Connorbear Posted May 2, 2017 Report Share Posted May 2, 2017 He did not get screwed. He's a big boy getting paid $16 million this year to do a job. He'll be fine. http://chicago.suntimes.com/sports/mike-gl...bisky-pick/amp/ Peace Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mongo3451 Posted May 2, 2017 Report Share Posted May 2, 2017 He did not get screwed. He's a big boy getting paid $16 million this year to do a job. He'll be fine. http://chicago.suntimes.com/sports/mike-gl...bisky-pick/amp/ Peace Plus, he gets to start for a year to earn his next check. At the minimum, he has an opportunity that he would not get in Tampa. Maximum is he'll have a long career as a starter. The solid is that he'll have a long career in the NFL. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bschmaranz Posted May 2, 2017 Report Share Posted May 2, 2017 Yeah if Trubisky is ready in 2018, Glennon will have gotten $19 million for one year. Definitely not a woe is me situation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bowlingtwig Posted May 2, 2017 Report Share Posted May 2, 2017 Exactly and nobody can say that Glennon thought he was being signed as the franchise QB. I think everyone knew we were taking a qb in the draft. Maybe not with #2 pick overall but if he thought he was going into 2017 with no competition at all then he is naive Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted May 2, 2017 Report Share Posted May 2, 2017 Exactly and nobody can say that Glennon thought he was being signed as the franchise QB. I think everyone knew we were taking a qb in the draft. Maybe not with #2 pick overall but if he thought he was going into 2017 with no competition at all then he is naive I honestly thought they were giving Glennon a year to figure it out and potentially be the franchise guy. Then they'd draft a QB mid-rounds. It made so much sense for so many reasons. If Glennon panned out, then the QB situation is resolved, the team is much better, and the picks can be spent elsewhere to make the team even better in 2018. If Glennon sucks, the mid-round rookie might get a shot to show what he's worth near the end of the season, and the Bears are likely in a position to draft a QB again, from a QB class widely considered to be much better. It's not about no competition. It's about first rounder, #2 pick overall competition. It still seems strategically flawed considering Glennon's signing, the weak QB class, the Bears' minimal picks, the Bears' massive needs, and the 2018 QB draft class. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bowlingtwig Posted May 2, 2017 Report Share Posted May 2, 2017 I honestly thought they were giving Glennon a year to figure it out and potentially be the franchise guy. Then they'd draft a QB mid-rounds. It made so much sense for so many reasons. If Glennon panned out, then the QB situation is resolved, the team is much better, and the picks can be spent elsewhere to make the team even better in 2018. If Glennon sucks, the mid-round rookie might get a shot to show what he's worth near the end of the season, and the Bears are likely in a position to draft a QB again, from a QB class widely considered to be much better. It's not about no competition. It's about first rounder, #2 pick overall competition. It still seems strategically flawed considering Glennon's signing, the weak QB class, the Bears' minimal picks, the Bears' massive needs, and the 2018 QB draft class. That's a valid point. But clearly pace thinks trubisky is that dude but when FA opened up it was no guarantee we could even get trubisky so he got Glennon. Paid him what a starter gets and wrote the deal up in a team friendly way that didn't prohibit the team from grabbing someone this yr in the 1st Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lemonej Posted May 2, 2017 Report Share Posted May 2, 2017 I honestly thought they were giving Glennon a year to figure it out and potentially be the franchise guy. Then they'd draft a QB mid-rounds. It made so much sense for so many reasons. If Glennon panned out, then the QB situation is resolved, the team is much better, and the picks can be spent elsewhere to make the team even better in 2018. If Glennon sucks, the mid-round rookie might get a shot to show what he's worth near the end of the season, and the Bears are likely in a position to draft a QB again, from a QB class widely considered to be much better. It's not about no competition. It's about first rounder, #2 pick overall competition. It still seems strategically flawed considering Glennon's signing, the weak QB class, the Bears' minimal picks, the Bears' massive needs, and the 2018 QB draft class. Do you truly believe that you should put all the trust in a guy that has only thrown 11 passes last year? I understand clearly your point but in reality it is a typical wait 'til next year mentality that Chicago Bears fans have embraced all to well. Since next years QB draft class was mentioned by you and there are no guarantees if Trubisky who came out early was one of the prospects you were considering in the fall at the position next year where would he be ranked? Then think we got him already and we just don't like the price that was paid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaskan Grizzly Posted May 2, 2017 Report Share Posted May 2, 2017 Do you truly believe that you should put all the trust in a guy that has only thrown 11 passes last year? I understand clearly your point but in reality it is a typical wait 'til next year mentality that Chicago Bears fans have embraced all to well. Since next years QB draft class was mentioned by you and there are no guarantees if Trubisky who came out early was one of the prospects you were considering in the fall at the position next year where would he be ranked? Then think we got him already and we just don't like the price that was paid. Something else to consider and to Jason's point about picking a QB in the later rounds; how many times leading up to the draft did we hear this year's QB class didn't have one "Franchise quality QB" in them? Yet three ended up being picked within the first 12 picks. Yes there has been much discussion about the QB class of 2018 and (allegedly) how much better it will be, yet three teams 'swung for the fences' this year. Did we 'luck out' in getting Trubisky this year? Who knows? But no matter how you slice it, the 'price' to get him seemed absolutely ridiculous. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ASHKUM BEAR Posted May 3, 2017 Report Share Posted May 3, 2017 I honestly thought they were giving Glennon a year to figure it out and potentially be the franchise guy. Then they'd draft a QB mid-rounds. It made so much sense for so many reasons. If Glennon panned out, then the QB situation is resolved, the team is much better, and the picks can be spent elsewhere to make the team even better in 2018. If Glennon sucks, the mid-round rookie might get a shot to show what he's worth near the end of the season, and the Bears are likely in a position to draft a QB again, from a QB class widely considered to be much better. It's not about no competition. It's about first rounder, #2 pick overall competition. It still seems strategically flawed considering Glennon's signing, the weak QB class, the Bears' minimal picks, the Bears' massive needs, and the 2018 QB draft class. The Bears needed a guy with more to offer than the Fales type we have been taking. I would have been happy with Kizer in the 2nd and had decent expectations for Peterman and that was it. If the draft played out were the Bears took someone else and another team traded up for MT, I don't think we would of had a chance for Kizer with out packaging a trade to get to the bottom of the 1st. Cleveland would have drafted different, they were good w Kizer and that was there target. We may have had to trade a future 1st like the other teams for Kizer. I think looking closely, the Bears calculated correctly and got the best value to have a QB with high potential. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AZ54 Posted May 3, 2017 Report Share Posted May 3, 2017 Something else to consider and to Jason's point about picking a QB in the later rounds; how many times leading up to the draft did we hear this year's QB class didn't have one "Franchise quality QB" in them? Yet three ended up being picked within the first 12 picks. Yes there has been much discussion about the QB class of 2018 and (allegedly) how much better it will be, yet three teams 'swung for the fences' this year. Did we 'luck out' in getting Trubisky this year? Who knows? But no matter how you slice it, the 'price' to get him seemed absolutely ridiculous. No "franchise QBs". It's not often one comes around, maybe once every 4 or 5 years. Even then Andrew Luck and Robert Griffen had a 50% success rate. When they do show up you better make sure you have the 1st overall pick. http://www.nfl.com/draft/history/fulldraft?type=position Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stinger226 Posted May 3, 2017 Report Share Posted May 3, 2017 I honestly thought they were giving Glennon a year to figure it out and potentially be the franchise guy. Then they'd draft a QB mid-rounds. It made so much sense for so many reasons. If Glennon panned out, then the QB situation is resolved, the team is much better, and the picks can be spent elsewhere to make the team even better in 2018. If Glennon sucks, the mid-round rookie might get a shot to show what he's worth near the end of the season, and the Bears are likely in a position to draft a QB again, from a QB class widely considered to be much better. It's not about no competition. It's about first rounder, #2 pick overall competition. It still seems strategically flawed considering Glennon's signing, the weak QB class, the Bears' minimal picks, the Bears' massive needs, and the 2018 QB draft class. I think they think they are going to be good this year and won't have a low enough pick to grab a qb next year. He went all in , had Mitchell T had two years of success under his belt we would be having different conversations. There is just so much of the unknown now it makes everyone uncomfortable. I think he may score with Mitchell T, i base this on the fact the last two years he tried to trade up and get Wentz and before that mariota. I thibk both of those are going to be good QBs. I think he knows what he is doing and all of this turns out well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted May 3, 2017 Report Share Posted May 3, 2017 Do you truly believe that you should put all the trust in a guy that has only thrown 11 passes last year? I understand clearly your point but in reality it is a typical wait 'til next year mentality that Chicago Bears fans have embraced all to well. Since next years QB draft class was mentioned by you and there are no guarantees if Trubisky who came out early was one of the prospects you were considering in the fall at the position next year where would he be ranked? Then think we got him already and we just don't like the price that was paid. Normally I'd say that's not a good approach, but this was a unique year. The Bears had the #3 pick in a few defensive draft