adam

Let me try this one. Glennon and Trubisky are both relative unknowns, and we knew what we had in Cutler. Glennon is making more than Cutler this year and is not "better" than Cutler. Trubisky has the potential to be the best of all 3 of them, but we can't make that assessment today. As of today, Cutler is probably the best of the 3. However, I am ok with the route Pace took. He cut ties with Cutler, which had to be done, and brought in Glennon as a bridge and potentially insurance in the event that Trubisky does not pan out or needs more time.

I believe he was saying, based on the other teams that had a QB need, none had the ammo to move up to #2 without giving their entire draft. We really were the only team and sort of bet against ourselves. Now at the end of the day, we didn't give up too much to move up one slot (and actually won the trade based on the draft value chart), but we probably could've gotten Trubisky at #3 without the need to give up picks.

Another option is to expand to a 12-team league. We only had a 10-team league due to interest.

Ary is the commish and I believe it was $25. It is a Keeper League, and we will have to see how many GM's are returning this year.

It is about that time to set a draft date and get the pay details squared away for this season. Also, any GM's not participating this year? Can we get a roll call? I'm in.

Glennon could also be a trading chip at the deadline or after the season.

Miami's O-Line ranked in the mid-20's, which spells doom for Cutler. He doesn't do well against pressure.

Ok fine, defense was horrible, but look at Cutler's numbers vs McCown's numbers in 2013; they are a really good comparison with basically the same team. Also, the year we hosted the NFCC, we had one of the best defenses in the league, so he has had the full gamut of teams. 2013: Cutler 19 TD, 12 INT, 7.4 Y/A McCown 13 TD, 1 INT, 8.2 Y/A The TD/INT says it all, and per attempt, McCown was better. Then you can fast forward to 2016 and Hoyer does the same thing, Cutler 4/5 and Hoyer 6/0. What I find interesting is how most of the national media (who hated Cutler) (and didn't like him on the Bears), loves him and finds him a perfect fit in Miami (some say better than Tannehill). Have you looked at their Offensive Line? It is hard to say it is better than ours from last year and he was sacked 17 times in his couple of games. I just feel like he is going to start our great with an easy schedule (TB, LAC, NYJ, NO) and potentially start 4-0, then lose 5 out of their next 6 and at some point he gets hurt. They go into the bye 5-5 and would be lucky to finish at 7-9 with 2x against NE, BUF, one against KC and DEN. I hope he works out and plays decent, but it would be tough to see him light it up after never living up to expectations here.

#1 (2013-2014) Jeffery, Marshall, Forte, and Bennett vs #2 (2017) Landry, Parker, Ajayi, and Thomas, who you got? I don't think it is even close. Cutler was 10-16 between 2013-14 with those skill position players.

I blame the CBA. The teams should be allowed more time prior to this point in the offseason for things like this.

or something about him throwing off his back foot

In the Division.

Coming up? Rookies reported today, that's why he signed. He said he wouldn't miss any time, so I am glad he is a man of his word.

Odds seem low for a team with such a bad record last year. Those odds make it like we have an even shot at the playoffs as NYG, WAS, PHI, ARZ, LAR, SF, DET, MIN, TB, NO, CAR (non-Division winners last year).

Trubisky's agent is the same as Mariota and Wentz and the problems are related to offset language. It will really suck if he misses any part of training camp. For all we did to get him, he needs to be in camp. http://www.csnchicago.com/chicago-bears/bo...t-training-camp

The money is locked in, so the agents had to figure out other things to negotiate, like guarantees, offset language, and upfront money. These are where the sticking points occur, because teams have a set way that they do business and that doesn't always align to an agent's agenda.

They add up their scores and give a cumulative grade for each unit, so because Long, Whitehair and Sitton were so high, we could have replacements OT's and we would still be top 5. The problem is, LT is probably the most important spot on the line, so it needs to be weighted. I think we are probably a top 12 unit which is still good enough.

Probably for added security and to project attendance prior to the event. The most annoying part is you can't place an order for multiple days, but you can choose up to 50 tickets.

Check this out from Football Outsiders: http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stat-anal...sted-games-lost We had the highest "adjusted games lost" since 2000, with 12 players that each had 6 or more AGL, wow. We missed more games than the 5 teams with the least amount of time missed combined. Also, we have the most time missed over the last two years (2015 and 2016 combined) as well. A little extra analysis using the numbers. On average, we have missed the most games of any team over the last 3 years. Interestingly enough, the top 5 teams in the last 3 years with the most games lost to injury all have losing records over that period as well. So even if you can overcome one bad year, it looks like it can be cumulative (one year impacts another). 2016 CHI - 155.1 (3-13) SD - 127.8 (5-11) MIN - 120.6 (8-8) NYJ - 110.5 (5-11) WAS - 101.5 (8-7-1) 2015 NYG - 138.7 (6-10) WAS - 119.1 (9-7) BAL - 96.1 (5-11) NE - 93.3 (12-4) CHI - 92.8 (6-10) 2-yr AVG 1. CHI - 124.0 2. WAS - 110.3 3. SD - 108.2 4. NYG - 95.6 5. SF - 90.7 2014 NYG - 137.1 (6-10) SD - 119.1 (9-7) IND - 104.7 (11-5) OAK - 103.6 (3-13) SF - 101.8 (8-8) CHI - 101.6 (5-11) 3-yr AVG 1. CHI - 116.5 (14-34) 2. SD - 111.8 (18-30) 3. NYG - 109.4 (23-25) 4. WAS - 103.4 (21-26-1) 5. SF - 94.4 (15-33) The Giants offer us a ray of hope. When injuries have piled up, they have had losing records of 6-10, but when healthy (in 2016 with only 52 AGL) they went 11-5 with virtually the same team. BAL improved by 3 games, and OAK by 4 games the year following an injury-riddled year. So we have the potential for a 3-4 game bump by just getting healthy. That coupled with actual more talent on the field could yield 4-5 wins from last year. Maybe we look at OAK as an example, they went 3-13 with a ton of injuries in 2014, then 7-9, followed by a 12-4 season which was only derailed by an injury (to Carr).

It should and hopefully it will improve his "vision"

This makes absolutely no sense. They are projecting a projection? To me, every win would have almost equal value, because if we didn't have 8-9 wins going into Week 17, the Minnesota game would mean nothing. Just look at their first comment or game; so DAL vs NYG in Week 1 is going to shift playoff chances for both teams by 24-25%? So more than half of the Giants season's playoff chances comes down to Week 1? Come on, this is beyond ridiculous. So I can see weighting the games based on Division, Conference, and home and away with each situation weighted slightly different, but this is silly. Now to answer your question, yes 11%, I think it is more like 25%, but at this point I can understand the low assessment.

Wow, hard to be more subjective than to have an opinion of an opinion. Of course other NFL Executives don't like what the Bears did, because it went against conventional wisdom. How can KC have a better grade than the Bears by giving up 2 1st's for Mahomes? The Packers with the 2nd best offseason, wtf ever. This is complete and utter garbage. I didn't realize this was a link to ESPN, which explains the ridiculousness of the article.

With Meredith's injury and White's injury history, if Decker is cleared healthy, then I would do it. He played 3 years with Fox, so there is that connection as well.

Not bad but Howard without a reception? Also, no other RB other than Cohen with one? You would have to scale those numbers back even more to account for the RB's. Also, I can't see White having less than 10 yards per catch. That would be bad. So other than White and the lack of RB's in the totals (meaning that the 370-3700 would have to be reduced if you weren't including RBs.

I figure between 360 and 380, on average about 23 a game.