bradjock Posted March 24, 2017 Report Share Posted March 24, 2017 As per multiple sources. One year deal. Considering none of the quarterbacks in the draft are ready to play now--I think this means we'll draft a guy in round 2 or 3 and we have no intention of playing him this year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dawhizz Posted March 24, 2017 Report Share Posted March 24, 2017 The only QB on the roster besides Glennon is Conner ashes, who has played in one NFL game and is coming off a major injury. Let's not pretend this is anything other than what it is: competition. I would think (hope) this doesn't change the draft strategy one bit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stinger226 Posted March 24, 2017 Report Share Posted March 24, 2017 The only QB on the roster besides Glennon is Conner ashes, who has played in one NFL game and is coming off a major injury. Let's not pretend this is anything other than what it is: competition. I would think (hope) this doesn't change the draft strategy one bit. I dont think it has anything to do with the draft. If they view any of top three as a Franchise QB there going to take him at 3, if not then a prospect in the third or fourth round Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bradjock Posted March 24, 2017 Author Report Share Posted March 24, 2017 I dont think it has anything to do with the draft. If they view any of top three as a Franchise QB there going to take him at 3, if not then a prospect in the third or fourth round The thing is--this is a team that has sucked for so long that it needs to start winning now. The best players available at #3 who can be immediate difference makers are defensive players. If we draft a QB at #3--there will be immediate pressure to play him. It doesn't get much easier than drafting at #3. You have a big board. You have a top 3. IMO it's real safe to assume a QB ain't near the top 3. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madlithuanian Posted March 24, 2017 Report Share Posted March 24, 2017 I just don't like it... As per multiple sources. One year deal. Considering none of the quarterbacks in the draft are ready to play now--I think this means we'll draft a guy in round 2 or 3 and we have no intention of playing him this year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ASHKUM BEAR Posted March 24, 2017 Report Share Posted March 24, 2017 The thing is--this is a team that has sucked for so long that it needs to start winning now. The best players available at #3 who can be immediate difference makers are defensive players. If we draft a QB at #3--there will be immediate pressure to play him. It doesn't get much easier than drafting at #3. You have a big board. You have a top 3. IMO it's real safe to assume a QB ain't near the top 3. Unfortunately this isn't the year. If they are lucky, one of the top 3 is available with the 2nd RD pick but doubtful. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Connorbear Posted March 24, 2017 Report Share Posted March 24, 2017 I have no issues with this signing. I believe this shows the Bears staff does not like any of the QB options in the draft. Glennon is essentially on a 1-year deal. Sanchez will be his veteran backup and Shaw will be the developmental QB. If Glennon doesn't work out this year, they will go back to square one next year. Peace Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaskan Grizzly Posted March 24, 2017 Report Share Posted March 24, 2017 The only QB on the roster besides Glennon is Conner ashes, who has played in one NFL game and is coming off a major injury. Let's not pretend this is anything other than what it is: competition. I would think (hope) this doesn't change the draft strategy one bit. I'm with him. ^^ There's one other QB I like less than Jay and he's now on the team. Talk about 'subtraction by subtraction'. At least there's a funny or two to go with it: https://mobile.twitter.com/AllbrightNFL/sta...%7Ctwgr%5Etweet Butt fumble Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ASHKUM BEAR Posted March 24, 2017 Report Share Posted March 24, 2017 I have no issues with this signing. I believe this shows the Bears staff does not like any of the QB options in the draft. Glennon is essentially on a 1-year deal. Sanchez will be his veteran backup and Shaw will be the developmental QB. If Glennon doesn't work out this year, they will go back to square one next year. Peace I don't think they dislike the QBs in this class, just not going to over draft one. Even a top 5 candidate would take time to adjust and not be ready the first portion of the season. Shaw is coming off a broken leg and may not be ready also. Sanchez is insurance/depth and if the rookie catches on right away then he is cut. They will take one between rounds 2-4 imo, we may get lucky and have Kizer, Watson, or Mahomes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stinger226 Posted March 24, 2017 Report Share Posted March 24, 2017 I don't think they dislike the QBs in this class, just not going to over draft one. Even a top 5 candidate would take time to adjust and not be ready the first portion of the season. Shaw is coming off a broken leg and may not be ready also. Sanchez is insurance/depth and if the rookie catches on right away then he is cut. They will take one between rounds 2-4 imo, we may get lucky and have Kizer, Watson, or Mahomes. I think its clear Pace does not believe in over paying and over drafting, so that is why we will not draft a QB at 3 or probably in the second. No matter what happens this year Paces job is not in jeopardy , Fox is another story. Pace will draft BPA PERIOD. