BearFan PHX

the Bears cant trade him if they dont own his rights going forward. If you mean trade him before thre 2025 season, then yes they could, but the $25 Million is guaranteed, so the money stays on our cap even if we trade him.

GREAT play by Brisker! Take away the screen and then close on the QB.

Ok, defense, lets show something

no I didnt. I said the IDEA didnt make sense. Youre this really weird combination of bully wanna be and victim. If youre gonna cry every time someone disagrees with you when you say something that doesnt make coherent sense, then as Ive asked, JUST STOP RESPONDING TO ME IF YOU CANT HANDLE IT.

and here we go again you assh*le. Youre all butthurt because you literally dont UNDERSTAND what Im saying. you dont know how to read. you really dont. or youre doing it on purpose. You CAN say you believe in Fields and want to keep him ***OR*** you can say that you want to move on from him, Those are BOTH opinions and you are WELCOME to either of them. You can disagree with me all day long. FINE. What you cant say is "teams find a way to figure out the cap" without saying what that would be. That's just magical thinking. you cant have your cake and eat it too. You cant say you want to wait and see on Fields, NOT pay him, but then keep him like you DID pay him. That's not an opinion. It's just nonsense.

Im not saying its because it will cost you $25M, Im saying it's because it costs you $25M and then you have nothing after that year. JF will not stay in Chicago if we havent extended him with a $40M+ contract before that year. If he doesnt hold out, then he plays that year for $25M and then is a free agent and leaves because we didnt have his back.

no but then youve wasted this opportunity to have the #1 pick. If you "wait and see" and draft a QB in 2025 while paying Fields $25 Mil, then you have to package multiple years' first round picks to move up, and you pay Fields $25 Mil and then he LEAVES, no matter how good he is because you didnt extend him. That's why you need to decide now. $25 isnt a cap killer, its just a waste of a two years for no reason and then then lets say you like him after 2025, well its TOO LATE to keep him because hes a free agent. I laid all these scenarios out in the previous posts. I dont think you actually read them, or if you do you dont understand them, because you dont mention them at all when you rebut? Poles really cant punt this decision, he has to make it one way or the other. You are entitled to your opinion on which way he should go, but you cant pretend that he doesnt need to make a decision.

Ugh, dude, dont go down that road again please. I dont need you telling me "see you can play nice" like Im a child and youre the teacher. THAT isnt playing nice. That is condescending. Stop it. No. I never said that. I have said that there are two legitimate options ahead of Poles. 1) Justin is the man, pay him 2) Justin has not proven he is the man, so you cant pay him without taking a huge risk I am in camp #2, but I dont know what Poles will do. choice #1 makes no sense to me, but I keep saying it IS a coherent option. What isnt coherent is trying to blend these two options into a "wait and see if Fields develops next year" because you have to make the decision by May on the 5th year option. This is part of our problem - you dont understand what I say, put words in my mouth and then get offended by them.

If Poles doesnt already know what he is going to do, they should fire him immediately. Im not trying to be personal, but this is just terribly naive thinking. Also, no. 2025 will be $25 Million guaranteed to Fields. 2026 would be your rookie QB. of course then why did you spend a year paying Fields if youre just gonna dump him? It makes NO sense, youre mixing plans together without understanding the choice Poles has to make by May. Go all the way with Fields, or lose him and go with the rookie. There is no middle way.

They have all identified that their QB is a Super Bowl QB. You gotta read what i wrote, and not just skim it. I said IF you think you have a super Bowl QB then there is an argument for going all the way to that contract. If you think that QB makes the players around him better - throwing lesser receivers open etc. But you've made the opposite argument many times - to put talent around Fields to elevate him. And that's not wrong. But that's not the guy you pay. that's the guy you use the cap money to surround. The opinion part of this is: if you think Fields is already a sure fire Super Bowl winner, then yes that's an opinion, and going all the way with him is a move that makes sense. I think that's crazy to say at this point, but if thats what you think youre entitled to it for sure. But if, instead, you think that youre hoping he'll progress, then paying him is a MISTAKE. an ERROR. That's the point. We can disagree on evaluation of Fields, but we cant disagree that going all in on only a hope, when you have the top draft pick, is GM malpractice. So if youre 100% on Fields, fine, thats a logical position. But if not, then it just isnt.

so you're ready to bet hes the man, bet away the top draft pick, and put $25 Mil on the books for 2025 when you need to sign Brisker and Gordon etc? That is one of the moves you can make. Waiting to see until next years offseason and then having it not work out is MUCH MUCH worse than taking a rookie this year and having that not work out. Remember, you dont get to make the decision at the end of 2025 - by then hes a free agent and can go anywhere. You have to make the long term decision by August 2025. But will we have the draft opportunity we have now? It's a hell of a bet without knowing. I think you think you get more time to wait and see than you do. To me, it's reckless. Too big a bet on too little data. The thing is, the bar is SO low in Chicago. We are the ONLY NFL team that has never had a 4,000 yard passer. I can see why Fields looks so good to you, comparatively. But it is a foolish bet to make at this point. The downside is huge, and the risk the other way is a LOT less. And all on what? Some flashes? Rolling with FIelds is a mistake - because of the cap and draft implications.

amen.

