Who We Need to Exceed Expectations in 2017

You don't know what an apology is? The problem is deeper than I thought.

I doubt any GM in any sport makes more to purposely harm the team. So...dumb statement.

But lots of GMs made bad moves. Bad moves are just that.....bad moves. Bad decisions get made all the time in sports. To try and come up with an excuse for every one and say it wasn't bad because this was the intent is mind numbingly stupid.

There are good GMs and there are bad ones. All of them intend to be good. The jury is still out on Pace but let's be honest....he's made a lot of mistakes. He inherited a shit situation and that's something we can all acknowledge. But just because he intends to do good....it doesn't make the poor decisions he's made any less horrible.

I'm not bothered at all. If you want to live in fantasy land and spin every little thing that's done at Halas Hall into a positive go right ahead. But I'd caution you that this is likely the wrong message board to do it on. As has been pointed out before you seem to just be doing this for arguments sake and that's kinda futile here. Reality it is what it is and at this moment in time the Bears are not a good football team....and the man making the moves at the top owns that.

 

I know what it means. Im not sure you do because I haven't apologized for anything relating to the Bears.

Tell that to those accusing Pace of tanking.

Now your exaggerating. I clearly don't defend every move the Bears make. And have been critical of moves I feel were not good ones.

The amount of mistakes Pace has made and just how horrible they were are very debatable. Especially since many of those decisions still need to play out before they can truly be deemed good or bad.

Agreeing that the jury is still out on Pace is a step in the right direction. Would you not agree that Pace has made some good decisions?

More exaggerating. I've been posting on this board since the beginning so save the threats. Reality is that this board tends to exaggerate the negatives and minimize the positives. The Bears do suck. Maybe they turn it around under Pace and co. Maybe they don't. I'll continue to hope for the best as opposed to expecting the worst.

 

Call it what you want Rob.....on a board with some pretty knowledgeable and realistic Bears fans you want to argue all the time and look at every transaction with rose colored glasses despite the overall performance of the team as of late.

For one, tanking is a realistic strategy teams use to get better in the future. The Cubs did it.....and if you think that Pace was going all out the past few seasons to produce as many on the field wins as possible.....then maybe you'd like to purchase this amazing lakefront cabin I just put on the market in Wyoming?

And you've defended some of the worst moves I've ever seen the team make. So there's that.....

We can only grade what we've seen so far based on the on field performance. Wanna discuss on field performance? I don't think you do.

Sure he has. I like his drafting better than his free agency moves for sure and we will see just how good some of those moves were over the next 2-3 seasons.

But every GM makes some good moves. Jerry Angelo made good decisions. Phil Emery made some good decisions. But good decisions have to out weight bad ones and at some point you have got to hit some home runs.

Pace isn't my biggest issue with this team. He's not even in the top 5. But at the end of the day the only thing that matters is wins and losses and Pace has seen way too may losses.

I wasn't making threats. You post stupid shit and myself and others will be here to point it out. Not a threat, more of a promise.

The contributors here tend to be realistic. At this current time the Bears are one of the worst teams in football. If you want to see shit spun into gold there are plenty of message boards out there filled with unrealistic homers that swallow everything the McCaskeys shovel at them. We don't do that here.

Please point out one Bears fan here that isn't hoping for the best.

Good luck with that.

 

There is a big difference between going all in and tanking. To think it has to be one or the other is stupid.

One of my biggest issues with Pace is his reluctance to outbid for certain FA's. Last off season he balked at the asking price for Jenkins and Jackson. He made up for Jackson with Hicks. Jenkins not so much. He did the same thing with this past offseason with The top DB's. My argument is that Pace missed out not because FA's don't want to play here but because he is unwilling to set the market. Like Ev said we have the $$$ but will we spend it. I am not saying Pace should have gone buck wild in FA but overspending a bit to lock down the CB1 spot seems worth it.

The rest of your post is BS. Your not the warden of the the Bears board. More football talk and less arguing about how I argue.

 

You're either trying to win now or trying to win later. Those are really the only two options. Pace has been trying to win later, apparently. Because he sure as hell wasn't trying to win now the past two seasons.

