'TD'

PPL have been blaming Cutler's interceptions on different things for 10 years. I really think it goes back to him an odd fella and saying things to the media that ownership/management didn't like. He called cutler out for being a bad QB atleast once that I can remember, maybe more times. I imagine they didn't get a long. He missed a game and said he didn't watch it. He wanted another big contract and didn't get it. Only thing he has to do is show up and give his best and he did last year. It wasn't great but his ribs and other things were bothering him last year and he still tried to play.

I think that a TE that can block and pass is a luxury. In that aspect I guess he is expendable, but not really replaceable.

I hate it, but better than I thought they would get. Losing a top 10 WR, top 5 TE, and top 5 running back in a year is rough. I guess it is expected in a rebuilding period, but I don't like the reasons any of them left the team.

I don't want a OT in the 11th pick. QB I only want in the first. I think any other round is a waste of a pick. I'd also like to see a kick returner in the 5-6th round

I'm not sure how this works, but add me to th -OT group and + QB only there

He reminds me of Peyton in how he prepares every year. He always protects himself, and the team has some what by getting other RB's for the harder yards. I could see him going another 4 years and being effective like Fred Jackson. I wouldn't have wanted to see the team lean on that, but I could see him pushing out another year or 2 of very high production. He's a really underapreciated Bear. While the RB position has been devalued, he stands out evey year, and stands out among the best in the league every year. Hall of Famer in my opinion still in his prime.

Forte broke the record for receptions in a season that Cutler lead the league in turn overs 2 years ago. You really can't go by YPA with him because he contributes so much more. Especially this past year when Fox wanted to run more. Cutler was limited on what he could do and the running game suffered, had injuries to the line that is directly dependant on a RB's production in the running game and so on. Bennett is the same, you can't judge by his production on the field. He's a complete TE and contributes a lot through his blocking. I hope Miller can step it up and be there, but we will see. Bushrod we disagree on, maybe it's because his name makes me laugh. I'm not sleeping on white, I hope he can step up and be great. I didn't like the pick when it happened few a reasons independent of Marshall. I didn't like the pick because we lost Marshall and the pick was reactive to that. And the devastating injury he had, I think could take away from the things that made him an effective WR in college. That's not devil's advocate, just my opinion.

I'm not a fan of Pace, but it's a serious devil's advocate from me. I think that signing good young players will be good for the future is a lot better than last year. That's why I limited it to now, instead of the future. The future, Forte will be gone, and I am a huge fan of Langford. Bennett is Better than anything we have or will have. It's just more stupid bs like Marshall. I agree with your rome comment. That was why I was playing devil's advocate on the now. I know this team is rebuilding, others say they can compete now and said it prior to free agency.

To play devil's advocate, there really isn't a position that is one or two positions of need this offseason, as basically every position is in need. There's really not a high impact player signed(not that there was one to be had). I like the signings in general and we will see how it works out. For the team next year, I see it as a loss still for this year, but something to be happy about. We lost Forte(top 5 RB still), going to lose Bennet ( top 3 TE still), and lost Bushrod that is better than his replacement. We have gained ILB's (not "that important") a questionable T in the passing game, and Hicks a rotational player on a good line. The defense got better, the offense got worse. The best player on the team left. I don't see much improvement in the short term, once again, playing devil's advocate.

Hopefully next year there will be some better secondary to fill holes. It's been so long since we saw Mike Brown tearing it up. They definitely build inside on D this year.

Using one of the top is part of my point. If you have a top QB, you are competitive every year. A top 10 QB will allow your team to be competitive year in and year out. You find those QB's early in the draft or you get really lucky and one emerges. Big Ben, Tom Brady, Aaron Rodgers, Drew Brees, Andrew Luck, and so on, you plug them into the KC Chiefs instead of Alex Smith(using him as an example of average talent QB) and the team is automatically a lot better. I'm was making my point without arguing Cutler, but you mentioned him and I think you support my idea when you do. You say Cutler just had his best over all season. His best season was 16th in QB rating, 19th in yard and TDs. He's had 10 years in the league, and average to below average is his best in your opinion(based on what you called his best year). He's going to be 33 in a couple weeks. The team is rebuilding, and on paper they look a little better this year. He is going to need replaced due his age soonanyways, whether you think he is a good QB or not. If this team is getting better, we won't see them this close to getting a top QB anytime soon.

To sum it up, if we can get Phillip Rivers part 2, it's going to be that much easier to piece together the rest of the team to be competitive every year. His team hasn't done that effectively, but when they do they are right there. That has such a substantial impact compared to every position, that they are irrelevant outside of our opinion of the bpa at their position.

I couldn't disagree more. Projects don't work at QB. For every Brady you have dozens to hundreds that don't work out. Your later picks should be for starters hopefully, depth atleast, and someone that will contribute to your team. I'd also argue that BPA doesn't apply to QB. To go to an extreme, the next legendary kicker has 0 value compared to an average QB. The price that QB's get paid are reflective of that. If you want to be comeptive for the next 10 years, you need a QB. The only other option is to build a team where you have to be near the top and every year be able to replace the multiple other pieces you lose. We see it every year multiple times with Aaron Rodgers. Their defense is usually pretty bad. They lost Jordy Nelson this year and still competitive. While you may not be the best at your position in the draft according to the big heads, that doesn't apply to value you bring to a team over the next 10-15 years.

