What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Fields NFL trade value? (1 Viewer)

menobrown

Footballguy
McDaniels won some games with Tebow so can see some appeal but Fields IMO is not a good marriage with the financial committment the Raiders have in their pass catchers.

That's a dilemma the Ravens have with Lamar and the Bears might be having with Fields. Both of them need more help but at the same time it's hard to get your money's worth out of WR's, whether that's via FA or high draft picks. Good WR's, those with a choice, have not wanted to play with Lamar and I'd guess most WR's feel the same way about Fields. I think this part of the equation for why Poles paid for Claypool. On the flip side these two QB's might be able to move an offense more then most because of their dual threat ability but it's not enough or sustainable over course of a season to rely on that. It really does become a dilemma I think the Ravens have been struggling with for a few years now of how to get Lamar help but also find a way to get bang for their investment.
 

zamboni

Footballguy
If CHI sees Love as the better QB, it's a no-brainer. They reset the 4 year window of the rookie QB contract, they pick up picks along the way, and the get a QB that fits their natural system better. A lot of chatter was done early on about how badly they were using Fields in that system and they were going a poor coaching job of forcing him to do something that doesn't fit his talent set. CHI may just decide to get what they can for Fields and reset this with someone else that fits better?
Resetting sounds reasonable in theory, but coaches/GMs can’t think that way or they won’t be around to see it through. The pressure is to win - or at least show meaningful improvement- now.

But again, what’s to say that the new blood will be any better than the current blood?
 

32 Counter Pass

Footballguy
I think it is still too early to make any declarations about Fields long-term success. He had one of the worst surround casts in the league this year, and lost his best WR during the season.

We have seen what happens when QBs are surrounded with talent. Hurts and Tau come to mind as QBs whose play was elevated by upgrading the skill players around them, and in Tau's case the oline. Fields showed the ability to deliver the ball to his WRs in college, so I think it would be premature to judge his future in the nfl.

I would surround him with as much talent as possible and see how 2023 unfolds.

Trade down and get as much draft capital as possible.

Draft a WR that projects as a #1WR. Fields played with Njigba, and the trend is to pair up young QBs with their college WRs (Burrow-Chase, Hurts-Smith)

Build up the oline with draft picks and thru FA.

Then evaluate his prospects in 2023.
 

Ministry of Pain

Footballguy
Another x-factor here is what does Chicago think of the non-QBs in this draft...if they see Anderson and Carter as franchise defenders they may not want to get too cute with what they are doing which would make a deal with Houston at #2, Indy at #4 and possibly Seattle at #5 that much more attractive...the Bears really are in a great spot and the reality is what they do with that #1 pick will play a strong part as to whether they become relevant again.

I would also expand this conversation to teams with high Draft picks and also a potential/perceived franchise QB on the roster already, some getting paid huge dollars.

Arizona: Kyler Murray, 3rd overall pick in the '23 NFL Draft...what is he worth, 5 1st-Rd picks? If Fields is getting talk of 3, what is Murray worth? Nothing you say?
🤷‍♂️

Draft order and QB POV...I posted this in another thread, feels relevant to the discussion we're having
1. Chicago-Have their QB maybe, not hearing a change of coaching, why not? Worst record in the NFL
2. Houston-Likely to draft a QB, depends on the next Head Coach
3. Arizona-Kyler Murray likely to miss a chunk of '23, just had surgery and was worse than just a clean ACL tear from what i was reading. New Coach?
4. Indianapolis-No QB and an owner that can be very involved and disruptive at times. Who is taking this Head Coaching vacancy?
5. Seattle-Make the Playoffs and have 2 first round picks to play with. Franchise QB? Time to trade up?
6. Detroit-Fans there seem to think no go on QB right now
7. Las Vegas-QB thirsty right now assuming Carr is gone. Keeping McDaniels?
8. Atlanta-How can they be sold on Ridder? Yes they would grab a QB if they could
9. Carolina-QB thirsty and always wanting to wheel n deal, who is the next head coach and what is the plan?
10. Philadelphia-Amazing they will have a gift 1st round pick. They're good at QB for the foreseeable future.

Seattle seems like a good trade candidate for Chicago. Base of the deal would be the #1 pick for the #5, #20.
I think from first glance there is a slight tier drop between the 4th and 5th picks. Stroud and Young should go 1-2, and 3-4 should be Anderson and Carter. Maybe Levis makes a jump into the top 3-4 picks, but as a Bears fan, I'd really hate to lose out on the premiere edge or DT.

Running Scared
I'm not ripping you two, lots of respect
But that is Running Scared IMHO if the front office takes this approach

I can understand where both of you are coming from but now is the time for RISK if it's me in that FO.
 

Boston

Footballguy
Another x-factor here is what does Chicago think of the non-QBs in this draft...if they see Anderson and Carter as franchise defenders they may not want to get too cute with what they are doing which would make a deal with Houston at #2, Indy at #4 and possibly Seattle at #5 that much more attractive...the Bears really are in a great spot and the reality is what they do with that #1 pick will play a strong part as to whether they become relevant again.

I would also expand this conversation to teams with high Draft picks and also a potential/perceived franchise QB on the roster already, some getting paid huge dollars.

Arizona: Kyler Murray, 3rd overall pick in the '23 NFL Draft...what is he worth, 5 1st-Rd picks? If Fields is getting talk of 3, what is Murray worth? Nothing you say?
🤷‍♂️

Draft order and QB POV...I posted this in another thread, feels relevant to the discussion we're having
1. Chicago-Have their QB maybe, not hearing a change of coaching, why not? Worst record in the NFL
2. Houston-Likely to draft a QB, depends on the next Head Coach
3. Arizona-Kyler Murray likely to miss a chunk of '23, just had surgery and was worse than just a clean ACL tear from what i was reading. New Coach?
4. Indianapolis-No QB and an owner that can be very involved and disruptive at times. Who is taking this Head Coaching vacancy?
5. Seattle-Make the Playoffs and have 2 first round picks to play with. Franchise QB? Time to trade up?
6. Detroit-Fans there seem to think no go on QB right now
7. Las Vegas-QB thirsty right now assuming Carr is gone. Keeping McDaniels?
8. Atlanta-How can they be sold on Ridder? Yes they would grab a QB if they could
9. Carolina-QB thirsty and always wanting to wheel n deal, who is the next head coach and what is the plan?
10. Philadelphia-Amazing they will have a gift 1st round pick. They're good at QB for the foreseeable future.

Seattle seems like a good trade candidate for Chicago. Base of the deal would be the #1 pick for the #5, #20.
I think from first glance there is a slight tier drop between the 4th and 5th picks. Stroud and Young should go 1-2, and 3-4 should be Anderson and Carter. Maybe Levis makes a jump into the top 3-4 picks, but as a Bears fan, I'd really hate to lose out on the premiere edge or DT.

Running Scared
I'm not ripping you two, lots of respect
But that is Running Scared IMHO if the front office takes this approach

I can understand where both of you are coming from but now is the time for RISK if it's me in that FO.

Please clarify…I don’t understand what you mean by risk here.
 

Ministry of Pain

Footballguy

Please clarify…I don’t understand what you mean by risk here.
Fair enough

-I think it's time for Chicago to trumpet out they are taking a QB, even if that lessens a little bit of Fields trade value because if he's as good as some of you think, maybe they can leverage more in a trade down.
-There's at least 3 QBs that have people talking about a Top 5 pick, find a partner and start dancing with them.

If Chicago stays put and takes a Defensive player of their choice, they fail IMHO. And Bears' fans so far feel similar.
Fields does have a lot of fans, think many of them had a piece in FF and are not being totally real about him as a future pocket passer in the NFL but I am NOT rooting against him.
Chicago has a lot of cards they can deal or play, no reason to sit on their hands and play it safe. They haven't been truly relevant in so long, it's getting to that Miami/Detroit/Cleveland range, not a good group of teams to be lumped into. Were the Jay Cutler years fond memories?
 
