New QB Contract Projections Show What Mitch Trubisky May Cost By Erik Lambert - April 5th, 2019
The Chicago Bears are operating within a window at the moment. Most NFL teams know that once they find a good quarterback in the draft, the clock starts. That’s the clock ticking towards when said QB will demand a new contract. Everybody knows franchise quarterbacks are by far the most expensive commodity in the sport. Kirk Cousins making $28 million per year from Minnesota proves that much. So what about Mitch Trubisky.
This is the question that has Bears fans so concerned about 2019. The window of having the young passer on a cheaper deal won’t last forever. The Bears have control of him through 2021 including the fifth-year option on his rookie deal. They have until then at the latest to make something happen on the field before they have to start discussions towards an extension.
"Most NFL teams know that once they find a good quarterback in the draft, the clock starts. That’s the clock ticking towards when said QB will demand a new contract."
This is one more reason to (hopefully) be able to follow a Patriots type model. Yes, the QB is costly. But you can manage your cap and still have a solid roster of talent that fits your schemes. Hit a high percentage in the draft. Don't mortgage the farm in FA, and yes, it's okay to let some of your high cost FAs walk, and then get a steady flow of extra draft picks through comp picks. Identify value FAs who may fit your scheme well, but not cost an arm and a leg (and who WANT to sign because you have a class franchise that wins).
But to pull this off you do have to have your franchise QB nailed down. You need discipline spending $$$ in FA. Be fearless in letting some of your guys walk (the Pats even let Pro Bowl players sometimes walk). You have to have a great scouting department. You gotta have a rock solid coaching staff that can develop young talent that is coming through the door each year.
With Pace and Nagy here, I think we could have a shot at sustaining the franchise beyond Trubisky's "cheap years" alone.
"Most NFL teams know that once they find a good quarterback in the draft, the clock starts. That’s the clock ticking towards when said QB will demand a new contract."
This is one more reason to (hopefully) be able to follow a Patriots type model. Yes, the QB is costly. But you can manage your cap and still have a solid roster of talent that fits your schemes. Hit a high percentage in the draft. Don't mortgage the farm in FA, and yes, it's okay to let some of your high cost FAs walk, and then get a steady flow of extra draft picks through comp picks. Identify value FAs who may fit your scheme well, but not cost an arm and a leg (and who WANT to sign because you have a class franchise that wins).
But to pull this off you do have to have your franchise QB nailed down. You need discipline spending $$$ in FA. Be fearless in letting some of your guys walk (the Pats even let Pro Bowl players sometimes walk). You have to have a great scouting department. You gotta have a rock solid coaching staff that can develop young talent that is coming through the door each year.
With Pace and Nagy here, I think we could have a shot at sustaining the franchise beyond Trubisky's "cheap years" alone.
With the Patriots model you need the best QB to ever play the game as your QB. I don't think Trubisky is close to that level. A Patrick Mahomes is the closing thing we have to that in the NFL right now who's on a rookie deal. Even he has a long way to go before he's at Brady's level.
I prefer what most NFL teams are doing now. Go big while your rookie QB is cheap. This is the best chance you have at winning a championship because you can spread out the cap space more for even more difference makers. Once your QB signs that contract. You better hope he's a top 5 QB. Even Top 5 QBs might win only 1 ring.
The Patriots are going to be the last dynasty in the NFL unless we get a QB similar to Brady and HC similar to BB. The Salary Cap made sure of it.
"Most NFL teams know that once they find a good quarterback in the draft, the clock starts. That’s the clock ticking towards when said QB will demand a new contract."
This is one more reason to (hopefully) be able to follow a Patriots type model. Yes, the QB is costly. But you can manage your cap and still have a solid roster of talent that fits your schemes. Hit a high percentage in the draft. Don't mortgage the farm in FA, and yes, it's okay to let some of your high cost FAs walk, and then get a steady flow of extra draft picks through comp picks. Identify value FAs who may fit your scheme well, but not cost an arm and a leg (and who WANT to sign because you have a class franchise that wins).
But to pull this off you do have to have your franchise QB nailed down. You need discipline spending $$$ in FA. Be fearless in letting some of your guys walk (the Pats even let Pro Bowl players sometimes walk). You have to have a great scouting department. You gotta have a rock solid coaching staff that can develop young talent that is coming through the door each year.
With Pace and Nagy here, I think we could have a shot at sustaining the franchise beyond Trubisky's "cheap years" alone.
The alternative to having to "pay your QB" is way worse. It's called "being in QB hell" like the Bills and Jets and Dolphins have been in for years. You're stuck re-drafting the position using high picks over and over OR paying a very high-priced free agent/trade QB who isn't all that great (Cousins, Smith) OR trying to get by with some garbage castoff like Glennon or Fitzpatrick or Osweiler.
"Having to pay" your drafted QB coming out of his rookie contract is actually the classic good problem to have. You don't have-to-pay unless you've found a drafted QB who has established himself successfully as the franchise guy going forward.
This is one more reason to (hopefully) be able to follow a Patriots type model. Yes, the QB is costly. But you can manage your cap and still have a solid roster of talent that fits your schemes. Hit a high percentage in the draft. Don't mortgage the farm in FA, and yes, it's okay to let some of your high cost FAs walk, and then get a steady flow of extra draft picks through comp picks. Identify value FAs who may fit your scheme well, but not cost an arm and a leg (and who WANT to sign because you have a class franchise that wins).