You may be misunderstanding my point. I'm saying with the market the way it is right now, paying a QB the going rate for a second deal with the same team, i.e. top 10 QB money, automatically puts your team into cap hell. You can have that QB, but you cant afford a full team around him. Someone could argue that a Pat Mahomes is worth paying that to, because he can take inferior players and make them superstars by being so good, throwing lesser receivers open etc. Someone else might argue that no QB is worth what that does to your cap, and KC and GB under Rodgers kinda show that to be true. A lot of Mahomes' passes are getting dropped by lesser receivers because they couldnt afford to keep Tyreek Hill. But either way, whether Mahomes is worth it or not, you cant pay a QB that kind of money if you dont already KNOW they are at that Super Bowl winning level. That's how you end up in cap hell with NO WAY OUT of it for years. Like the Cutler 7 year deal. You think maybe after year 3 or 4, they might have thought "Crap, Jay isnt it" and then they had to roll with him for FOUR MORE YEARS because they had no way out? THis has been our story for decades. Stuck in mediocrity. Now, if instead you've argued for putting talent around Fields, then that is the other model of cap management. You get a rookie QB on their rookie deal, and you have tons of cap space to add all kinds of talent around them, and try to win a Super Bowl within the first 4 years. But if you are going into year 4 with a QB on their rookie deal, you have to decide at that point whether you are done with them, or want to roll with them long term. That's when you need to say yes or no to the $25 Mil guaranteed the year after the one coming up now. Now if you say yes, and then find that he isnt the guy after year 4, then youre STUCK with him for year five because of the option, and then after that you have nothing and youre starting over looking for a QB without a guaranteed high first pick to even get a QB. That's how you end up 7-10 every year with no way out other than mortgaging multiple years drafts to move up for a rookie. On the other hand, if you dont pick up the option, you know your QB is gone to free agency after that year, and again you have wasted the 4th year for nothing after that. You may think you can sign him then, but then youve missed the $25 Mil option and gone right to $40+ Mil a year early, so even more cap hell! Plus there's no guarantee that player picks your team since you didnt show you believed in them. And to try to franchise tag a QB? THAT is a certain holdout. On another hand, if you take a rookie and strike out, you probably have a high draft pick again and can take another swing after 2 years, all the while having cap to keep building the roster into a monster. That's why the 5th year option is there and structured the way it is - so teams will have to sh*t or get off the pot after year 3 with first round QBs. That's why the players union have negotiated it: specifically to force this decision. Now Poles did a fantastic job of using our #1 pick last year to punt and get us in this position again were we have had this year 3 to evaluate Fields. And here we are at the end of that. But the question isn't "Did Fields improve? Is he worth riding with one more year to see where he goes?" the question, forced by cap reality is "are you willing to bet your entire cap future right now that Fields is going to be Mahomes level" and another question is "is ANY QB worth that much?" Now of course lesser QBs sign for lesser deals, but no one is building a plan based on paying inferior QBs $20 Mil a year and having them be franchise QBs for the long haul. Like it or not, the decision time is May. And I dont see how anyone can say JF is 100% worth mortgaging our entire future for at this point. Will a rookie be as good as Fields has been? Who knows? But you arent betting the farm on them - THATs the difference. Also, as a PS, Brady always took $10 Mil less than his value so he could have a team around him.

the 5th year option is a guaranteed money, so if you trade or cut Fields, you still owe the $25 Mil against our cap. It doesn't go with Fields to the team that trades for him. This whole thing is structured so that the player and team have to decide if they want a long term deal or not this offseason. That's why its structured like this in the first place. The evaluation year was this year, not next year. Now you have to decide JF is the man and youre on a track to pay him $45Mil a year in 2 years or not.

Well I said that if you think Fields is Mahomes, then you pay him. Im not saying you walk away from a Super Bowl winning QB over the cap. Im saying if youre gonna pay a QB and lose all the other players around him that you cant afford, you'd better be sure he is a Super Bowl winning QB. Im saying that i dont think anyone can say right now, or even at the end of this season that JF is 100% gonna be a Super Bowl winning QB, therefore, you gotta look to replace him, because it's too much of a risk to roll with him if he turns out not to be one?

