out the year of Ryan Poles' birth, 1985.

[Otis Day]

1985, helluva year. Jr year in college. Bears kicking ass and taking names. Having the time of my life. Got engaged to the woman who became my wife.

[malk]

If something goes south with Williams, does playing someone like Bryan Hoyer or Josh Dobbs over Bagent or Rypien really do anything?

Yes, if they can run the offense better.
Although I'm not necessarily opposed to letting Bagent have first try.

But what does that do?

It isn't guaranteed to begin with. Bagent ran Getsy's offence adequately in about the worst circumstances you can imagine (for clarity, I mean not getting a full offseason as a backup and then being thrown in at short notice, it would have been worse if, say, Moore had been injured). Who is to say that with a full off season of practice, a year he won't be better than Brian Hoyer who last won an NFL game wearing a Bears Jersey in 2016?

I think the opportunity to find out what we have with Bagent is much more valuable than a known entity of mediocrity at best. And that's before getting into the opportunity cost of how much cap you throw at an expensive position for little potential upside. If we're targeting being able to carry a rookie QB through to the playoffs then it is important to have a backup that can step in and not guarantee a loss over a few weeks. But Bagent has gone 2-2 in what's almost certainly a worse team than we'll have going into 2024. Ok one of those was against the Panthers but the others were 5, 8 and 9 win teams (plus the part game against the 7-10 Vikings). They're exactly the kind of team you want to be able to win against with a backup.

Still with the backup with some promise, we might even be able to flip him for a pick next year, or sign him to a longer term backup deal and let him grow into the system.

[Moriarty]

Yes, if they can run the offense better.
Although I'm not necessarily opposed to letting Bagent have first try.

But what does that do?

It isn't guaranteed to begin with. Bagent ran Getsy's offence adequately in about the worst circumstances you can imagine (for clarity, I mean not getting a full offseason as a backup and then being thrown in at short notice, it would have been worse if, say, Moore had been injured). Who is to say that with a full off season of practice, a year he won't be better than Brian Hoyer who last won an NFL game wearing a Bears Jersey in 2016?

I think the opportunity to find out what we have with Bagent is much more valuable than a known entity of mediocrity at best. And that's before getting into the opportunity cost of how much cap you throw at an expensive position for little potential upside. If we're targeting being able to carry a rookie QB through to the playoffs then it is important to have a backup that can step in and not guarantee a loss over a few weeks. But Bagent has gone 2-2 in what's almost certainly a worse team than we'll have going into 2024. Ok one of those was against the Panthers but the others were 5, 8 and 9 win teams (plus the part game against the 7-10 Vikings). They're exactly the kind of team you want to be able to win against with a backup.

Still with the backup with some promise, we might even be able to flip him for a pick next year, or sign him to a longer term backup deal and let him grow into the system.

Bagent's a great story. And he performed extremely well relative to college competition level, relative to draft position, relative to pro experience.
But when you stop grading on a curve, what have you got? He had 2/4 games where he moved the ball successfully (225 yds/game), but 2 where he didn't (162 y/g). Both games he got yards, he also had interception problems (2 + 3). 3/4 games had passer ratings in the 60s/70s. His best rated game was his first one. He was heavy on the dink and dunk and didn't successfully push downfield much.
There's some minor promise there. But even if he grows into a solid backup, that's not a lot of value. We saw what Pickett and Fields brought in return. He'd have to do a lot more and convince people he's got real starter potential to net you much.

Getting a veteran backup* doesn't mean you can't let Bagent have first shot if Caleb is hurt.

Although I'm not necessarily opposed to letting Bagent have first try.

But it does mean you have insurance if he was just a flash in the pan. Matt Barkley looked really nice for a couple games, too. You can't be telling yourself you know a lot from 4 games that were "not as bad as you'd have thought". Not insurance in terms of winning games. Insurance in terms of getting the other players on the offense desperately needed experience in the new system when it's working reasonably close to functional.
It also means you have some veteran guidance and mentoring for both guys.


* As a hypothetical strategy. As I said, above, most of the options you'd want if you were going this way are gone already. So it may be a moot point by now.