I am not big on the idea of a RB, but if he can be as good or better than Forte for the next 10 years then go for it. I really got burnt bad on my support of Bensen, so I don't want a first round RB, but I would be OK with it, because of who he is. I really like Langford and the way he runs. I simply view QB different. I wouldn't see it as a lost year, but a year of adjusting that any QB will need coming into the league due to the big contrast of the college and pro games. If the Bears are really not that far away as you think, then it's best to get a QB now before they are drafting too late to get a top prospect. I'm a firm believer that if you aren't drafting one of the top QB prospects, one they personally believe in, then don't draft one at all. QB's picked any later are a lot more likely to fail, and a pick is being used that could be a starter or depth at other positions and be a contributor to the team.

Glad to see him back and hope he stays a WR.

Why would a QB worry you? The Bears are in a prime position to get one to groom for the future.

One place reports it at 3 years $12 million, half guaranteed. That's not a bad contract at all.

I'm not going to pretend to know anything about this guy, but it's good to see they are filling holes through free agency. The team is rebuilding. If they just depended on the draft to fill needs would limit their options. I'm also glad they aren't trying to force a quick turn around by handing out huge contracts left and right.

Did he really want to be a Packer? How smart is it to say that in Chicago?

I would just be happy for some road warrior action

I disagree on a couple things. I will start with last first, I don't think moving on is what made the roster old. It was just flat out bad drafting for a very long amount of time. The team had no one to move on too. The only way they could have moved on was through free agency, and while younger it is usually average talent at best. The other thing I disagree on is whether Cutler's contract was good or bad based on your opinion of him. Granted, that may effect our view as fans, but as a contract I think the structure was just bad. You can debate the amount he was paid due to talent, but the structure of it was very prohibitive and locked him in to the team for 3 years without a chance to option out. Structurally, compared to Osweiler's contract, I dont think Brock's contract makes Cutler's look good in comparison which is where the conversation started. The cap has risen a lot. Houston has more freedom to move on quickly, and the pay per year is comparable, with Brock being much younger and his team having the flexibility to move on easier and less guaranteed money.

There is 13 million dead cap if he is cut now. I don't see him cut in any situation right now, but maybe next year but still likely traded for a late pick if he is here then. If he is traded, there is only 3 million in dead cap. The team that trades for him assumes the 10 million guaranteed for this year. The 3 million is a roll over from where emery converted his money into a signing bonus over 5 years. Edit: From my understanding, after this year the guaranteed money is done. I know for a fact, the 10 million for this year was guaranteed last year once like the 10th or 13th hit or something of march.

No I am not and yes I am. Who we should have grabbed or shouldn't isn't really important because it was speculation. Personally, I would have took advantage of the second highest scoring offense in the league the year it was made and franchised him. Tried to find a deal and start finding the Bears future QB, the Bears had an adequate stop gap while the Bears went to find a QB. Inevitably, the Bears would have been in a rebuilding situation like they are now due to past missmanagment of the roster. I'm also saying it isn't a a good deal not. I just wasn't going to argue the pay vs. production and talent because above average QB's gets paid today. That is only because an argument over talent could distract the conversation from my point. The argument of how good of a QB Cutler is goes from top 5 to bottom 5, depending on who you talk to and that has nothing to do with the contract. He's finally entered a situation where we are not guaranteeing money 2 years ahead of time, and he can be cut. Pay, I would argue that that over 18 million that is left on his contract average is bad given his age and past. The reason I say it is reasonable is because he can moved on from with little penalty now from my memory of his contract. 1.) He had no reason to be locked up long term to start out with, which adds to the bad contract. He was coming off a career part of a year that he didn't finish and was out produced by a journeyman QB. The Bears gave a large contract based on half a seasons performance and inspite of a past history. A Franchise tag, and possible trade or letting him earn a contract would have been the appropriate move. This isn't revisionist theory on my part, it was my opinion of the deal at the time. 2.) Since he had the contract, he had the most turn overs in the league one year and lead a team to 6 wins the next year. What was that 13 wins all together for the 48 million he has collected so far. That's a bad deal. The only reason I say it is reasonable now is because he could be traded this year. He could be cut next year. He is still getting paid at an above average pay, and the first part of the contract have gave the Bears nothing, while keeping them locked into him as QB for multiple years due to bad terms of the agreement. I guarantee that last year, Fox and Pace would have cut him if they could. They made it obvious they wanted to move him and his production(having the most turnovers in the league) and contract prevented them from moving him last year. Now 2 years later, when the Cap has raised double than his salary, he is still in the middle of the pact in pay. The bears are not getting dividends from signing him early based on where he lies in that pack. His pay starts to ascend back up, but least he can be cut. That is the onlything good about his contract, we can get rid of him.

It's a very friendly contract now, given the market and the ability to trade this year or cut/trade in the future. However, it was a very bad deal when it signed, and my opinion of that isn't changed by the current market. Below subpar TE's and RB's are making 6 million a year or so, but doesn't make me feel better about Brandon Manumaleuna and Chester Taylor's contracts in the past.

Laurence Holmes Retweeted Pro Football Focus ‏@PFF 7h7 hours ago Tracy Porter resigns with the Bears. He allowed a passer rating of 107.2 when quarterbacks targeted his coverage. https://twitter.com/PFF/status/707701244140371968?lang=en Holmes retweeted that earlier. I am not big on PFF and don't know if that is their stat or an actual stat, or for one year or his career.