I think both are true. There have clearly been some players that don't want to play here. To argue there hasn't would be foolish. But on others, yeah, he lost out because of how the bidding went. Both can be true...it doesn't have to one or the other.

Well then you should feel right at home with it, shouldn't you?

And you're clearly not the English and grammar teacher of the Bears board, you stuttering prick.

I don't need to be the warden in order to call you out on your crap....it's an open forum that I'm free to contribute to.

Stop arguing just to argue and I'll stop arguing about how you argue. Or continue to argue and do a better job of arguing about arguing when I argue back.

 

Actually one of the things I like about him. No one wins Super Bowls in free agency. Overpaying right now would be foolish because the Bears are far from one player away from winning anything. You spend in free agency if you need a player to help put you over the top, the Bears need more than a CB so overpaying just to get a guy on board would be a waste of money. Jacksonville, Washington and Miami have done that for years, how has that worked out for them?

In either case you are not trying to win in the immediate future. If the moves the Bears made this offseason (or lack of moves in some cases) lead you to believe that this team is going to be be successful in 2017, you are more of a koolaid drinker than even I give you credit for. This team is going to stink in 2017, said the same thing last year. I'm not hoping they suck but rather coming to accept the reality that this year is going to be very similar to the last 2. Paint me however you want with that but just because I can't slurp down a roster that has not improved and in some areas, may actually be worse, doesn't make me negative, makes me a realist.

This comes across as pompous and offensive to pretty much anyone in here who doesn't think like you which thankfully is most of the other posters in here. To think somehow that since you don't speak negatively about the Bears, that makes you a better fan than any of the rest of us is really self-righteous and proves what a complete shithead you actually are.

 

So nobody is building for the future while also trying to win now? It is the goal of every team to do both. Except for the Browns. We'll see how that works out.

It is rare that a player will turn down more money to sign elsewhere. You make it sound like it's a regular occurrence. Give me an example of Pace offering more money and a player saying no thanks.

This is what I was actually arguing. It was in reference to Alshon and Bennett. If Pace was willing to pay Alshon the #1 receiver money he wanted or franchised him a second year he would be a Bear. If Pace extended Bennett instead of trading him he would be a Bear. Do you disagree?

You should talk.

 

I agree that overspending in FA regularly is not a good idea. But spending the money on a young proven player that can help you both now and in the future isn't such a bad idea. Stephon Gilmore Is only 26. He'll be around long enough.

First off I was speaking for myself. At no time did I hint that other posters weren't hoping for the best or question their loyalty to the Bears. Even though there have been posts alluding to the poster being ok with the Bears sucking if it meant that Pace and co. would be fired sooner rather than later.

Second to say the majority of posters here do not expect the worst is laughable. I don't fault anybody for having that view I just choose not to myself.

I find it funny that you would be so sensitive to be offended by my comment when you yourself have no problem throwing insults around when people don't agree with your view.

 

"It is rare that a player will turn down more money to sign elsewhere. You make it sound like it's a regular occurrence. Give me an example of Pace offering more money and a player saying no thanks."

Alshon Jeffery.

 

Every team walks out on the field trying to win. Not every GM is concerned with building a team that wins RIGHT NOW. Pace is a good example of that. If you thought winning right now was Pace's goal the past couple seasons......well then you're just dumb.

Where in anything I wrote did I even come close to saying it was a regular occurrence? I get you like to argue.....but you fucking suck at it. Read my words instead of making up your own for me.

How about Jermaine Gresham? Turned down 23 million he had on the table from the Bears and other teams to sign for 1 year and 3.5 with the Cards.

How about the plethora of DB's the Bears attempted to sign in FA and lost out on? Do you honestly think all of them had to do with money? Or perhaps it's because the Bears are a dumpster fire and signing with actual teams that have a chance to win was more attractive?

A Bears fan taking shots at the Browns right now is ridiculous to me. We are the Browns. A pathetically mismanaged team with poor ownership that has routinely turned in piss poor results during the regular season.

Alshon did not want to be here. The money was there in the offer from the Bears. The willingness to want to be here from Alson wasn't. That is painfully obvious.

Bennett was unhappy here. That is also painfully obvious.