Last edited:
IF
  • Chicago is really too many players from contending in 2023 and they are really playing for 2024 or 2025
  • Teams are offering good hauls for their first pick
  • Teams are offering good hauls for Fields
  • They can get away with it with ownership
Why not trade both? Even if that means missing out on a top QB in this draft and running a Carson Wentz out at QB for 2023?
 

Anarchy99

Footballguy
IF
  • Chicago is really too many players from contending in 2023 and they are really playing for 2024 or 2025
  • Teams are offering good hauls for their first pick
  • Teams are offering good hauls for Fields
  • They can get away with it with ownership
Why not trade both? Even if that means missing out on a top QB in this draft and running a Carson Wentz out at QB for 2023?
The teams that need QBs are some of the same teams that already passed on Fields in the draft. I don't expect there to be a ton of suitors for him . . . he hasn't exactly lit it up passing the ball up over his first two seasons. Some teams could have had him for just their #1 pick when he was drafted. Two years later, no way would they give up more now than they would have then. As already discussed, a lot of that limited success passing is due to him being on the Bears, but I doubt there will be more than a couple of teams that might be interested in him at all. Given that teams may suspect they will draft a QB first overall, potential trade partners will likely submit lowball offers.

Similarly, CHI gave up a lot to move up to get him (two 1's, a 4, and a 5). I doubt they would take back way less than their initial investment. CHI can still pay him for 2-3 years on his rookie deal. If they ship out Fields and don't draft someone else, then they will have to pay his replacement a lot more than they would have to pay Fields.
 

Zow

Footballguy
2 firsts and some additional compensation (eg multiple picks, a player of real value, etc.) was my initial thought from the other threads.

I guess another x-factor is where that 2022 1st is...if it is from a team like Indy it has a ton of value...if it is from a team like the Commanders it is less and if it is a team like the Giants it loses a little more...gonna be fascinating to watch how the QB landscape unfolds as there are scenarios for about 50% of the league to have a new QB next year.
Right. I mean if the trade is with the Texans and they literal just swap back one spot, then it’s obviously less.

My general claim assumes two random 1sts.
 
IF
  • Chicago is really too many players from contending in 2023 and they are really playing for 2024 or 2025
  • Teams are offering good hauls for their first pick
  • Teams are offering good hauls for Fields
  • They can get away with it with ownership
Why not trade both? Even if that means missing out on a top QB in this draft and running a Carson Wentz out at QB for 2023?
The teams that need QBs are some of the same teams that already passed on Fields in the draft. I don't expect there to be a ton of suitors for him . . . he hasn't exactly lit it up passing the ball up over his first two seasons. Some teams could have had him for just their #1 pick when he was drafted. Two years later, no way would they give up more now than they would have then. As already discussed, a lot of that limited success passing is due to him being on the Bears, but I doubt there will be more than a couple of teams that might be interested in him at all. Given that teams may suspect they will draft a QB first overall, potential trade partners will likely submit lowball offers.

Similarly, CHI gave up a lot to move up to get him (two 1's, a 4, and a 5). I doubt they would take back way less than their initial investment. CHI can still pay him for 2-3 years on his rookie deal. If they ship out Fields and don't draft someone else, then they will have to pay his replacement a lot more than they would have to pay Fields.
In your reply, you basically stated that Fields will not return much which negates the question. I'm not arguing that any of the four conditions are true. For the first we have all seen teams come out of nowhere with pretty much the same players. For the second, every draft is different. Is there that coveted player this year? You kind of dealt with the Fields haul. And then there is that dreaded vote of confidence.

I kind of agree with the premise that Fields isn't bringing back as much as some have suggested. But in the hypothetical where he nets a couple of #1s and few other picks do you grab those picks to build the offensive line, or the receiver's room, or the defense even if trading down your own first pick? I guess another way of putting it, would Fields or any quarterback survive to be a difference maker on the next competitive Bears team if that isn't until 2025?
 

Anarchy99

Footballguy
IF
  • Chicago is really too many players from contending in 2023 and they are really playing for 2024 or 2025
  • Teams are offering good hauls for their first pick
  • Teams are offering good hauls for Fields
  • They can get away with it with ownership
Why not trade both? Even if that means missing out on a top QB in this draft and running a Carson Wentz out at QB for 2023?
The teams that need QBs are some of the same teams that already passed on Fields in the draft. I don't expect there to be a ton of suitors for him . . . he hasn't exactly lit it up passing the ball up over his first two seasons. Some teams could have had him for just their #1 pick when he was drafted. Two years later, no way would they give up more now than they would have then. As already discussed, a lot of that limited success passing is due to him being on the Bears, but I doubt there will be more than a couple of teams that might be interested in him at all. Given that teams may suspect they will draft a QB first overall, potential trade partners will likely submit lowball offers.

Similarly, CHI gave up a lot to move up to get him (two 1's, a 4, and a 5). I doubt they would take back way less than their initial investment. CHI can still pay him for 2-3 years on his rookie deal. If they ship out Fields and don't draft someone else, then they will have to pay his replacement a lot more than they would have to pay Fields.
In your reply, you basically stated that Fields will not return much which negates the question. I'm not arguing that any of the four conditions are true. For the first we have all seen teams come out of nowhere with pretty much the same players. For the second, every draft is different. Is there that coveted player this year? You kind of dealt with the Fields haul. And then there is that dreaded vote of confidence.

I kind of agree with the premise that Fields isn't bringing back as much as some have suggested. But in the hypothetical where he nets a couple of #1s and few other picks do you grab those picks to build the offensive line, or the receiver's room, or the defense even if trading down your own first pick? I guess another way of putting it, would Fields or any quarterback survive to be a difference maker on the next competitive Bears team if that isn't until 2025?
I pretty much have made the final argument you listed already (a new QB wouldn't be any better given the lack of receiving talent, poor OL play, and lackluster coaching). So yeah, sure, if some team is crazy to give up a ton of picks for Fields, then sure, CHI might do it.

Another thing not mentioned in the Fields / Bears / first pick / trade discussion is that it's unlikely the current staff and regime for any bad teams that draft a QB early will get to see what happens to the QB they select and the team they surrounded him with. The league has a win right away or your out mentality, so it's unlikely the Bears (or any other franchise) will be fine with not being competitive for 3 seasons. (I know you said ownership would be ok with it in your hypothetical).

That generally opens up a whole different can of worms when a new staff and administration comes in, as they usually have no allegiance to any players the prior administration had drafted and often will clean house.

So in your breakdown, IMO, the #1 pick is worth at least twice what Fields is worth in draft capital. Halfway through his rookie deal, I just don't see teams lining up and starting a bidding war over Fields. We haven't seen that happen before, but we have seen teams load up on picks to get a Top 5 rookie QB (which is why I think that option comes with way more draft pick upside for the Bears in a trade).
 

MAC_32

Footballguy
If CHI sees Love as the better QB, it's a no-brainer. They reset the 4 year window of the rookie QB contract, they pick up picks along the way, and the get a QB that fits their natural system better. A lot of chatter was done early on about how badly they were using Fields in that system and they were going a poor coaching job of forcing him to do something that doesn't fit his talent set. CHI may just decide to get what they can for Fields and reset this with someone else that fits better?
Resetting sounds reasonable in theory, but coaches/GMs can’t think that way or they won’t be around to see it through. The pressure is to win - or at least show meaningful improvement- now.

But again, what’s to say that the new blood will be any better than the current blood?
For all intents and purposes this year was already part of the reset. The roster is still in shambles, but they have $118m in cap space. They won't be a legit contender in 2024, playoffs can be a reasonable expectation with a 1.1 qb in 2023.
 

Hankmoody

Footballguy
If CHI sees Love as the better QB, it's a no-brainer. They reset the 4 year window of the rookie QB contract, they pick up picks along the way, and the get a QB that fits their natural system better. A lot of chatter was done early on about how badly they were using Fields in that system and they were going a poor coaching job of forcing him to do something that doesn't fit his talent set. CHI may just decide to get what they can for Fields and reset this with someone else that fits better?
Resetting sounds reasonable in theory, but coaches/GMs can’t think that way or they won’t be around to see it through. The pressure is to win - or at least show meaningful improvement- now.