with several holes. It seemed more prudent to load up on defensive talent and ride with Glennon. It's not like the Bears could contend either way this year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted May 3, 2017 Report Share Posted May 3, 2017 I think they think they are going to be good this year and won't have a low enough pick to grab a qb next year. He went all in , had Mitchell T had two years of success under his belt we would be having different conversations. There is just so much of the unknown now it makes everyone uncomfortable. I think he may score with Mitchell T, i base this on the fact the last two years he tried to trade up and get Wentz and before that mariota. I thibk both of those are going to be good QBs. I think he knows what he is doing and all of this turns out well. If the coaches and Pace think they are going to be good, then they're worse at talent evaluation than anyone could possible imagine. They'll be lucky to get to .500. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stinger226 Posted May 3, 2017 Report Share Posted May 3, 2017 If the coaches and Pace think they are going to be good, then they're worse at talent evaluation than anyone could possible imagine. They'll be lucky to get to .500. I think with some luck in the injury issues we would have been close to 500 last year. The perception is all based on having 2 bad years in a row. So if we are 500 this year, does that make a good statement that we are a better team? The looks bad but when they start playing things will change. Who expected Atl to be that good last year? I dont remember anybody on their bandwagon. They have been 4-12 6-10 8-8 and then 11-5. They have been rebuilding and have improved every year. The difference between us and them is they had a QB in place already, but I dont remember people putting them in the SB before the season started last year. I think we are closer with talent, that our record indicated last year. You can never predict injuires but I see not way we have the same impact as we did last year. Down to third QB, White got injured. Trevathan, Goldman was out for many games, Ashton never lived up to expectations, Porter was out quite a bit. Floyd didnt play every game. Miller was hurt again for much of the season. Long went down and Sitton missed some games. I think if we had better luck, we could have been 500 last year. This year our QB situation is in much better position to succeed. We now have a legitimate RB we didnt know that the start of the year. When Long gets back, our OL should be a strength not a question mark. Our TE situation should be much better. White is healthy and hopefully stays that way. On offense we will be a power running game with many two TE sets, will lead to more consistency and should have better results in the red zone with more targets. If Goldman stays healthy for the whole year and Bullard shows up our front 7 will be a stength. We have thrown a ton of bodies at the back end of the defense and i think it will perform much better. With all the injuries last year, I still think we had improved to the 15th rated defense which was much better than year before. I think our arrow is pointing up and if Glennon is a good QB, we should finish at least 8-8. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bowlingtwig Posted May 3, 2017 Report Share Posted May 3, 2017 I think with some luck in the injury issues we would have been close to 500 last year. The perception is all based on having 2 bad years in a row. So if we are 500 this year, does that make a good statement that we are a better team? The looks bad but when they start playing things will change. Who expected Atl to be that good last year? I dont remember anybody on their bandwagon. They have been 4-12 6-10 8-8 and then 11-5. They have been rebuilding and have improved every year. The difference between us and them is they had a QB in place already, but I dont remember people putting them in the SB before the season started last year. I think we are closer with talent, that our record indicated last year. You can never predict injuires but I see not way we have the same impact as we did last year. Down to third QB, White got injured. Trevathan, Goldman was out for many games, Ashton never lived up to expectations, Porter was out quite a bit. Floyd didnt play every game. Miller was hurt again for much of the season. Long went down and Sitton missed some games. I think if we had better luck, we could have been 500 last year. This year our QB situation is in much better position to succeed. We now have a legitimate RB we didnt know that the start of the year. When Long gets back, our OL should be a strength not a question mark. Our TE situation should be much better. White is healthy and hopefully stays that way. On offense we will be a power running game with many two TE sets, will lead to more consistency and should have better results in the red zone with more targets. If Goldman stays healthy for the whole year and Bullard shows up our front 7 will be a stength. We have thrown a ton of bodies at the back end of the defense and i think it will perform much better. With all the injuries last year, I still think we had improved to the 15th rated defense which was much better than year before. I think our arrow is pointing up and if Glennon is a good QB, we should finish at least 8-8. I don't share your sentiments on last year's team. I get your point of getting luck with the injuries but even with alot of luck I don't see 8-8 from last yr. The team lacked playmakers and although the defense did perform better and was mediocre