Teams don't like to keep unhappy players around. Unhappy players don't typically perform as well as happy ones.

I don't blame the team completely in either situation. Jeffery has had problems staying on the field and Bennett is known to be distant from his teammates and lazy in practice.

In both situations, however, the players in question simply wanted out.

I do talk. A lot. And unlike you I don't just argue for the sake of arguing....I actually have a clue what I'm talking about.

 

I'm definitely not sensitive, that may actually be the first time in my entire life I have been called that, leave it to you to be completely wrong about someone. Definitely not the first time and as long as you keep posting here, I'm sure it won't be the last. I was pointing out what a pompous ass you were coming across as, hardly makes me sensitive.

Next, I would like proof of where I hurled insults at anyone who didn't agree with my point of view. I only hurl insults at trolls, people who get personal when they disagree with me and well, you. Not because we have a different point of view but rather you argue a point of view that is not your own by your own admission you said you argue based on what you think the Bears are thinking.

Wow, you were speaking for yourself? That is a new concept. Good for you. When speaking for yourself, it appears you are insinuating that others in here don't hope for the best. If I am wrong or if I was sensitive, I would apologize but since I am neither I won't. My insinuation in your statement is proven here:

Ok, not sure how I could have thought you were insulting the other posters here by your first comment but thanks for allowing your pompousness to show through with your statement above. You shouldn't fault anyone for having a point of view of their own because it has been clear from your own admission as well as posts that you don't.

Just an FYI, when someone as a football fan can look at a team and see based on the roster that the team is going to be challenged to compete on a week in, week out basis that does not mean you are expecting the worst, it means you are accepting a reality that your team is not very good and is going to be challenged to win games. Everyone here hopes we have a game like we did against the Vikings at home last year but with the roster as it is currently constructed, it is going to take a perfect storm like that game to win much at all this season. This roster has been stripped of talent is heavily reliant on unproven talent just to not get blown out every week. That is reality, not negativity.

Side question: Are you in anyway related to Larry Mayer?

 

Just because a GM is more concerned with building sustainable success than competing for a championship right now does not mean he is tanking. When you take over a team as old and talent deprived as the Bears were your options are limited. Do you think it was the goal to win less games in Pace/Fox's second season than their first?

Like I said before the Browns were the only team where it seemed that wins/losses was not at all a concern to the team last season. The 49ers cleaned house and seem to be following suit for this coming season.

Even though Pace took a QB that will need time to develop with his first round pick he also gave Glennon 18.5 million guaranteed to be the QB now. If Glennon sucks and the Bears do not show significant improvement in the win/loss column Fox is most likely gone and Pace is most likely on the hot seat. So I think Pace is concerned with winning both now and later.

The rare occurrence

Yes. Would they come here for equal money? No. If Pace was willing to outbid other teams they would be Bears.

First off it wasnt a shot. The Browns have admitted they are tanking now to win later. Ask their fans and they will agree that the Browns are taking a very different approach to rebuilding a team than any other. I didnt say its destined to fail. I said we will see how it works out.

Now that would be a shot at Browns fans. Hypocrite.

The money was not there in the offer from the Bears or any other team. That is why he basically franchised himself in his one year deal with the Eagles.

If Pace would have offered Alshon the long term top WR contract he was looking for do you think he would have turned it down to play elsewhere? The rumors of him wanting out of Chicago had to do with climate and playing in a big market. How does signing with the Eagles prove that?

Bennett was unhappy because he wanted more money. Everyone knows that. He skipped OTA's in Pace/Fox's first season. Why? Because he was upset that Trestman was fired? NO because he wanted to get paid coming off his ONE brilliant season.

Both of these players unhappiness came from their contract situation. Not because of the Bears losing culture.

 

I wish I were in a spot right now to contribute fully to this conversation, as I realized I owe at least that. Unfortunately, I'm on my phone and on the move, and there's a lot here to talk about. So I'll address a couple things in part, and try to do so more completely later, though my initial attempt is likely to just muddy the waters more, I'm sure.