But again, what’s to say that the new blood will be any better than the current blood?
That's why I prefaced it with "if they see Love (or Stroud) as the better QB". If they don't it's a non-conversation. But if they do, there are a ton of other side benefits to go along with it.
 

Anarchy99

Footballguy
If CHI sees Love as the better QB, it's a no-brainer. They reset the 4 year window of the rookie QB contract, they pick up picks along the way, and the get a QB that fits their natural system better. A lot of chatter was done early on about how badly they were using Fields in that system and they were going a poor coaching job of forcing him to do something that doesn't fit his talent set. CHI may just decide to get what they can for Fields and reset this with someone else that fits better?
Resetting sounds reasonable in theory, but coaches/GMs can’t think that way or they won’t be around to see it through. The pressure is to win - or at least show meaningful improvement- now.

But again, what’s to say that the new blood will be any better than the current blood?
That's why I prefaced it with "if they see Love (or Stroud) as the better QB". If they don't it's a non-conversation. But if they do, there are a ton of other side benefits to go along with it.
IMO, the only way they move off of Fields is if they see a QB that in their evaluation that is WAYYYYY better than Fields. I suspect 3/4 of the league won't have an interest in trading for him for what the Bears would need to make it worth their while. They are already into Fields for two firsts, a fourth, and a fifth. Teams will all offer at best 50 cents on the dollar knowing they will take someone else at #1. No way did Fields stock go up in trade value after two seasons. They might only get an offer of a late second rounder in 2023 and a 2024 4th rounder. Even if they like an incoming rookie a little bit more, I don't see them bailing on Fields as their ROI would be pretty low.
 

Boston

Footballguy

Please clarify…I don’t understand what you mean by risk here.
Fair enough

-I think it's time for Chicago to trumpet out they are taking a QB, even if that lessens a little bit of Fields trade value because if he's as good as some of you think, maybe they can leverage more in a trade down.
-There's at least 3 QBs that have people talking about a Top 5 pick, find a partner and start dancing with them.

If Chicago stays put and takes a Defensive player of their choice, they fail IMHO. And Bears' fans so far feel similar.
Fields does have a lot of fans, think many of them had a piece in FF and are not being totally real about him as a future pocket passer in the NFL but I am NOT rooting against him.
Chicago has a lot of cards they can deal or play, no reason to sit on their hands and play it safe. They haven't been truly relevant in so long, it's getting to that Miami/Detroit/Cleveland range, not a good group of teams to be lumped into. Were the Jay Cutler years fond memories?

I think you misread what I said...they absolutely should not stay put...they should cash in and if they simply take a defender at 1.1 it is a fail...my point is if they view Anderson and/or Carter as elite level defenders they could trade down with Houston or Indy get one of them and still cash in on the pick.
 
Last edited:

Hankmoody

Footballguy
IMO, the only way they move off of Fields is if they see a QB that in their evaluation that is WAYYYYY better than Fields. I suspect 3/4 of the league won't have an interest in trading for him for what the Bears would need to make it worth their while. They are already into Fields for two firsts, a fourth, and a fifth. Teams will all offer at best 50 cents on the dollar knowing they will take someone else at #1. No way did Fields stock go up in trade value after two seasons. They might only get an offer of a late second rounder in 2023 and a 2024 4th rounder. Even if they like an incoming rookie a little bit more, I don't see them bailing on Fields as their ROI would be pretty low.
That's a sunk cost though and that's not how teams (should) operate. If the math says Young or Stroud is better then you take him and you get what you can for Fields just like ARI did. This plays out to be a QB upgrade + a 2nd you can spend on an OL or WR or defensive help. Those 2020-21 picks are water under the bridge now, you don't throw good money after bad.
 

Anarchy99

Footballguy
IMO, the only way they move off of Fields is if they see a QB that in their evaluation that is WAYYYYY better than Fields. I suspect 3/4 of the league won't have an interest in trading for him for what the Bears would need to make it worth their while. They are already into Fields for two firsts, a fourth, and a fifth. Teams will all offer at best 50 cents on the dollar knowing they will take someone else at #1. No way did Fields stock go up in trade value after two seasons. They might only get an offer of a late second rounder in 2023 and a 2024 4th rounder. Even if they like an incoming rookie a little bit more, I don't see them bailing on Fields as their ROI would be pretty low.
That's a sunk cost though and that's not how teams (should) operate. If the math says Young or Stroud is better then you take him and you get what you can for Fields just like ARI did. This plays out to be a QB upgrade + a 2nd you can spend on an OL or WR or defensive help. Those 2020-21 picks are water under the bridge now, you don't throw good money after bad.
I still think teams look at it as an overall, big picture. If they think a new QB might only be 2% better than Fields, and they would take a bath in picks acquired by trading the #1 pick vs. picks they would get from trading Fields, the net impact on the team and organization could be a net loss instead of a gain of 2% at QB. We don't know the potential offers that would apply here, but if they could get 3 firsts, a second, and a third from a desperate team for the #1 overall pick vs. only getting a 2nd and a 4th for Fields, that would be a simple decision.

That being said, all I keep seeing is the Bears are in great shape to build around Fields either through the draft, by trading the #1 pick, and/or having a roomful of cash to spend / cap room. I have not seen places indicating the Bears are or should considering trading Fields, as he flashed athleticism and top tier talent without any help, just think what he could do with an offense around him. I have a son that lives in Chicago, and he hasn't heard or seen talk of them trading Fields. Maybe that is just subterfuge and a diversion, but I don't see a lot of chatter or support pushing the Bears to move on from Fields. It's not a Josh Rosen situation.
 

-OZ-

Footballguy
2 firsts and some additional compensation (eg multiple picks, a player of real value, etc.) was my initial thought from the other threads.

I guess another x-factor is where that 2022 1st is...if it is from a team like Indy it has a ton of value...if it is from a team like the Commanders it is less and if it is a team like the Giants it loses a little more...gonna be fascinating to watch how the QB landscape unfolds as there are scenarios for about 50% of the league to have a new QB next year.
Using “my” team as a basis, I’d be okay giving the 1.11 and a 24 1st along with tannehill (if they want him to give Bryce some time) for fields. I wouldn’t give more than that. But then they’d be running like 75% of the time.
 

-OZ-

Footballguy
When Bears got the 1.1 I thought all things should be on the table, including trading Fields. The more I've heard end of season player interviews, including Fields, I don't think get a sense trading Fields is anything the Bears brass is remotely considering.

My main reason for thinking they should at least consider it is the team is not ready to compete next year and going with a rookie QB would re-set the rookie contract to year one. That and fact that Fields is still a difficult judge with respect to his ability to pass due to a lack of weapons and finally bad roster or not they could not win games.

But again I get a sense they are committed to him and it would be a wildly unnpopular move in the lockerroom and city if they tried to move him.

If they were to trade him his price would start at two 2 random 1's plus extra.
Which do you feel would net the Bears a greater return in a trade . . . Fields or the #1 overall pick?
1.1
Yep. I don’t think this is particularly close. Even if it should be.
 

Bri

Footballguy
It seems incongruous to me that they want to improve the QB position & the guy they're moving on from is worth multiple #1's. Not gonna happen.
Yeah.
I think this sometimes too.
He's got a lot of fans though and the NFL is littered with coaches that think they can fix a player if the player just has the skills.

Everyone praises his wheels of course, but he's such a questionable passer.

What happens when they compare Fields' college tape to the quarterbacks in this class?
 

FairWarning

Footballguy
Looking at what the recent qb s went for in trades (Watson, Wilson, Stafford), the Bears would get more than a 1 and a 3.
 

fred_1_15301

Footballguy
Looking at what the recent qb s went for in trades (Watson, Wilson, Stafford), the Bears would get more than a 1 and a 3.
Those guys all had a track record of success (maybe not Stafford but everyone knew he was hampered by the team). Fields s very much an unknown. We don’t know if the guy will ever be able to accurately throw the ball and he’s a QB.
 