the problem was that defense simply couldn't make plays to get off the field and I've never seen a defense so bad at creating turnovers. That team was setup to suck. I see better things this yr and it's all going to start with the oline. We have screwed this up so much in the past but we finally have a qb that might be that guy but none if it can't matter if he spends as much time on his ass as Cutler did his 1st several years Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucky Luciano Posted May 3, 2017 Report Share Posted May 3, 2017 I don't share your sentiments on last year's team. I get your point of getting luck with the injuries but even with alot of luck I don't see 8-8 from last yr. The team lacked playmakers and although the defense did perform better and was mediocre the problem was that defense simply couldn't make plays to get off the field and I've never seen a defense so bad at creating turnovers. That team was setup to suck. I see better things this yr and it's all going to start with the oline. We have screwed this up so much in the past but we finally have a qb that might be that guy but none if it can't matter if he spends as much time on his ass as Cutler did his 1st several years seven games last season we lost by less than 10 points even with the multitude of injuries. do we win some of those games if we were, within reason, healthy? who knows, but i say it was 'possible' we could have been a 500 team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madlithuanian Posted May 3, 2017 Report Share Posted May 3, 2017 If Glennon thought he was going to be the franchise for the next 5 years and the Bears had no possibility of drafting a QB high, then there's a lot air between his ears... Exactly and nobody can say that Glennon thought he was being signed as the franchise QB. I think everyone knew we were taking a qb in the draft. Maybe not with #2 pick overall but if he thought he was going into 2017 with no competition at all then he is naive Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BearFan2000 Posted May 4, 2017 Report Share Posted May 4, 2017 Glennon would have to be awfully naive to not know the landscape of things when he signed the contract. He was a backup at Tampa with limited NFL starting experience joins a team starved for a consistent good to great QB. A very high likelihood we would spend a high draft pick on QB possibly even at #3 overall. Yes his contract guaranteed money for 2017 is starter money, after 2017 theres little guaranteed money. He signed a 1 year prove it deal no matter how you slice it. That alone is less than total commitment by the Bears. My gut feeling is the drama of his feelings being hurt is more a mountain out of a molehill. Would it be annoying to sign with a team only see them draft someone who could take your job at #2 overall? Sure but if he's any kind of competitor, he won't feel threatened but will welcome the competition, and would motivate him to work harder not to lose the job. That said the part of this situation that is a bit crappy is that he was invited by Bears brass to attend the draft party at Soldier Field amongst the fans when Trubisky was picked. That's crappy and put him in an awkward position, especially if he wasn't told they might be drafting a QB high either prior to attending or even as early as when they were talking to him about signing here. Which takes me back to the point about him being very naive if he wasn't aware of the possibility that even with signing him they might take a QB high. And realize it's a business decision to not put all your eggs in his basket. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bowlingtwig Posted May 4, 2017 Report Share Posted May 4, 2017 Glennon would have to be awfully naive to not know the landscape of things when he signed the contract. He was a backup at Tampa with limited NFL starting experience joins a team starved for a consistent good to great QB. A very high likelihood we would spend a high draft pick on QB possibly even at #3 overall. Yes his contract guaranteed money for 2017 is starter money, after 2017 theres little guaranteed money. He signed a 1 year prove it deal no matter how you slice it. That alone is less than total commitment by the Bears. My gut feeling is the drama of his feelings being hurt is more a mountain out of a molehill. Would it be annoying to sign with a team only see them draft someone who could take your job at #2 overall? Sure but if he's any kind of competitor, he won't feel threatened but will welcome the competition, and would motivate him to work harder not to lose the job. That said the part of this situation that is a bit crappy is that he was invited by Bears brass to attend the draft party at Soldier Field amongst the fans when Trubisky was picked. That's crappy and put him in an awkward position, especially if he wasn't told they might be drafting a QB high either prior to attending or even as early as when they were talking to him about signing here. Which takes me back to the point about him being very naive if he wasn't aware of the possibility that even with signing him they might take a QB high. And realize it's a business decision to not put all your eggs in his basket. Yeah your right I feel bad about him hosting the draft party. That would be extremely awkward Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DABEARSDABOMB Posted May 4, 2017 Report Share Posted May 4, 2017 The draft party thing was a disaster by the Bears. The bright side is, it seems like Trubisky is a pretty humble kid who should be able to learn and work with Glennon (and