First, to the notion that players don't want to come here: Rob, I'm not going to sift through the multitude of reports from the off-season. One of the downsides to following a sport that is so meticulously covered by every single site, blog, and cat video on the internet, so much so that hundreds of "reports" are published if a player even breathes wrong, is that looking up specific reports from months ago is extremely difficult. Admittedly, I'm not in that game right now. But you denied that players care about much besides money, and asserted that if Pace had just offered enough, the players would be coming here. I mean, come on, man.

A. Players absolutely take more than money into account. Why the fuck do you think the Pats manage such friendly contracts on a routine basis? If a player knows they're going to succeed, and be treated accordingly, they have way more incentive to go to that team than they do a team like Chicago. I'm sure you're not just hearing for the first time the sentiment, "Why would anyone want to go to Cleveland?". Well, we're Cleveland.

You use examples likes Alshon - it was reported that he was being offered a pretty decent deal, here. He wasn't getting top 5 WR money, but it was around top 10. Turned it down. Now, you say he went for a one year contract to try and boost his chances at a bigger one later. Absolutely he would do that. Makes sense. But why, Rob, wouldn't he take that one year contract here? Why wouldn't he want to play in Chicago, for that prove-it deal?... Because the Bears suck and there's little incentive to playing here, not the least of which being to use immediate success as a springboard for a bigger contract.

B. Yes, if Pace offered enough money players would come here. But why does he have to exorbitantly outbid every other team? Say it with me, now... "Because the Bears suck, and there's little incentive for playing here".

There were numerous reports of the Bears bidding for players and being turned down. You're right - if Pace had paid like fucking crazy, they would've come here. But he only would've had to because this team sucks. Is it all his fault? No. But I wasn't blaming it on just him - I was blaming it on the organization as a whole, and highlighting this as a symptom of ineptitude. Somehow, the disagreement became about the existence of the symptom, which seems plain as day to me.

As for tanking: I don't even understand the argument you're trying to make, Rob. Are you simultaneously asserting that Chicago hasn't been tanking, while also making the case that talented players not being here is okay because the team won't be winning any time soon? I mean, what's happening here, man? I'm not going to insult you, but I hope you can see how people might get frustrated at times - in the span of a few posts you made two entirely counter arguments.

Pace has said on multiple occasions, including after this draft, that in order to select a top QB you need to have an early pick. It's pretty common knowledge. It explains his reasoning as to why he hadn't taken one prior (although it's counter to what he said when he first got here, and while I can follow his likely logic around each weave and turn, it's equally valid to cast doubt on his plans and strategy, as we all have). He also maintains that he tried to move up in previous years, though you'll have to take him at his word, and in general, that's a bad idea. However, several things are clear:

Chicago has needed a franchise QB since the day Pace got here, and said as much.
Pace went balls-deep after a QB this year - finally having a pick high enough to do so - so much so that he put on an enormous degree of subterfuge, and traded up at even the hint that he might not get who he wanted.
Chicago (as you've said!) hasn't been very good, and has absolutely been playing the "long-game" in getting better during Pace's entire tenure.

Now, I think that makes a pretty good case for why someone (like myself) could look at the team, see them tanking, and while not happy in the meantime, see the merits of it (all of which I've said). If you're disagreeing that the above is tanking, in combination with your admittance that the team has been fine with jettisoning players that won't provide a help several years from now despite the fact that they'll help the team win now, well, then... I don't know what to tell you. That's what tanking is. Getting rid of players who won't be fixtures on your team 5+ years from now, despite being aids now, and pining for that ever so valuable top pick for a QB... That's tanking. That's what they did.

You make the case that Pace signed Glennon because he didn't want the team to suck now, but also make the case that he didn't want to be fired if the team continued to suck. Again, Rob, I don't think you're connecting the dots - not properly, at least. Tanking is tough for any team, because it means you're going to lose revenue, you're going to draw criticism, and as a GM you're going to be on the hot seat. Signing Glennon to give Trubisky a chance to sit was a good move for him and the team. I have a lot to criticize Pace for, but for the most part, that's not it. But Pace didn't sign a legitimate QB to compete with Cutler before this year. He didn't even draft one. He tanked, got the high pick, got the WB he wanted, and signed a patsy for the coming year. Signing Glennon isn't a sign that Pace hasn't been set on tanking - it's a part of the plan. Again, I think the disagreement here, Rob, might just be on a lack of understanding. I hope so, at least.