Well, if you dont pick up his 5th year option, then Fields is a likely holdout this year? Its hard to tell a QB that you have confidence in them if you havent picked up their option? And even if he didnt hold out, Fields would then know he was a free agent at the end of next year, and there'd be no reason to think that he would choose us over a higher bidder. Someone is always willing to overpay. The option for year 5, the 2025 season would be $25 Million, and theres the $7 or whatever you pay him this year. And you dont pick up the option if you intend to cut him or lose him, so you pick up the option because you think he's the guy, and give him an extension somewhere in year 5. And if you do that, your cap is screwed. This is true for any team with a top paid QB. You wouldnt pay him $25 Mil just to cut him a year later, and if that was your plan, thered be no reason to think youd have the draft capital then to land a top pick. Basically, the decision point about whether you want to roll with Justin long term into a big second deal is May of 2024.

Agree on Foreman. I thought he would be the starter game 1. Also, I'm probably the boards' biggest Fields detractor, and I agree he had his best game this past week. Keeping Fields has more parameters than just how Fields plays though. There are serious salary cap implications that i think will cause us to take a QB int he 1st round and move on from Fields, even as he is playing better.

I agree with all of this, but i think it overlooks the most major part of his decision. We generally tend to think in terms of Fields performance, and trade value, and how good the rookies would be, but looming over all of this in the decision is the salary cap. If you keep JF this year, you're gonna pick up his 5th year option in May, and then you cant cut him, so theres no "wait and see how he does" at that point youre committed for 2 years and $30 Million on the salary cap. Signing him to a long term deal will prevent signing the rookie class that has Gordon and Brisker to long term deals. I suppose you could pay him $30 Mil for two years and then cut him, but there is no guarantee that we'd have a top pick to get the QB then. If youre the kind of person who thinks that a decent QB is good enough if you build around him, then with the salary cap implications you pretty much have to move on from Fields. If on the other hand, youre SURe that Fields is a top 5 QB, then you pay him, and whatever it takes. But you see what that's done to Mahomes in KC, and what it did to Rodgers in GB. Theres no $ left for a defense or someone to catch your passes. Brady routinely took $10 Million less a year than his worth in order to keep players around him. But hes the only one that did that as far as I know. So the wait and see on Fields is over. We are at a salary cap moment where we have to be sure now, and i cant see how anyone could be sure right now. So that, more than any other reason is why Fields is likely gone.

true!

yeah, theres some faulty math above, since we all know the best odds of getting a great QB come from early picks. I also agree with your analysis here DABEARS. Justin isnt currently an elite QB. There is risk down every path here. But one thing that is certain is that you need to make a decision on JF's 5th year option right after the draft this year. If you do that, you're committed to Fields including $25 Million for year five. You cant move on from him for two years. That isn't the free one year test drive that people think it is, because you have to guarantee his 5th year before training camp starts this year. We have a lot of young players but if you start looking out to 2025 and 2026, you see that youll be having real cap troubles getting everyone signed if you stay with Fields. And if Fields is Mahomes, then you try to make it work, but you can even see how that's working with the real Mahomes in KC. But yes if he is Mahomes, then you pay him. But if he isnt, youre buying a long term ticket right back to football purgatory where we have lived for decades. On the other hand, if you trade Fields, and draft a rookie, then you have plenty of space to roll with this team going forward and keep adding talent around him. Basically, if you look at the cap going forward, you have to KNOW that Fields is the MAN. If you dont, and I dont think anyone can say they do right now, then the financially smart thing to do is to draft a rookie. This is why Fields' performance in these last games isnt the biggest issue in determining his future here. The salary cap is. Sportwriters talk about talent. Fans talk about loyalty and hope. GMs talk about the salary cap, they understand the pressure of it better than anyone. If 100% of the GMs that responded said trade Fields, I'll bet they were thinking of the cap as much or more than JF's abilities when they said that. And to AZ54's point about QB hungry teams, they might also constitute a market for a Fields trade?

sounds like an easier game than it could have been, and unfortunately, it provides less of a test for our team too. While it's not JF's fault that the Browns' defense and team is depleted, it also removes a chance for him to prove more against a better opponent. He needs all the chances he can get too, because the decision about his future in Chicago doesn't just rest on his performances, but also he's already behind the 8 ball because of the rookie contract window that restarts if you replace him with a rookie, and there's nothing JF can do about that. On the plus side, it helps with this year's playoff quest.

I stand corrected - every little bit helps - thank you Adam

People were calling for it, but i dont think he was fired at the half - that would be epic though.

Raiders spanking the Chargers. both were 5-8 like us, but the raiders had the easier strength of schedule, so this helps us in draft position, and has no effect to our playoff chances either way.

Yeah we may go back and forth on Fields and the coaches, but besides all that, the arrow is pointing straight up for the rest of this team, it's easy to see. The OL, RBs and defense are all stocked. (QB?), FS, OC, DL2, WR2, TE2 - needs that are all fill-able in one offseason given our draft and cap positions. We are division champ contenders next year, and who knows where the ceiling might be then.