InDitkaWeTrust

Footballguy
IF
  • Chicago is really too many players from contending in 2023 and they are really playing for 2024 or 2025
  • Teams are offering good hauls for their first pick
  • Teams are offering good hauls for Fields
  • They can get away with it with ownership
Why not trade both? Even if that means missing out on a top QB in this draft and running a Carson Wentz out at QB for 2023?
The teams that need QBs are some of the same teams that already passed on Fields in the draft. I don't expect there to be a ton of suitors for him . . . he hasn't exactly lit it up passing the ball up over his first two seasons. Some teams could have had him for just their #1 pick when he was drafted. Two years later, no way would they give up more now than they would have then. As already discussed, a lot of that limited success passing is due to him being on the Bears, but I doubt there will be more than a couple of teams that might be interested in him at all. Given that teams may suspect they will draft a QB first overall, potential trade partners will likely submit lowball offers.

Similarly, CHI gave up a lot to move up to get him (two 1's, a 4, and a 5). I doubt they would take back way less than their initial investment. CHI can still pay him for 2-3 years on his rookie deal. If they ship out Fields and don't draft someone else, then they will have to pay his replacement a lot more than they would have to pay Fields.
To your second point, those are sunk costs from a different GM. If a reasonable offer comes in for Fields (Ryan Poles has zero loyalty to him), I expect Poles to take the offer, keep the #1 and draft Bryce Young. Poles has a LOT of flexibility right now and it's a good place to be as a second year GM.
 

FairWarning

Footballguy
Looking at what the recent qb s went for in trades (Watson, Wilson, Stafford), the Bears would get more than a 1 and a 3.
Those guys all had a track record of success (maybe not Stafford but everyone knew he was hampered by the team). Fields s very much an unknown. We don’t know if the guy will ever be able to accurately throw the ball and he’s a QB.
It’s rare that a qb is entering his prime is possibly available. If he were moved tomorrow, he automatically will have better receivers and a OL. Few OCs would turn down the chance at coaching him also. As a Bears fan, I’m on the fence about him, but I was wrong about Hurts also.
 

DJackson10

Footballguy
Spinning off a Mac32 post:

Suppose all 31 teams assume the Bears will draft a QB then what is Fields' trade value?

Trade value goes way down when teams know you are trying to trade a guy. Only a dumb GM would over pay for Fields. Great person but his passing doesn't impress me at all. Athletic skills but that only takes you so far. Would spend anything more then a player or two swap plus conditional picks.
 

JohnnyU

Footballguy
As a Bears fan, this one is tough. I see above, a few posters that didn’t watch him play this year. I am not sure who can fairly put losses on JF’s shoulders. Have you seen the roster, offensive line?

I watched Superman behind that line this year, he was incredible with his legs and almost impossible to evaluate as a passer. I am not sure what he is worth in a trade, but imagine if the Ravens were to pass on Lamar and traded for JF.
I watched a lot of Chicago games, was an investor in Fields thru several FF leagues.
I just don't think he is a pocket passer yet and I wouldn't hesitate to draft another QB if that player appears at the No 1 spot
Chicago owes it to themselves to have the very best possible prospect and arm at QB as they can find. They already whiffed badly on Trubisky, Fields looks promising but I would not say that he automatically takes them off the table to Draft a QB.

And this would be a tough conversation but I also would want Fields to know that even if the Bears commit to him, the likelihood is they want everyone thinking they are picking a QB so they can trade down a couple spots and maximize the talent they can surround Fields with. He's got to understand it's better for the Bears if stories are going around that they want to grab another QB at No 1. That will get the phones ringing and people wanting to trade. Nobody is going to trade up if word on the street is Bears are going Left Tackle at No 1.

If I am the Bears' GM I want to try and operate from a position of strength and not weakness by a perception that everyone thinks we will pass on Quarterback, quite the opposite I would be broadcasting even if I wanted to keep moving forward with Justin Fields. Now the downside is Fields might think we don't want him and start getting a complex but that's why i would sit down with him and explain the next 12-24-36 month plan to him so he feels like he is part of the solution.

Otherwise that No 1 pick won't hold a lot of weight. And if I were the GM I would also entertain trade offers for Fields on the very very down low :lol:
You gotta work both sides, high level chess game about to start, lots of smoke and mirrors.
The #1 pick will be a QB, regardless of who holds that pick. The ONLY reason for the bears to not trade down is if they get a huge haul for Fields and want to target 2025 to compete. As said in the other thread, Poles should be fired immediately if any position other than a QB is taken at #1.
The Bears aren't getting a huge haul for Fields. Like someone said earlier, there is a big disconnect between this board and the NFL when it comes to QBs.
 

DJackson10

Footballguy
Maybe I missed something along the way, but I don't think Fields is all that good.
I think you could justify drafting a QB at #1 even if they don't trade Fields. That won't happen, just saying.
But yeah, if they can get decent trade value for Fields, absolutely entertain that idea.
Or, if they can get a haul for the #1, obviously entertain that as well.
Edit....three firsts for Fields is certainly not happening

Yeah I don't think he's that good at all. IMHO he's another decent starter to bridge to the guy you want but not a franchise QB. Could be a good back up option though.
 

DJackson10

Footballguy
As a Bears fan, this one is tough. I see above, a few posters that didn’t watch him play this year. I am not sure who can fairly put losses on JF’s shoulders. Have you seen the roster, offensive line?

I watched Superman behind that line this year, he was incredible with his legs and almost impossible to evaluate as a passer. I am not sure what he is worth in a trade, but imagine if the Ravens were to pass on Lamar and traded for JF.
I watched a lot of Chicago games, was an investor in Fields thru several FF leagues.
I just don't think he is a pocket passer yet and I wouldn't hesitate to draft another QB if that player appears at the No 1 spot
Chicago owes it to themselves to have the very best possible prospect and arm at QB as they can find. They already whiffed badly on Trubisky, Fields looks promising but I would not say that he automatically takes them off the table to Draft a QB.

And this would be a tough conversation but I also would want Fields to know that even if the Bears commit to him, the likelihood is they want everyone thinking they are picking a QB so they can trade down a couple spots and maximize the talent they can surround Fields with. He's got to understand it's better for the Bears if stories are going around that they want to grab another QB at No 1. That will get the phones ringing and people wanting to trade. Nobody is going to trade up if word on the street is Bears are going Left Tackle at No 1.

If I am the Bears' GM I want to try and operate from a position of strength and not weakness by a perception that everyone thinks we will pass on Quarterback, quite the opposite I would be broadcasting even if I wanted to keep moving forward with Justin Fields. Now the downside is Fields might think we don't want him and start getting a complex but that's why i would sit down with him and explain the next 12-24-36 month plan to him so he feels like he is part of the solution.

Otherwise that No 1 pick won't hold a lot of weight. And if I were the GM I would also entertain trade offers for Fields on the very very down low :lol:
You gotta work both sides, high level chess game about to start, lots of smoke and mirrors.
The #1 pick will be a QB, regardless of who holds that pick. The ONLY reason for the bears to not trade down is if they get a huge haul for Fields and want to target 2025 to compete. As said in the other thread, Poles should be fired immediately if any position other than a QB is taken at #1.
The Bears aren't getting a huge haul for Fields. Like someone said earlier, there is a big disconnect between this board and the NFL when it comes to QBs.