Lastly, I think you were addressing me with the reference to posters saying 'they'd be okay with the Bears sucking if Pace and company were fired'. I'm never okay with the Bears sucking. It's unacceptable, to me. I tie way too much of my mental well being to a football team to be okay with it. But it's pretty obvious to anyone with a pulse that the team isn't going to be winning anytime soon. And as someone who has disagreed with a number of things Pace has done, I don't think he's blameless for that. So, in rationalizing the QB moves and situation as it now stands, I recognize the options available to us (and have laid them out accordingly).

One of which is that, if Trubisky blows, Pace is gone. The latter of which I am absolutely okay with. But, as I have said many times, I hope I'm wrong, and while I don't like him so far, I'd rather be stuck with Pace and a good football team than a bad one without him. Hell, if Pace turns this into a good football team, I'll be happy to come around - hence my repeated statement, "I hope I'm wrong".

I mean, shit, Rob. Again, I'm hoping this is just a misunderstanding, but I hope you can see how it might be frustrating, to even be having this conversation.

 

Fuck. It probably would've just been easier, in hindsight, to highlight and quote what I needed to than to write all of the above. Likely six of one, half dozen of the other. That was at least an hour of intermittent additions, when I had the chance. There was probably a better time/way to do that. Still the most enjoyable part of the last hour-two hours. Cheers, everyone.

 

Personal attacks aside I think you're wrong here, Rob. And a little guilty of moving the goalposts in your arguments.

It was widely reported Bennett and Marshall quit and ran their mouths. Marshall talked his way out of town. Bennett has said "its because of the contract," but his game, he quit too and it showed. He became complacent. It was the culture by Trestman of him being a completely hands-off coach who had a competent offense at times that was grossly under-prepared to put up with the suckfest that was Mel Tucker running a defense.. He was in the CFL too. When they were giving up 50 points a game, the lockerroom "mood" was widely discussed. Players weren't pissed off, they just wanted to make sure checks went through.

That's culture to me.

Listen to George McKaskey talk about Trestman's firing. Was that about money, or a bad culture? From a Tribune snippet from 2014:

"Mom is pissed off. I can?t think of a 91-year-old woman that that description would apply, but in this case, I can?t think of a more accurate description.

?She?s been on this earth for eight of the Bears? nine championships, and she wants more. She feels that it?s been too long since the last one, and that dissatisfaction is shared by her children, her grandchildren and her great grandchildren. She?s fed up with mediocrity. She feels that she and Bears fans everywhere deserve better.?

McCaskey said it was important for the Bears to re-establish an identity.

"People need to know that when they've played the Chicago Bears, they've been through hell," he said.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/football/bears/chi-bears-emery-trestman-story.html

Bennett was part of that team. As was Jeffery. I'll disagree if you think when George saying "the bears need to re-establish their identity" and jump to contract frustration over culture of lethargy/everything Juicebox fucked up.

The bears offered Alshon Jeffery more money (reported 5 year deal in ballpark of 13 mil per season) and he turned down. So at first you wanted BWW to point out "players who turned down more money from the bears" for less with someone else. I think Bearman11 also pointed out a couple DBs (AJ Bouye was one, he took less with Jax).

So Alshon was unhappy with his contract situation with the bears, NOT the culture, and as a result of his contract frustration, he took less money from the Eagles? I just don't follow your logic here.

If the eagles gave him big $ like Demariyus Thomas or Dez Bryant, then yeah--I agree. But he took 5 mil less per season, for one season, on an incentivized "prove it" deal instead of a 5 year deal paying him a million and change less per year than Dez/Thomas.

Either you badly posed your examples, or you're just trying to move the goalposts to win the argument (either way, you're a better poster than both)......

Help me see what I'm missing, cause I don't want to turn this into a pissing match/personal attack contest. I have no problem with objectivity, but just don't see how you can point to contracts as why Jeffery and Bennett aren't bears right now.

I don't get when you insinuate Jeffery left because of the contract then he took way less money than reportedly offered and still chalk it up to frustration of the contract situation. Its not likely. And Jeffery could have gotten more, and was reportedly offered more.