I'd hope Glennon can do the same and recognize that whether he is the long-term face of this franchise or not...he still has a real great career opportunity to start with the Bears and prove that he belongs as a starter). In an ideal world, Glennon kicks butt and Trubisky does awesome in practice and building confidence, etc....to the point that we find ourselves in a great position with two assets, one of which we can deal for additional picks. I would not be surprised if we could trade Glennon a year from now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BearFan2000 Posted May 5, 2017 Report Share Posted May 5, 2017 In an ideal world, Glennon kicks butt and Trubisky does awesome in practice and building confidence, etc....to the point that we find ourselves in a great position with two assets, one of which we can deal for additional picks. I would not be surprised if we could trade Glennon a year from now. That would be ideal and would present good opportunity for the Bears and for Glennon personally. Should Glennon prove to be a starter quality QB he wouldn't and shouldn't be expected to sit behind a successful Trubisky. He'd have had his chance to audition for a starting gig somewhere and a trade would give that opportunity to start somewhere and most likely a reworked contract to pay him accordingly. We'd get something back in trade either picks or players or some combination. It'd be a win win. That's what I hope happens. It would also mean that the Glennon signing and the Trubisky pick were good moves. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaskan Grizzly Posted May 5, 2017 Report Share Posted May 5, 2017 That would be ideal and would present good opportunity for the Bears and for Glennon personally. Should Glennon prove to be a starter quality QB he wouldn't and shouldn't be expected to sit behind a successful Trubisky. He'd have had his chance to audition for a starting gig somewhere and a trade would give that opportunity to start somewhere and most likely a reworked contract to pay him accordingly. We'd get something back in trade either picks or players or some combination. It'd be a win win. That's what I hope happens. It would also mean that the Glennon signing and the Trubisky pick were good moves. Here's a 'what if' (just for the devils advocate perspective). What if Glennon goes Tom Brady on us and becomes Hall of Fame like in his performances? And Trubisky, with limited action looks more like a pedestrian QB (ala Garrapolo) that potentially could be a great back up QB? Do you still keep Glennon long term? Do you try and trade Biscuit while he still has value? In no way do I think this happens, just curious what would happen if it did? (It's a while until any real football action so why not?) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madlithuanian Posted May 5, 2017 Report Share Posted May 5, 2017 If you win the lottery, you are happy. End of story! Keep both, unless there's and offer you can't refuse. Here's a 'what if' (just for the devils advocate perspective). What if Glennon goes Tom Brady on us and becomes Hall of Fame like in his performances? And Trubisky, with limited action looks more like a pedestrian QB (ala Garrapolo) that potentially could be a great back up QB? Do you still keep Glennon long term? Do you try and trade Biscuit while he still has value? In no way do I think this happens, just curious what would happen if it did? (It's a while until any real football action so why not?) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted May 5, 2017 Report Share Posted May 5, 2017 Here's a 'what if' (just for the devils advocate perspective). What if Glennon goes Tom Brady on us and becomes Hall of Fame like in his performances? And Trubisky, with limited action looks more like a pedestrian QB (ala Garrapolo) that potentially could be a great back up QB? Do you still keep Glennon long term? Do you try and trade Biscuit while he still has value? In no way do I think this happens, just curious what would happen if it did? (It's a while until any real football action so why not?) That's been my stance and dilemma the entire time. If Glennon blows up, the Bears: -Good: Have a starting QB who is a stud. -Bad: Have a #2 pick overall who doesn't see the field If Glennon sucks, the Bears: -Good: Have absolutely no reason not to get their #2 guy in the game -Good: Can cut Glennon and free up his money. -Bad: Wasted money on Glennon when they were going to pick a QB at #2 anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madlithuanian Posted May 5, 2017 Report Share Posted May 5, 2017 There is no real bad in losing money on Glennon if he sucks...we aren't cap strapped and the overall amount spent at the QB position is not too different from last year. It's not egregious. It's the cost of wanting a better option than they guys we had last year. And if Glennon is a stud, then the problem of finding a franchise QB is addressed. We hedged our bet. yeah, it would have been nice to know that before we drafted a QB...but there was no way of knowing that. Our QB situation I think is as good as we could hope given our unique set of circumstances. That's been my stance and dilemma the entire time. If Glennon blows up, the Bears: -Good: Have a starting QB who is a stud. -Bad: Have a #2 pick overall who doesn't see the field If Glennon sucks, the Bears: -Good: Have absolutely no reason not to get their #2 guy in the game -Good: Can cut Glennon and free up his money. -Bad: Wasted money on Glennon when they were going to pick a QB at #2 anyway. 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.