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adam Posted March 24, 2017 Report Share Posted March 24, 2017 Sanchez is a pretty solid backup at this point in his career (I can't believe he is already 30). If you take away his name and just look at his numbers, he is a serviceable QB with a winning record. That is hard to do in the NFL. He has a better winning pct than Cutler, Cousins, Cassel, Kaepernick, Bortles, Tannehill, and Bradford. Just think, he is now the winningest QB on the roster with 37 career wins. That is more than Glennon+Shaw+Hoyer+Barkley combined. So I don't know how this makes us worse. If anything, we added some veteran presence to the QB room. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaskan Grizzly Posted March 24, 2017 Report Share Posted March 24, 2017 Sanchez is a pretty solid backup at this point in his career (I can't believe he is already 30). If you take away his name and just look at his numbers, he is a serviceable QB with a winning record. That is hard to do in the NFL. He has a better winning pct than Cutler, Cousins, Cassel, Kaepernick, Bortles, Tannehill, and Bradford. Just think, he is now the winningest QB on the roster with 37 career wins. That is more than Glennon+Shaw+Hoyer+Barkley combined. So I don't know how this makes us worse. If anything, we added some veteran presence to the QB room. The last time he played anywhere near 16 games it was 2012 (played 15) while with the Jets and he threw for 13 TDs and 18 INTs. That rivals Jays #s. Last season he played in all of two games for Dallas (preseason I believe) and threw 0 TDs and 2 INTs. His overall TD to INT rate? 68 to 68. Yeah, as Charlie Sheen would say; "winning". Yeah, "winningest" QB on the roster instills all sorts of confidence in me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scs787 Posted March 24, 2017 Report Share Posted March 24, 2017 This move comes right after Kizers pro day, and days after Watson and Trubiskis. Coincidence? I don't think so. I would be shocked if one of those 3 are Bears next year. I doubt Mahomes is the pick either simply due to the Cutler comps. I think we trade up from the 3rd into the late 2nd just to make sure we get Peterman. Starting to like Kaaya a bit more too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adam Posted March 24, 2017 Report Share Posted March 24, 2017 The last time he played anywhere near 16 games it was 2012 (played 15) while with the Jets and he threw for 13 TDs and 18 INTs. That rivals Jays #s. Last season he played in all of two games for Dallas (preseason I believe) and threw 0 TDs and 2 INTs. His overall TD to INT rate? 68 to 68. Yeah, as Charlie Sheen would say; "winning". Yeah, "winningest" QB on the roster instills all sorts of confidence in me. I know, but he is a backup, so it is good to have some experience at that position in the locker room, even for Glennon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted March 24, 2017 Report Share Posted March 24, 2017 The thing is--this is a team that has sucked for so long that it needs to start winning now. The best players available at #3 who can be immediate difference makers are defensive players. If we draft a QB at #3--there will be immediate pressure to play him. It doesn't get much easier than drafting at #3. You have a big board. You have a top 3. IMO it's real safe to assume a QB ain't near the top 3. EXACTLY. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted March 24, 2017 Report Share Posted March 24, 2017 This move comes right after Kizers pro day, and days after Watson and Trubiskis. Coincidence? I don't think so. I would be shocked if one of those 3 are Bears next year. I doubt Mahomes is the pick either simply due to the Cutler comps. I think we trade up from the 3rd into the late 2nd just to make sure we get Peterman. Starting to like Kaaya a bit more too. I don't think it's a coincidence either. However, if Watson or Kizer are there in the 2nd round, I don't see how the Bears pass. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AZ54 Posted March 24, 2017 Report Share Posted March 24, 2017 This sucks. http://www.chicagobears.com/news/article-1...c4-a8bc949aa82f Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaskan Grizzly Posted March 24, 2017 Report Share Posted March 24, 2017 I know, but he is a backup, so it is good to have some experience at that position in the locker room, even for Glennon. Why bother? Cutler had the same experience, both at being in the locker room and throwing INTs. Where has that gotten us? And FWIW, i don't think there is any coincidences to be drawn, positive or negative, with all the QB visits. We all know how semi-secretive Pace has been in the past. All the cards are still in play. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted March 24, 2017 Report Share Posted March 24, 2017 Why bother? Cutler had the same experience, both at being in the locker room and throwing INTs. Where has that gotten us? And FWIW, i don't think there is any coincidences to be drawn, positive or negative, with all the QB visits. We all know how semi-secretive Pace has been in the past. All the cards are still in play. I would be completely shocked if Pace is even considering a QB at #3 at this point. With Glennon and Sanchez, he's basically saying, "We'll see what these guys can do for a year, and we'll draft for value elsewhere. If that doesn't work, the team should be better overall and I can then look a little harder at the next crop of QBs." If Pace had a massive woody about any of the rookies, he likely wouldn't have signed Sanchez. I don't think the Bears have ever simultaneously carried four QBs. If they draft one that would mean Shaw is likely gone. You don't spend a high draft pick on a guy who is essentially going to be the third QB on the depth chart. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucky Luciano Posted March 24, 2017 Report Share Posted March 24, 2017 I would be completely shocked if Pace is even considering a QB at #3 at this point. With Glennon and Sanchez, he's basically saying, "We'll see what these guys can do for a year, and we'll draft for value elsewhere. If that doesn't work, the team should be better overall and I can then look a little harder at the next crop of QBs." If Pace had a massive woody about any of the rookies, he likely wouldn't have signed Sanchez. I don't think the Bears have ever simultaneously carried four QBs. If they draft one that would mean Shaw is likely gone. You don't spend a high draft pick on a guy who is essentially going to be the third QB on the depth chart. if one of the qb's has the potential to be a franchise quarterback i would be shocked if he does NOT pick one even at #3. i don't care how many they carry on the roster it's not just smart it's essential to have that guy on the roster now when we are in this stage of a rebuild. if he sits for a year or two or EVEN three i could care less although i would like to see him as our #2 so he gets the reps in practice for development. after this time it would be a PLEASURE if glennon pans out to have a qb to trade for multiple firsts. we may not be able to pick this high again for some time so to wait would mean we have to give up the moon to get the quality player we seek in the top 5 picks. welcome to mediocrity or sucking on offense for another decade. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BearFan PHX Posted March 24, 2017 Report Share Posted March 24, 2017 if one of the qb's has the potential to be a franchise quarterback i would be shocked if he does NOT pick one even at #3. i don't care how many they carry on the roster it's not just smart it's essential to have that guy on the roster now when we are in this stage of a rebuild. if he sits for a year or two or EVEN three i could care less although i would like to see him as our #2 so he gets the reps in practice for development. after this time it would be a PLEASURE if glennon pans out to have a qb to trade for multiple firsts. we may not be able to pick this high again for some time so to wait would mean we have to give up the moon to get the quality player we seek in the top 5 picks. welcome to mediocrity or sucking on offense for another decade. Agree 100% - having made the moves he's made he is not precluded from drafting a QB in any way or in any round. The question remains whether any of the QBs in the draft are franchise players of course, but I agree, the moves he's made so far are consistent with either possibility. In other words, you cant read Pace based on the signings. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lemonej Posted March 24, 2017 Report Share Posted March 24, 2017 What is Sanchez's deal? Is it fully guaranteed or does he also have to compete and make the team as well as Shaw? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Connorbear Posted March 24, 2017 Report Share Posted March 24, 2017 What is Sanchez's deal? Is it fully guaranteed or does he also have to compete and make the team as well as Shaw? Brad Biggs said the deal is $2 million for 1 year with $1 million guaranteed. Peace Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaskan Grizzly Posted March 24, 2017 Report Share Posted March 24, 2017 Brad Biggs said the deal is $2 million for 1 year with $1 million guaranteed. Peace So in other words they could still draft a QB early and cut their losses on Sanchez (or anyone besides Glennon) and not lose much? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Connorbear Posted March 24, 2017 Report Share Posted March 24, 2017 So in other words they could still draft a QB early and cut their losses on Sanchez (or anyone besides Glennon) and not lose much? Yup. It's a $1 million dollar insurance policy. Peace Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.