People here confuse real life with fantasy a lot of times. Not just this board either. There's people out there who think Lamar is an elite QB. Maybe fantasy wise but not NFL Real life. Fields seems like a good guy but I just don't see him NFL starter. #1 pick I'd absolutely if I was Chicago entertain getting Levis. Not sold on CJ Stroud as I see him and fields Similar.
 

ffmail4me

Footballguy
I think if you want a QB to make it in today's NFL, you need at least 1, and ideally at least 2 good WRs. The Bears barely have 1 right now. Mooney has flashed, but I'd hardly call him the prototypical #1 alpha WR in the NFL. I'd say considering what he's had to work with, Fields had a phenomenal year. Yes, a lot of that success came on his legs, but he does have the tools to be a very good NFL QB IMO.
 

JohnnyU

Footballguy
As a Bears fan, this one is tough. I see above, a few posters that didn’t watch him play this year. I am not sure who can fairly put losses on JF’s shoulders. Have you seen the roster, offensive line?

I watched Superman behind that line this year, he was incredible with his legs and almost impossible to evaluate as a passer. I am not sure what he is worth in a trade, but imagine if the Ravens were to pass on Lamar and traded for JF.
I watched a lot of Chicago games, was an investor in Fields thru several FF leagues.
I just don't think he is a pocket passer yet and I wouldn't hesitate to draft another QB if that player appears at the No 1 spot
Chicago owes it to themselves to have the very best possible prospect and arm at QB as they can find. They already whiffed badly on Trubisky, Fields looks promising but I would not say that he automatically takes them off the table to Draft a QB.

And this would be a tough conversation but I also would want Fields to know that even if the Bears commit to him, the likelihood is they want everyone thinking they are picking a QB so they can trade down a couple spots and maximize the talent they can surround Fields with. He's got to understand it's better for the Bears if stories are going around that they want to grab another QB at No 1. That will get the phones ringing and people wanting to trade. Nobody is going to trade up if word on the street is Bears are going Left Tackle at No 1.

If I am the Bears' GM I want to try and operate from a position of strength and not weakness by a perception that everyone thinks we will pass on Quarterback, quite the opposite I would be broadcasting even if I wanted to keep moving forward with Justin Fields. Now the downside is Fields might think we don't want him and start getting a complex but that's why i would sit down with him and explain the next 12-24-36 month plan to him so he feels like he is part of the solution.

Otherwise that No 1 pick won't hold a lot of weight. And if I were the GM I would also entertain trade offers for Fields on the very very down low :lol:
You gotta work both sides, high level chess game about to start, lots of smoke and mirrors.
The #1 pick will be a QB, regardless of who holds that pick. The ONLY reason for the bears to not trade down is if they get a huge haul for Fields and want to target 2025 to compete. As said in the other thread, Poles should be fired immediately if any position other than a QB is taken at #1.
The Bears aren't getting a huge haul for Fields. Like someone said earlier, there is a big disconnect between this board and the NFL when it comes to QBs.

People here confuse real life with fantasy a lot of times. Not just this board either. There's people out there who think Lamar is an elite QB. Maybe fantasy wise but not NFL Real life. Fields seems like a good guy but I just don't see him NFL starter. #1 pick I'd absolutely if I was Chicago entertain getting Levis. Not sold on CJ Stroud as I see him and fields Similar.
Similar? Stroud is actually accurate.
 

DJackson10

Footballguy
Fields does have a lot of fans, think many of them had a piece in FF and are not being totally real about him as a future pocket passer in the NFL but I am NOT rooting against him.
Chicago has a lot of cards they can deal or play, no reason to sit on their hands and play it safe. They haven't been truly relevant in so long, it's getting to that Miami/Detroit/Cleveland range, not a good group of teams to be lumped into. Were the Jay Cutler years fond memories?

The bolded I notice a lot when either talking to people here, friends, coworkers etc. People seem heavily invested fans of a player if they are on their FF team especially if they are keeper/dynasty guys. Or they are big madden fans and play Ultimate Team. Guys like Lamar, Vick, Fields, etc in that game are better to have in some aspects because of their ability to run and there's ways to glitch the system to make them almost unstoppable at times.

Point being is fans seem to can't separate fantasy from reality when making these discussions and it becomes really hard to have a real discussion with some on these topics.
 

DJackson10

Footballguy
As a Bears fan, this one is tough. I see above, a few posters that didn’t watch him play this year. I am not sure who can fairly put losses on JF’s shoulders. Have you seen the roster, offensive line?

I watched Superman behind that line this year, he was incredible with his legs and almost impossible to evaluate as a passer. I am not sure what he is worth in a trade, but imagine if the Ravens were to pass on Lamar and traded for JF.
I watched a lot of Chicago games, was an investor in Fields thru several FF leagues.
I just don't think he is a pocket passer yet and I wouldn't hesitate to draft another QB if that player appears at the No 1 spot
Chicago owes it to themselves to have the very best possible prospect and arm at QB as they can find. They already whiffed badly on Trubisky, Fields looks promising but I would not say that he automatically takes them off the table to Draft a QB.

And this would be a tough conversation but I also would want Fields to know that even if the Bears commit to him, the likelihood is they want everyone thinking they are picking a QB so they can trade down a couple spots and maximize the talent they can surround Fields with. He's got to understand it's better for the Bears if stories are going around that they want to grab another QB at No 1. That will get the phones ringing and people wanting to trade. Nobody is going to trade up if word on the street is Bears are going Left Tackle at No 1.

If I am the Bears' GM I want to try and operate from a position of strength and not weakness by a perception that everyone thinks we will pass on Quarterback, quite the opposite I would be broadcasting even if I wanted to keep moving forward with Justin Fields. Now the downside is Fields might think we don't want him and start getting a complex but that's why i would sit down with him and explain the next 12-24-36 month plan to him so he feels like he is part of the solution.

Otherwise that No 1 pick won't hold a lot of weight. And if I were the GM I would also entertain trade offers for Fields on the very very down low :lol:
You gotta work both sides, high level chess game about to start, lots of smoke and mirrors.
The #1 pick will be a QB, regardless of who holds that pick. The ONLY reason for the bears to not trade down is if they get a huge haul for Fields and want to target 2025 to compete. As said in the other thread, Poles should be fired immediately if any position other than a QB is taken at #1.
The Bears aren't getting a huge haul for Fields. Like someone said earlier, there is a big disconnect between this board and the NFL when it comes to QBs.

People here confuse real life with fantasy a lot of times. Not just this board either. There's people out there who think Lamar is an elite QB. Maybe fantasy wise but not NFL Real life. Fields seems like a good guy but I just don't see him NFL starter. #1 pick I'd absolutely if I was Chicago entertain getting Levis. Not sold on CJ Stroud as I see him and fields Similar.
Similar? Stroud is actually accurate.

Stroud is going to fail like every other OSU QB. Not sure why people rate these guys so highly.
 

JohnnyU

Footballguy
As a Bears fan, this one is tough. I see above, a few posters that didn’t watch him play this year. I am not sure who can fairly put losses on JF’s shoulders. Have you seen the roster, offensive line?

I watched Superman behind that line this year, he was incredible with his legs and almost impossible to evaluate as a passer. I am not sure what he is worth in a trade, but imagine if the Ravens were to pass on Lamar and traded for JF.
I watched a lot of Chicago games, was an investor in Fields thru several FF leagues.
I just don't think he is a pocket passer yet and I wouldn't hesitate to draft another QB if that player appears at the No 1 spot
Chicago owes it to themselves to have the very best possible prospect and arm at QB as they can find. They already whiffed badly on Trubisky, Fields looks promising but I would not say that he automatically takes them off the table to Draft a QB.

And this would be a tough conversation but I also would want Fields to know that even if the Bears commit to him, the likelihood is they want everyone thinking they are picking a QB so they can trade down a couple spots and maximize the talent they can surround Fields with. He's got to understand it's better for the Bears if stories are going around that they want to grab another QB at No 1. That will get the phones ringing and people wanting to trade. Nobody is going to trade up if word on the street is Bears are going Left Tackle at No 1.

If I am the Bears' GM I want to try and operate from a position of strength and not weakness by a perception that everyone thinks we will pass on Quarterback, quite the opposite I would be broadcasting even if I wanted to keep moving forward with Justin Fields. Now the downside is Fields might think we don't want him and start getting a complex but that's why i would sit down with him and explain the next 12-24-36 month plan to him so he feels like he is part of the solution.

