'TD'

I'll be happy if they just address it with Moore or McCourty. Last year, I was all about HaHa Dix in the draft, because they didn't get a quality safety in FA. I just hope it doesn't go ignored again.

I think Cutler will be back based on the Clausen signing. I may be over thinking it, but I think he is a solid number 2. I can't see him being signed to compete for the starting job. So either the Bears have an early QB to be drafted in their sights that can start year 1, or Cutler is back.

2 of the only 3 ppl on offense that matter going forward voiced their opinion. Long, Bennett, and Jeffery are the only players on offense/maybe the team, that will be playing in the top couple tiers of their positions in the NFL in a couple years when the Bears have a chance to be good. Marshall's status as a top WR in the league should have bought him a year under the new regime. If Fox and Pace truly found him to be a problem player, they could have cut/traded him next year. They are going on hearsay and most likely pressure from the ownership. The media bandwagon of running Marshall out of town started after his press conference in response to allegations being made about his time with the Dolphins in light of the Ray Rice scandal. Bernstien and Arkush went full steam ahead with it, and jumped at every chance and every incident to solidify their argument that Marshall must go. Other media jumped on this bandwagon as it picked up steam, and it lead to the media's stance that we see now. I am sure ownership's view on him changed after the same event. Those same media sources were saying that in the GM search that it was a prerequisite of the new GM hire that Marshall would have to move on. After the hire, those reports were later recanted, as their was a backlash of ownership having their hand on the team personnel decisions. It was then changed to Pace would have final say on the complete roster. Honestly, I think there are some players that do not like Marshall on the team. I do think it's greatly exaggerated how it's been reported in the media, and trumped up to being most the roster. I also think it is very likely that ownership made it very clear they wanted Marshall gone to Pace, and the move was in response to that. I agree that publicly, it would be highly unlikely for players to speak out against Marshall after the trade. It's just not good for their careers. Long and Bennett did speak out, and being part of the core of the offense for the future, what they said matters to me.

https://twitter.com/Ky1eLong/status/573904700321456128 https://twitter.com/Ky1eLong/status/573904700321456128 I imagine that Jeffery would have to be in there also, considering all the help he has given him among others.

I'm sorry but I disagree on so many different areas. He actually cultivated an atmosphere of winning imo. He organized meeting in the offseason with players and training. The first year he worked with Jeffery in the offseason, Jeffery made the Pro Bowl. Players that matter on the offense have came out in support of Marshall today. He really wasn't bad last year as a player last year. He missed 3 games, played a few games where he was standing there as a decoy basically, and still put up over 700 yards and 8 TDs. I will be surprised if his replacement that is brought in, or the compensation for him will get that in 16 games. You can say that cutting him is a game of chess, but I see it as sacrificing your queen to save pawn. Forte is the most talented player on the team, but will be done after this year. Marshall was the second best by a mile and could have continued to be for years. Due to the Ray Rice problems, accusations dating back to the Dolphins surfaced. The team let him hold a press conference, which was stupid on his part, but even more so for the team allowing it to happen how it did. The guy was just trying to defend his name. He wanted to win, and the team was playing like crap, and he called some guys out on it and told the stupid kicker to shut up. The kicker doesn't need to be running his mouth anyways. A Lions fan was giving him guff on twitter, and he joked about a boxing match to try to promote something he had going. A radio host was trying to bait him pretty hard into saying something stupid, and he got tired of it. The talk of the media was if he could do his Showtime show with his new coach. He jokingly asked if Harbaugh would let him go. His comment on buyer's remorse, was just a comment on the offense and team underachieving as a whole. It wasn't meant to be a shot at Cutler. There is really nothing distracting, or malicious in his actions the warrant trading a top 10 WR in the league for a 5th round pick. It is good they got "something" for him, if they were going to cut him anyway. There's just absolutely nothing positive about cutting him in the first place, except maybe a happier overpaid kicker. A kicker that threw his own coaches under the bus before the season was over.

I didn't think you was. I caught that I said the wrong age right before you posted. I just never went back and changed it. And I wanted to clarify that I was talking about 34-35, not 36-37. I think Tiki was around 30 when he retired, which is about normal for a RB. I could see Marshall wanting to pursue that too. I would too if I had to play for the Jets. I'm not sure Showtime is as a big jumping off point. I think it would have to be ESPN or others showing interest.

I wasn't really impressed with his experience or resume. The only think I liked about it was that he wasn't Ballard. I really liked the Fox hire and the staff Fox assembled. I really hate the Marshall trade. I want to see how he handles free agency, the draft, and the Cutler situation. They will be major factors on my interest in the team going forward and my opinion of him as a GM.