[HisRoyalSweetness]

Bagent's a great story. And he performed extremely well relative to college competition level, relative to draft position, relative to pro experience.
But when you stop grading on a curve, what have you got? He had 2/4 games where he moved the ball successfully (225 yds/game), but 2 where he didn't (162 y/g). Both games he got yards, he also had interception problems (2 + 3). 3/4 games had passer ratings in the 60s/70s. His best rated game was his first one. He was heavy on the dink and dunk and didn't successfully push downfield much.
There's some minor promise there. But even if he grows into a solid backup, that's not a lot of value. We saw what Pickett and Fields brought in return. He'd have to do a lot more and convince people he's got real starter potential to net you much.

You can't overlook that he was a rookie and like any rookie needs time to adjust to the NFL. He made mistakes, didn't throw good downfield balls and threw some INTs, but he also moved extremely well in the pocket, went through progressions, got the ball out quickly and on time, and ran the ball effectively when he had to. He rarely if ever looked rattled. He showed promise and won a couple of games which is the key.

He's under contract for another two seasons and I for one would much rather stick with a developmental backup who has shown some good things than bring in a veteran with several years experience during which they've shown nothing of consequence. I'd sooner gamble on potential upside than run out a guy you already know has reached his ceiling and it isn't very high.

[malk]

But what does that do?

It isn't guaranteed to begin with. Bagent ran Getsy's offence adequately in about the worst circumstances you can imagine (for clarity, I mean not getting a full offseason as a backup and then being thrown in at short notice, it would have been worse if, say, Moore had been injured). Who is to say that with a full off season of practice, a year he won't be better than Brian Hoyer who last won an NFL game wearing a Bears Jersey in 2016?

I think the opportunity to find out what we have with Bagent is much more valuable than a known entity of mediocrity at best. And that's before getting into the opportunity cost of how much cap you throw at an expensive position for little potential upside. If we're targeting being able to carry a rookie QB through to the playoffs then it is important to have a backup that can step in and not guarantee a loss over a few weeks. But Bagent has gone 2-2 in what's almost certainly a worse team than we'll have going into 2024. Ok one of those was against the Panthers but the others were 5, 8 and 9 win teams (plus the part game against the 7-10 Vikings). They're exactly the kind of team you want to be able to win against with a backup.

Still with the backup with some promise, we might even be able to flip him for a pick next year, or sign him to a longer term backup deal and let him grow into the system.

Bagent's a great story. And he performed extremely well relative to college competition level, relative to draft position, relative to pro experience.
But when you stop grading on a curve, what have you got? He had 2/4 games where he moved the ball successfully (225 yds/game), but 2 where he didn't (162 y/g). Both games he got yards, he also had interception problems (2 + 3). 3/4 games had passer ratings in the 60s/70s. His best rated game was his first one. He was heavy on the dink and dunk and didn't successfully push downfield much.
There's some minor promise there. But even if he grows into a solid backup, that's not a lot of value. We saw what Pickett and Fields brought in return. He'd have to do a lot more and convince people he's got real starter potential to net you much.

Getting a veteran backup* doesn't mean you can't let Bagent have first shot if Caleb is hurt.

Although I'm not necessarily opposed to letting Bagent have first try.

But it does mean you have insurance if he was just a flash in the pan. Matt Barkley looked really nice for a couple games, too. You can't be telling yourself you know a lot from 4 games that were "not as bad as you'd have thought". Not insurance in terms of winning games. Insurance in terms of getting the other players on the offense desperately needed experience in the new system when it's working reasonably close to functional.
It also means you have some veteran guidance and mentoring for both guys.


* As a hypothetical strategy. As I said, above, most of the options you'd want if you were going this way are gone already. So it may be a moot point by now.

I'm glad you brought up Barkley. We could have kept him for peanuts and instead we brought in a vet backup at significant cost who stunk up the joint and we had to bail on soon anyway.

In terms of getting other players on the offence experience, who desperately needs it? Moore, Allen, Kmet, Everett... none of them need experience from a middling system QB in live games. And if the team feels like it needs a vet presence for guidance and mentoring, bring in that guy as a coach rather than counting him against the cap and the 53.

And fundamentally I don't think you need a backup QB that's massively similar to your starter. Good coaches can win in more than one way so whilst there might be some players who don't fit at all but that doesn't appear to be the case here.

So we're left with the kind of option that would cost $12.5m like Minshew, $10m for Darnold, $8m for Brissett. Well, I think the Titans have got a steal with Rudolph at under $3m but even there, I think I'd still rather see if Bagent can make an impression on this new coaching staff.