Otherwise that No 1 pick won't hold a lot of weight. And if I were the GM I would also entertain trade offers for Fields on the very very down low :lol:
You gotta work both sides, high level chess game about to start, lots of smoke and mirrors.
The #1 pick will be a QB, regardless of who holds that pick. The ONLY reason for the bears to not trade down is if they get a huge haul for Fields and want to target 2025 to compete. As said in the other thread, Poles should be fired immediately if any position other than a QB is taken at #1.
The Bears aren't getting a huge haul for Fields. Like someone said earlier, there is a big disconnect between this board and the NFL when it comes to QBs.

People here confuse real life with fantasy a lot of times. Not just this board either. There's people out there who think Lamar is an elite QB. Maybe fantasy wise but not NFL Real life. Fields seems like a good guy but I just don't see him NFL starter. #1 pick I'd absolutely if I was Chicago entertain getting Levis. Not sold on CJ Stroud as I see him and fields Similar.
Similar? Stroud is actually accurate.

Stroud is going to fail like every other OSU QB. Not sure why people rate these guys so highly.
I'm not sure why people scout the helmet.
 

DJackson10

Footballguy
I think if you want a QB to make it in today's NFL, you need at least 1, and ideally at least 2 good WRs. The Bears barely have 1 right now. Mooney has flashed, but I'd hardly call him the prototypical #1 alpha WR in the NFL. I'd say considering what he's had to work with, Fields had a phenomenal year. Yes, a lot of that success came on his legs, but he does have the tools to be a very good NFL QB IMO.

If you want a QB to make it in Todays NFL it's starts with good coaching and a GM and franchise owner. Then you need a solid Offensive line followed by a a good WR1 and a decent Starting RB. Also have a good TE where you can dump it off too if needed as a security blanket. You got to put the players around these QBs and the coaching staff for them to succeed. Numerious teams have failed. You also get a guy like a Lamar Jackson they are in their prime already because they got an athletic skillset that will deteriorate over time. They also won't develop much as a passer in the NFL. Those types of guys need to be going to the Baltimores etc of the world. Good defenses and great Olines with Good run games. have a few guys to stretch the field and use their arm strength.
 

Anarchy99

Footballguy
I circle back to what I said initially. We have no idea how Fields could be as a passer, as so far he's had very little talent to work with, no time to throw, and mediocre scheming and coaching. Swap out Fields for hot shot rookie phenom QB X without fixing the other issues, and the Bears will be saying the same thing about QB X in two seasons. Put Mahomes on the Bears this season, and do they win 6 games?

As far as Lamar goes, I don't think NFL talent evaluators look at him as more than an average passer, but he's shown he can win (at least in the regular season). That has to count for something. BAL is 45-16 in the regular season when Lamar plays but 9-14 when he doesn't. That may stem from the offense being tailored to Jackson and the backups not being able to run the same types of plays. Hard to tell what the Ravens would look like in a more traditional scheme with a less mobile / more passing friendly QB.

As far as Fields goes, I think he is more accurate passing the ball than people give him credit for. He completed 70% of his passes as a senior. He's been under duress all the time in Chicago, so extending plays and have to throw on the move is not something that QBs can rely on in terms of accuracy. Plus, at that point, plays as called had broken down and both Fields and receivers were ad-libbing a lot of the time.
 

BladeRunner

Footballguy
Spinning off a Mac32 post:

Suppose all 31 teams assume the Bears will draft a QB then what is Fields' trade value?
I'll stick with what I said in that thread. 3 1st round picks. Fields has demonstrated elite game changing ability as a runner, and while passing has been spotty, I think many (most?) other teams would chalk that up to supporting cast more than anything else. Fields still has 2 years left on his rookie deal, with a 3rd option year, and showed clear improvement from 2021 to 2022.

I can see preferring Bryce Young to him, especially if you have an offense set in place, that doesn't ask the QB to leave the pocket so much, but I have a hard time seeing any case for CJ Stroud over Fields. Just nowhere near the upside. Levis is interesting, I'm a Levis fan, and could make a case for him having an even higher ceiling, but his floor is lower for sure. Levis gives me a Herbert vibe, where the tools greatly outweigh the production, and neither had much in the way of help around them. I think people have forgotten Herbert was viewed as a very risky prospect when he was drafted.

The issue the Bears run into, is that if they are looking to deal him, it signals to teams that they are taking a QB, and they won't get that high of a return, as they would for the #1 pick. That, and Fields arguably already being the best Bears QB of the last 30 years, are why I think trading Fields is highly unlikely. They won't get what he's worth, and teams will offer more for the #1 pick.
This is just insanity. QB's need to be able to you know pass the ball, or they won't be around long in the NFL.
Yep!

Tagliova, Hurts, Fields, Lance, Jackson, Murray (I know I'm missing some more) - all running QBs and every single one of them didn't finish the season because of injury due to running.

There is a reason pocket passers like Rodgers, Brees, Brady and a host of others have longevity in the league - and it's because they don't call their own number and flee/run at the first sign of a defensive lineman. There is a reason "running QBs" run - it's because they can't pass. That running costs them extra missing games/seasons EVERY year.

Running QBs are a very expensive short term solution for a position that needs stability for the long term. This running QB fad needs to end. How about we let RBs run the ball and QBs PASS the ball? Y'know, what they're hired for? If your QB is running more than your RB, you have a problem at the QB position, not the RB position.

If I were a GM, Fields wouldn't be worth more than a 3rd or 4th rounder - I want my QBs to know how to pass the ball accurately. Running should supplement that passing ability, not be the primary tool in his toolbox.
 
Last edited:

travdogg

Footballguy
Spinning off a Mac32 post:

Suppose all 31 teams assume the Bears will draft a QB then what is Fields' trade value?
I'll stick with what I said in that thread. 3 1st round picks. Fields has demonstrated elite game changing ability as a runner, and while passing has been spotty, I think many (most?) other teams would chalk that up to supporting cast more than anything else. Fields still has 2 years left on his rookie deal, with a 3rd option year, and showed clear improvement from 2021 to 2022.

I can see preferring Bryce Young to him, especially if you have an offense set in place, that doesn't ask the QB to leave the pocket so much, but I have a hard time seeing any case for CJ Stroud over Fields. Just nowhere near the upside. Levis is interesting, I'm a Levis fan, and could make a case for him having an even higher ceiling, but his floor is lower for sure. Levis gives me a Herbert vibe, where the tools greatly outweigh the production, and neither had much in the way of help around them. I think people have forgotten Herbert was viewed as a very risky prospect when he was drafted.

The issue the Bears run into, is that if they are looking to deal him, it signals to teams that they are taking a QB, and they won't get that high of a return, as they would for the #1 pick. That, and Fields arguably already being the best Bears QB of the last 30 years, are why I think trading Fields is highly unlikely. They won't get what he's worth, and teams will offer more for the #1 pick.
This is just insanity. QB's need to be able to you know pass the ball, or they won't be around long in the NFL.
Yep!

Tagliova, Hurts, Fields, Lance, Jackson, Murray (I know I'm missing some more) - all running QBs and every single one of them didn't finish the season because of injury due to running.

There is a reason pocket passers like Rodgers, Brees, Brady and a host of others have longevity in the league - and it's because they don't call their own number and flee/run at the first sign of a defensive lineman. There is a reason "running QBs" run - it's because they can't pass. That running costs them extra missing games/seasons EVERY year.

Running QBs are a very expensive short term solution for a position that needs stability for the long term. This running QB fad needs to end. How about we let RBs run the ball and QBs PASS the ball? Y'know, what they're hired for? If your QB is running more than your RB, you have a problem at the QB position, not the RB position.