 

Why do you think the Pats routinely trade good players right before they are do a huge pay day? Because they know most players aren't going to take a hometown discount just to stay in the team. They get what they can before they lose them in FA. You think the 5 year $65 million dollar deal Gilmore signed in NE is team friendly.

http://bearswire.usatoday.com/2017/...sappointed-deal-wasnt-reached-with-bears/amp/

Check this out and tell me it sounds like Gilmore chose the Pats over the Bears because the Bears suck as opposed to them not wanting to show him the $$$$.

If you think that $$$ is not the A numero uno reason most FA's sign on the dotted line we will have to agree to disagree.

Enough with the Cleveland comparisons. If the Bears continue to change coaches and GM's every couple of years they may well turn out to be the Cleveland Browns. But right now? It's a stretch.

The Bears weren't the only team in the race for Alshons services. The Vikings and Colts were also in the mix. None of them were offering the long term $$ Alshon was after.

The deal that Pace was offering might have been good but not good enough. He chose the one year deal with Philadelphia because he thinks it gives him the best chance to earn the big pay day. If you want to take that as Alshon leaving no matter what Pace was willing to offer again we will agree to disagree.

Who said the Bears had to exorbitantly outbid every other team? Pace has a habit of letting other teams set the market for top line FA's. Then tries to play catch up or deems them too expensive for his taste.

If the Bears are such a horrible destination how did we sign guys like Trevathan, Hicks, Sitton and Freeman?

I am sure the Bears do not have their pick of any FA's they desire. I thought we were talking mostly about the top DB's the Bears missed out on. I feel I covered that.

Now I hope your not insinuating that if the Bears did not suck that all of a sudden any FA would be happy to be a Bear. We would still need to outbid other teams for their services. The Patriots signing of Gilmore is proof of that. I could go on and on listing the FA's that chose to sign away from a better situation for $$$. It goes both ways.

What do you mean by "long game". Has Pace had a choice but to not play the long game? Just because your building through the draft doesn't mean your giving up on the now. Pace went balls deep on Trubisky because he was in shooting distance. It wasn't by design. Why didn't he tank enough for the team to have a shot at a top QB last draft? Because you try and put the best team out there each season and win as many games as you can. After the season you assess your situation and act accordingly.

I think he signed Glennon because he is taking two bites at the apple. And I like it. He signed Glennon because he feels it's an upgrade over Cutler/Hoyer. There is no guarantee that Mitch pans out no matter how much Pace thinks of him. Glennon gives you two young QB's with upside. How much upside Glennon has is very debatable but I find it hard to believe he was signed just to be a patsy. He could have brought in a much cheaper patsy with a much less chance of winning games.

Just curious but who could Pace have brought in to be serious competition for Cutler? If he was tanking he could have cut Cutler and went with anything else out there. There wasn't anything else out there. He could have drafted a QB sure. Would any of them beat out Cutler? Even Prescott only got his opportunity after Romo went down with an injury that kept him out long enough to allow Dak to prove his worth.

Again if you are insinuating that Pace tanked in order to get the 3rd pick in the draft I am sorry I just don't buy that. With all the injuries the Bears dealt with last season they still were a few plays away from winning at least 3 more games. With a healthy unit who is to say they couldn't have won a couple more. Putting them way out of position to land a top QB in the draft.

I repeat the Browns were the only team last season that deliberately gave there team little chance of competing in order to get a high draft pick. That is tanking. Pace and the Bears did the best they felt they could do to field a competitive team. Super bowl aspirations? No. Another last place finish and 3rd pick in the draft. No again. There is a large grey area in between going all in for a Super Bowl run and tanking. We will agree to disagree again.

I know you don't want the Bears to suck but you do expect them to. You use the term "hope I'm wrong" a lot. I don't question you or anybody's loyalty to the Bears. I just disagree with how doom and gloom the situation is and hope that I am proven right. It's not a better view than anyone else's. Its just a different one.

 

This is a good argument for why the Bears didn't want Bennett. But the argument in this case is Bennett wanting out of Chicago. Supposedly because they were a bad team with no hope in sight. I simply feel that if the Bears wanted to keep Bennett they could have. If they would have extended him following his breakout season(Trestman's last season) he would be a Bear. Whether that would have been a good move or not is another discussion.