He's been stuck with Cutler as his QB every year, except when he played for a very poorly talented Dolphins team. Edit: I forgot about the year with Orton, my bad

The age thing was my bad. I had 31 to start out with, then looked again and saw 30 and his bday this month. I think he will be good until he is atleast 34 or 35. That's why I said 5 or 6 years. I guess it's 4 or 5 years, as I was off on the age (31, 32, 33, 34 and/or 35.) I think his style of play is more dependent on his size and savviness than speed. I think he is more talented than most all of the WR's you listed and style will let him do that. His numbers may suck because of right now Geno Smith is his QB, but I think he will have the ability to play at that high level.

There's a few things that upsets me on multiple levels. It is hard to find someone of his caliber talent, the apparent meddling of the ownership, and the poor compensation in return. I could make a wall of text on those or other things. This team can just be frustrating as a fan.

Age- He just turned 30 and could realistically play at a high level for 5 or 6 years. Injury- He played extremely well with the Bears prior to this one year that he played through injuries Erratic behavior- Who cares? A lot of his erratic behavior this year has been taken out of context, and not as bad as it is portrayed to be.

Plus, don't forget he all the work he put into helping Jeffery develop. He was the first guy to meet Kyle Long and the godfather to Bennett's kid. This trade may cause more locker room problems than keeping Marshall would have. Marshall just turned 30, and has another 4 good years left in him and had a friendly cap number. I just don't get it. Had to be ownership.

Yep, just another gaping hole added to the Swiss cheese that is this team.

I see no positives in the move. I can't see the move being made without ownership butting their nose in. I don't like his past, but he's a hell of a player and was a good Bear. I just hope they follow suit, and make other moves that are needed.

I liked the be negative blood thing

If it was just age, talent, and Cutler's contract alone, then I would make the trade in a heart beat. The 2 major problems with Bradford is the injuries and it's the last year of his deal. The Bears can't really redo his contract with a trade to secure more years, because his body may not hold up, and if they don't he could walk away after next year or demand the ever growing QB franchise tag. I still think Cutler could pull some decent trade value, so I'd like the Bears to do some extensive research in Bradford's health before pulling the trigger.

I don't understand the bad contract part. He's paid under his production/talent level. He had an off year last year, but he was injured and played hurt last year. The guaranteed money this year isn't a problem if you plan to keep him or trade him.

No team has had that in the salary cap era. You just asked for a good to excellent player at every position on offense and a top 12 defense for 3 years in a row, not to mention coaches in each phase, to polish a turd QB.

Damn, and I wanted to see the ageless Fred Jackson play another year.

If you had to cut him after converting money, it will be bigger than $1 million cap hit. The rest of that $6 million would come due, along with the rest of the $5 million from last year, plus whatever is guaranteed. The June first designation could help move that around some. The offset clause in his contract may also help with that, but the details on it is foggy. Was the wording just for the first year, or does it carry on through the remainder of the contract? I don't know, I haven't seen anything in depth on it. It just ties to team to him more.

He'll be 30 next month. I don't see him improving at his age, and his only asset(speed) goes with age.

How Urlacher was treated sent some repercussions through the team. A new regime came in and let him go like it was nothing. Briggs was expecting to not come back due to this. I'm sure Forte is wondering the same. Even if it isn't Emery making the decisions.

There's a lot of attractive free agents available. Jeffery is on the last year of his deal and Long has outplayed his. They could be offered front loaded contracts to eat up space, and free up space for later years.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/footb...0218-story.html Ok, there's the story. I didn't see the June part in there, but the offset clause running through out his next contract is amazing. Of course he could sign some where for one year and the vet minimum, but likely the Bears could recoup all that money if he is cut. If that language is in the contract, it would both give the Bears leverage for a renegotiation of his contract if they wanted, and would ultimately make him much easier to trade. A team that traded for him would be on the hook for that 10 million that kicks in for 2016, but the they should be able to recoup it if they cut him after this year from the next team.

I think whomever was talking on the SCORE or the listener was wrong. I think they may have confused two things that have been known, and jumbled them together. It came out in December that Cutler has an offset clause. As far as I know, Cutler's 2015 salary would be offset by his 2015 salary with a new team. Possibly only the league minimum, as their would be no reason to ask for more from his new team. The Bears are on the hook for this year's salary unless he is traded. (not his whole new contract) The other thing is, that he can be given the the June 1st designation before being cut this year. That will push most of his dead money (from the contract being converted to bonus last year) into the 2016 season, and the Bears can save money against the cap that way. (just applies to his dead money from the conversion last year, still would have to be cut by march 13th) I think those 2 (as far as I know) facts got combined, into this new scenario.