If I were a GM, Fields wouldn't be worth more than a 3rd or 4th rounder - I want my QBs to know how to pass the ball accurately. Running should supplement that passing ability, not be the primary tool in his toolbox.
The first bolded is completely wrong. Lance is the only one who got injured while running. Tua isn't a running QB at all, and the others got hurt being sacked, except Murray who suffered a non-contact injury, and doesn't really count. I would agree that running QBs aren't as stable long-term as pocket passers, but they certainly have value, and aren't a fad. Some of them develop as passers too, like Josh Allen, Lamar Jackson did, and Hurts seems to be getting there. Frankly the second bolded is untrue of any of your earlier examples, except maybe Lance.

Thing is, there are only so many top passers, its not like running QBs are being chosen over passing QBs in general, its another option. There are typically maybe 10 quality pocket passers in the NFL, its not like there are these great passers who are just stuck behind running QBs who can't pass. Any QB who does anything well, is worth a 3rd or 4th. If they are elite at it, like Fields is, they are worth a lot more.

What would be some examples of pocket QBs you would take over the bolded that isn't someone everyone would, like Burrow/Herbert or someone like that? You taking Mac Jones over those guys?
 

DJackson10

Footballguy
Fields 2022 seems a lot like Hurts in 2021. The Eagles brought in pieces to surround Hurts, and it worked out spectacularly well.

It's a big step to go from Hurts 2021 to Hurts 2022, but the Bears would be fools not to try.

The Eagles had a better roster and great players around him already plus some great coaches Bears barely have anything worth while.
 

BladeRunner

Footballguy
Spinning off a Mac32 post:

Suppose all 31 teams assume the Bears will draft a QB then what is Fields' trade value?
I'll stick with what I said in that thread. 3 1st round picks. Fields has demonstrated elite game changing ability as a runner, and while passing has been spotty, I think many (most?) other teams would chalk that up to supporting cast more than anything else. Fields still has 2 years left on his rookie deal, with a 3rd option year, and showed clear improvement from 2021 to 2022.

I can see preferring Bryce Young to him, especially if you have an offense set in place, that doesn't ask the QB to leave the pocket so much, but I have a hard time seeing any case for CJ Stroud over Fields. Just nowhere near the upside. Levis is interesting, I'm a Levis fan, and could make a case for him having an even higher ceiling, but his floor is lower for sure. Levis gives me a Herbert vibe, where the tools greatly outweigh the production, and neither had much in the way of help around them. I think people have forgotten Herbert was viewed as a very risky prospect when he was drafted.

The issue the Bears run into, is that if they are looking to deal him, it signals to teams that they are taking a QB, and they won't get that high of a return, as they would for the #1 pick. That, and Fields arguably already being the best Bears QB of the last 30 years, are why I think trading Fields is highly unlikely. They won't get what he's worth, and teams will offer more for the #1 pick.
This is just insanity. QB's need to be able to you know pass the ball, or they won't be around long in the NFL.
Yep!

Tagliova, Hurts, Fields, Lance, Jackson, Murray (I know I'm missing some more) - all running QBs and every single one of them didn't finish the season because of injury due to running.

There is a reason pocket passers like Rodgers, Brees, Brady and a host of others have longevity in the league - and it's because they don't call their own number and flee/run at the first sign of a defensive lineman. There is a reason "running QBs" run - it's because they can't pass. That running costs them extra missing games/seasons EVERY year.

Running QBs are a very expensive short term solution for a position that needs stability for the long term. This running QB fad needs to end. How about we let RBs run the ball and QBs PASS the ball? Y'know, what they're hired for? If your QB is running more than your RB, you have a problem at the QB position, not the RB position.

If I were a GM, Fields wouldn't be worth more than a 3rd or 4th rounder - I want my QBs to know how to pass the ball accurately. Running should supplement that passing ability, not be the primary tool in his toolbox.
The first bolded is completely wrong. Lance is the only one who got injured while running. Tua isn't a running QB at all, and the others got hurt being sacked, except Murray who suffered a non-contact injury, and doesn't really count. I would agree that running QBs aren't as stable long-term as pocket passers, but they certainly have value, and aren't a fad. Some of them develop as passers too, like Josh Allen, Lamar Jackson did, and Hurts seems to be getting there. Frankly the second bolded is untrue of any of your earlier examples, except maybe Lance.

Thing is, there are only so many top passers, its not like running QBs are being chosen over passing QBs in general, its another option. There are typically maybe 10 quality pocket passers in the NFL, its not like there are these great passers who are just stuck behind running QBs who can't pass. Any QB who does anything well, is worth a 3rd or 4th. If they are elite at it, like Fields is, they are worth a lot more.

What would be some examples of pocket QBs you would take over the bolded that isn't someone everyone would, like Burrow/Herbert or someone like that? You taking Mac Jones over those guys?
So you want me to pick a pocket passer QB but I can't pick any good pocket passer QBs currently playing or have ever played? Wut?
 

DJackson10

Footballguy
Spinning off a Mac32 post:

Suppose all 31 teams assume the Bears will draft a QB then what is Fields' trade value?
I'll stick with what I said in that thread. 3 1st round picks. Fields has demonstrated elite game changing ability as a runner, and while passing has been spotty, I think many (most?) other teams would chalk that up to supporting cast more than anything else. Fields still has 2 years left on his rookie deal, with a 3rd option year, and showed clear improvement from 2021 to 2022.

I can see preferring Bryce Young to him, especially if you have an offense set in place, that doesn't ask the QB to leave the pocket so much, but I have a hard time seeing any case for CJ Stroud over Fields. Just nowhere near the upside. Levis is interesting, I'm a Levis fan, and could make a case for him having an even higher ceiling, but his floor is lower for sure. Levis gives me a Herbert vibe, where the tools greatly outweigh the production, and neither had much in the way of help around them. I think people have forgotten Herbert was viewed as a very risky prospect when he was drafted.

The issue the Bears run into, is that if they are looking to deal him, it signals to teams that they are taking a QB, and they won't get that high of a return, as they would for the #1 pick. That, and Fields arguably already being the best Bears QB of the last 30 years, are why I think trading Fields is highly unlikely. They won't get what he's worth, and teams will offer more for the #1 pick.
This is just insanity. QB's need to be able to you know pass the ball, or they won't be around long in the NFL.
Yep!

Tagliova, Hurts, Fields, Lance, Jackson, Murray (I know I'm missing some more) - all running QBs and every single one of them didn't finish the season because of injury due to running.

There is a reason pocket passers like Rodgers, Brees, Brady and a host of others have longevity in the league - and it's because they don't call their own number and flee/run at the first sign of a defensive lineman. There is a reason "running QBs" run - it's because they can't pass. That running costs them extra missing games/seasons EVERY year.

Running QBs are a very expensive short term solution for a position that needs stability for the long term. This running QB fad needs to end. How about we let RBs run the ball and QBs PASS the ball? Y'know, what they're hired for? If your QB is running more than your RB, you have a problem at the QB position, not the RB position.

If I were a GM, Fields wouldn't be worth more than a 3rd or 4th rounder - I want my QBs to know how to pass the ball accurately. Running should supplement that passing ability, not be the primary tool in his toolbox.
The first bolded is completely wrong. Lance is the only one who got injured while running. Tua isn't a running QB at all, and the others got hurt being sacked, except Murray who suffered a non-contact injury, and doesn't really count. I would agree that running QBs aren't as stable long-term as pocket passers, but they certainly have value, and aren't a fad. Some of them develop as passers too, like Josh Allen, Lamar Jackson did, and Hurts seems to be getting there. Frankly the second bolded is untrue of any of your earlier examples, except maybe Lance.

Thing is, there are only so many top passers, its not like running QBs are being chosen over passing QBs in general, its another option. There are typically maybe 10 quality pocket passers in the NFL, its not like there are these great passers who are just stuck behind running QBs who can't pass. Any QB who does anything well, is worth a 3rd or 4th. If they are elite at it, like Fields is, they are worth a lot more.

What would be some examples of pocket QBs you would take over the bolded that isn't someone everyone would, like Burrow/Herbert or someone like that? You taking Mac Jones over those guys?