I have followed the Alshon drama very closely since it started and he was franchised. The only information I could find is that the Bears offered a 5 year deal well short of $13 million per season.

http://bearswire.usatoday.com/2017/03/09/bears-offering-alshon-jeffery-well-below-13m-per-year/amp/

Again the argument was that Alshon wanted out of Chicago. No matter what Pace did to try and keep him. If you followed the story it would seem that Alshon did consider the Bears as well as the Colts and Vikings. But nobody was offering the long term deal he wanted. The best short term deal was from the Eagles so he took that. Now we don't know details like how much money was being offered up front and how much guaranteed money was involved on those long term offers. But it was reported that Pace was. It interested in a short term deal. Maybe I am wrong. I'd be willing to entertain any evidence that it went down differently.

As for the CB's. Gilmore was the top target and it has been widely reported that Pace reneged on the asking price.

Bouye is harder to get info on. All I could find is that he was leaving it up to his agent to take care of the deal. He wanted to return to Houston but they wouldn't come up in price. The Bears did make a strong offer but it didn't top what the Jags had offered. Again I am willing to listen to any evidence proving me wrong.

There is a pattern here when it comes to Pace landing top FA's. It was reported last offseason that he passed on the big money Jenkins got offered from the Giants. He passed on paying Gilmore. He has had no problems signing guys to money he is confortable paying so I have a hard time believing the Bears current situation is stopping him from landing FA's.

 

I shudder to think what your interpretation of "doom and gloom" is because I don't know how it can get worse at this point. We're coming off our worst 16 game record in franchise history. We have 14 wins in the last 3 years combined. We're sitting on 5 playoff appearances in the 25 years that Mike Ditka was fired. There are massive talent voids on both sides of the ball, a head coach who coaches not to lose, two huge question marks at QB. I think it's hard for many of us to comprehend how any rational fan can see it any other way.

I'm tired of sucking and I want to win now, not 2018 or 2019, NOW. I don't have the patience for a long rebuild. Unlike you, I'm not ok with another <5 win season if it means that Pace's guys are showing progress. In 2+ years Pace has taken a bad but talented football team and made it a bad and untalented team. The immediate future is not bright. All that said I'm hoping so hard that Trubisky turns out to be the guy and that we know it soon.

This ^^^^^

 

I would like to think the worst is passed and improvement is on the horizon. Would you rather have question marks at QB or Jay Cutler? Do you think the Bears are going to suck forever? Is this season too soon to expect real improvement?

I am not ok with another sub 5 win season. I expect the Bears to flirt with a winnning record. Call me crazy but you don't give a QB 18 mill to lose double digit games. Not with a good line, running game and defense. Now for all that to happen you need to stay healthy. I will not give a pass if the injury's mount again. It's on Pace/Fox. You can only get unlucky so many times.

The Chicago Bears just took a QB with the second pick in the draft. The future hasn't been this bright since we traded for Cutler. Yes that bright future turned into a dark hell but that doesn't mean it will happen again. It can't. For all of our sanity.

If you take all the additions and all the subtraction the Bears have made since Pace took over and you feel the Bears are a less talented team I don't know what to tell you. Still got work to do at WR, DB and RT.

 

Great post blang buddy. As always.

I know its not great form to just repeat others, but im going to. Worst record since they went to 16game seasons. 14wins in 3 seasons(the kinda thing MANY people saw coming) and rob is still playing the negativity card with this board. I'd say unbelievable, but actually.... its very believable.

In terms of the QB position, yes. In terms of the team, i can't agree, because i have so little faith in Pace to build a successful team. I also have very little faith in Loggains being able to develop anything more than diarrhea right after eating a spicy curry, but im trying not to think about that for a number of reasons.


On the subject of QB position/Trubisky tho, i meant to say this after the draft and forgot so am saying it now. Months ago i said the Bears were absolutely nailed on to take a QB with their first pick this year based on the theory of AF1 re GM's & pushing the button on QB's. Flyers theory(i shouldn't even call it that anymore) has been proven correct once again. Now THERE'S a guy who knows what he's talking about.