The problem is these teams are looking for their Vicks/Cunninghams. There's never going to be a guy like Randall again. He was before his time. Athletes today are much better in all positions. The problem also is you got coaches GMs etc with egos who think if they can fix X guy they will be put in the Hall etc.

My preferred QB Skill wise is a Elway/Young/Rodgers/Big Ben type. Guy who can throw all over the field but if needed can move around in the pocket or even pick up some yards or score a TD here and there with his legs in the RZ. I don't need this gimmicky ******** running the QB when you have a position player paid for that already

I'd take Derrik Carr I think he's underrated and he's had how many HC's since he began? Trevor Lawerence is another. I think Jimmy G is a serviceable option in the right situation.
 

InDitkaWeTrust

Footballguy
It's really interesting how dichotomous the take on Fields is here.
Having watched every Bears game start to finish, I think they need to give Fields the weapons to prove how good of a QB he can be. That said, I think Poles is playing a win/win position by not hitching himself to a particular wagon right now. Feeling out trade offers (and there will be multiples) for the #1 and for Fields is the right way to go. He'll then have to make big boy decisions on which path he chooses. I'm kinda envious and not all at the same time!
 

travdogg

Footballguy
Yep!

Tagliova, Hurts, Fields, Lance, Jackson, Murray (I know I'm missing some more) - all running QBs and every single one of them didn't finish the season because of injury due to running.

There is a reason pocket passers like Rodgers, Brees, Brady and a host of others have longevity in the league - and it's because they don't call their own number and flee/run at the first sign of a defensive lineman. There is a reason "running QBs" run - it's because they can't pass. That running costs them extra missing games/seasons EVERY year.

Running QBs are a very expensive short term solution for a position that needs stability for the long term. This running QB fad needs to end. How about we let RBs run the ball and QBs PASS the ball? Y'know, what they're hired for? If your QB is running more than your RB, you have a problem at the QB position, not the RB position.

If I were a GM, Fields wouldn't be worth more than a 3rd or 4th rounder - I want my QBs to know how to pass the ball accurately. Running should supplement that passing ability, not be the primary tool in his toolbox.
The first bolded is completely wrong. Lance is the only one who got injured while running. Tua isn't a running QB at all, and the others got hurt being sacked, except Murray who suffered a non-contact injury, and doesn't really count. I would agree that running QBs aren't as stable long-term as pocket passers, but they certainly have value, and aren't a fad. Some of them develop as passers too, like Josh Allen, Lamar Jackson did, and Hurts seems to be getting there. Frankly the second bolded is untrue of any of your earlier examples, except maybe Lance.

Thing is, there are only so many top passers, its not like running QBs are being chosen over passing QBs in general, its another option. There are typically maybe 10 quality pocket passers in the NFL, its not like there are these great passers who are just stuck behind running QBs who can't pass. Any QB who does anything well, is worth a 3rd or 4th. If they are elite at it, like Fields is, they are worth a lot more.

What would be some examples of pocket QBs you would take over the bolded that isn't someone everyone would, like Burrow/Herbert or someone like that? You taking Mac Jones over those guys?
So you want me to pick a pocket passer QB but I can't pick any good pocket passer QBs currently playing or have ever played? Wut?
Not at all what I'm saying. I'm saying nobody is arguing any of those guys over Burrow/Herbert.

I'm asking what pocket passers, on a similar level/perception as those running QBs are you taking overt those running QBs? Unless I'm misunderstanding, and you are saying you would prefer any pocket passer QB over those guys, but I'm assuming that isn't what you are saying.

The first bolded is completely wrong. Lance is the only one who got injured while running. Tua isn't a running QB at all, and the others got hurt being sacked, except Murray who suffered a non-contact injury, and doesn't really count. I would agree that running QBs aren't as stable long-term as pocket passers, but they certainly have value, and aren't a fad. Some of them develop as passers too, like Josh Allen, Lamar Jackson did, and Hurts seems to be getting there. Frankly the second bolded is untrue of any of your earlier examples, except maybe Lance.

Thing is, there are only so many top passers, its not like running QBs are being chosen over passing QBs in general, its another option. There are typically maybe 10 quality pocket passers in the NFL, its not like there are these great passers who are just stuck behind running QBs who can't pass. Any QB who does anything well, is worth a 3rd or 4th. If they are elite at it, like Fields is, they are worth a lot more.

What would be some examples of pocket QBs you would take over the bolded that isn't someone everyone would, like Burrow/Herbert or someone like that? You taking Mac Jones over those guys?

The problem is these teams are looking for their Vicks/Cunninghams. There's never going to be a guy like Randall again. He was before his time. Athletes today are much better in all positions. The problem also is you got coaches GMs etc with egos who think if they can fix X guy they will be put in the Hall etc.

My preferred QB Skill wise is a Elway/Young/Rodgers/Big Ben type. Guy who can throw all over the field but if needed can move around in the pocket or even pick up some yards or score a TD here and there with his legs in the RZ. I don't need this gimmicky ******** running the QB when you have a position player paid for that already

I'd take Derrik Carr I think he's underrated and he's had how many HC's since he began? Trevor Lawerence is another. I think Jimmy G is a serviceable option in the right situation.
Obviously, everyone would prefer a HOF QB. Only maybe 3-5 of those a decade though. Trevor Lawrence, I will give you, though he went #1 overall, and that pick probably wasn't going anywhere for pretty much any price.

I'd be curious to see where others land on guys like Carr and Jimmy G. Personally, I'd take all of Lamar, Hurts, Murray, and Fields over Jimmy G. Carr is closer, but I'd still prefer the "runners."
 

Battersbox

Footballguy
I watched 95% of the snaps Fields took over the past 2 years. I don't think he's a good passer, but it's not because he's inaccurate (I'd estimate he's about average when it comes to accuracy). The problem is he doesn't know what he's seeing. I truly believe that. While it's true his supporting cast sucks there have been way too many instances where he didn't see an opportunity or failed to simply throw the ball away before getting sacked. His ability to run/scramble often works against him as he probably thinks he can always make something happen. In his defense, he's an almost inhuman runner, but still even someone of Fields' ability can't make something out of every single play.
It's possible his decision making would improve with an improved cast. Still, I'm not sure he'll ever be an effective pocket passer in the league. And sadly, the speed fades after a couple of years of hits. With all that said, I still think they need to keep Fields rather than trade for the unknown because there is little reason to think any of these new QB's will be any better...it's a crap shoot.
 

Anarchy99

Footballguy
I watched 95% of the snaps Fields took over the past 2 years. I don't think he's a good passer, but it's not because he's inaccurate (I'd estimate he's about average when it comes to accuracy). The problem is he doesn't know what he's seeing. I truly believe that. While it's true his supporting cast sucks there have been way too many instances where he didn't see an opportunity or failed to simply throw the ball away before getting sacked. His ability to run/scramble often works against him as he probably thinks he can always make something happen. In his defense, he's an almost inhuman runner, but still even someone of Fields' ability can't make something out of every single play.
It's possible his decision making would improve with an improved cast. Still, I'm not sure he'll ever be an effective pocket passer in the league. And sadly, the speed fades after a couple of years of hits. With all that said, I still think they need to keep Fields rather than trade for the unknown because there is little reason to think any of these new QB's will be any better...it's a crap shoot.
I saw Fields play a lot for Ohio State. If he has time to throw and has receivers that get separation, he is more than capable as a passer. I agree at the pro level his reads aren't great, but when you are always behind and feel like he have to make plays, you end up holding the ball too long and taking sacks (vs. throwing the ball away). I think with better coaching and more experience, he can do much better with that. I also think with more blocking and some weapons that can get open, he wouldn't be forced to hold the ball and would be more decisive.

In some ways, I think QBs coming out from Alabama and Ohio State have BETTER weapons in college than they do in the NFL. I think it's tougher for them working with average Joe's at receiver at the pro level than a batch of future NFL first rounders in college.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top