But to pull this off you do have to have your franchise QB nailed down. You need discipline spending $$$ in FA. Be fearless in letting some of your guys walk (the Pats even let Pro Bowl players sometimes walk). You have to have a great scouting department. You gotta have a rock solid coaching staff that can develop young talent that is coming through the door each year.
With Pace and Nagy here, I think we could have a shot at sustaining the franchise beyond Trubisky's "cheap years" alone.
The alternative to having to "pay your QB" is way worse. It's called "being in QB hell" like the Bills and Jets and Dolphins have been in for years. You're stuck re-drafting the position using high picks over and over OR paying a very high-priced free agent/trade QB who isn't all that great (Cousins, Smith) OR trying to get by with some garbage castoff like Glennon or Fitzpatrick or Osweiler.
"Having to pay" your drafted QB coming out of his rookie contract is actually the classic good problem to have. You don't have-to-pay unless you've found a drafted QB who has established himself successfully as the franchise guy going forward.
That's always the goal, isn't it?
I believe it is the goal. And hopefully you have a good enough relationship with the QB you drafted that after he gets 3 or 4 years of the huge payday he is willing to restructure so you can pay other players.
One of the sports sites (ringer maybe) posted an article about going from rookie QB contract to rookie QB contract. IE as in Don't pay Goff/Wentz simply let them walk or trade them early for a first round pick or two and then draft another one.
The reason given was using cap dollars to pay for OL, DL, Edge rushers and a good WR and TE. QB and RB were looked at as replaceable. RB because that is how the league views them and QBs because they chew up too much cap space. The recent SeaHawks article hinted around the concept of letting Wilson go get paid someplace else and rebooting the DEF with draft picks before drafting another QB. Basicially its going the Jaguars route (pay for DEF and hope your QB is league average at worst--Bortles wasn't.)
Of course this was before the Rams coach was exposed in the SB by Belichik, and the Rams OFF turned into just another OFF.
On the other hand, having that QB no matter how much cap he chews up allows you to draft other positions. You can trust guys like Brady/Brees/Rogers/Rivers to turn average skill position players better meaning draft picks can be focused otherwhere.
So NE (for example--the easiest to talk about) and have two good-great skill position players (Gronk and Edleman) and simply fill in the rest--Hogan and the RBbC. When some player comes up for a contract, few are kept in NE and the rest are traded for picks or let go for comp picks, allowing NE to plug and play in a sense.
Belichik doesn't really draft any better than any other team. Over time it all evens out (unless you are Angelo/Emery--did those two kill us or what). But being careful with second contracts and in FA pays off. They are able to sign guys for less (Gilmore) who want a chance at a ring.
One of the sports sites (ringer maybe) posted an article about going from rookie QB contract to rookie QB contract. IE as in Don't pay Goff/Wentz simply let them walk or trade them early for a first round pick or two and then draft another one.
The reason given was using cap dollars to pay for OL, DL, Edge rushers and a good WR and TE. QB and RB were looked at as replaceable. RB because that is how the league views them and QBs because they chew up too much cap space. The recent SeaHawks article hinted around the concept of letting Wilson go get paid someplace else and rebooting the DEF with draft picks before drafting another QB. Basicially its going the Jaguars route (pay for DEF and hope your QB is league average at worst--Bortles wasn't.)
Of course this was before the Rams coach was exposed in the SB by Belichik, and the Rams OFF turned into just another OFF.
Yeah sounds good in theory but couple problems:
A) To be in a position to draft a new QB (one capable of starting soon) you pretty much have to have sucked the year before so you have a high 1st round pick. The goal is to NOT SUCK.
B) Even if you get a top-10/15 pick QB, many don't work out too well anyway.
It's difficult enough to consistently draft quality non-QBs. Cue up Green Bay last 5 years or so. Think of the awful Bears drafts prior to the last couple tries. Having to draft and redraft successfully for QB even just every 3 years or so seems like a herculean task.
the rookie qb theory only works if you can sucker one of the teams at the top into taking your qb coming off a rookie deal on the 3rd year(no way it happens at the 4th year where they have to extend them that year.
its a great theory sadly it doesn't work in the real world bc if it was successful even once it would never work again bc everyone would know not to trade a top qb for a qb coming off their rookie deal.
One of the sports sites (ringer maybe) posted an article about going from rookie QB contract to rookie QB contract. IE as in Don't pay Goff/Wentz simply let them walk or trade them early for a first round pick or two and then draft another one.
The reason given was using cap dollars to pay for OL, DL, Edge rushers and a good WR and TE. QB and RB were looked at as replaceable. RB because that is how the league views them and QBs because they chew up too much cap space. The recent SeaHawks article hinted around the concept of letting Wilson go get paid someplace else and rebooting the DEF with draft picks before drafting another QB. Basicially its going the Jaguars route (pay for DEF and hope your QB is league average at worst--Bortles wasn't.)
Of course this was before the Rams coach was exposed in the SB by Belichik, and the Rams OFF turned into just another OFF.
Yeah sounds good in theory but couple problems:
A) To be in a position to draft a new QB (one capable of starting soon) you pretty much have to have sucked the year before so you have a high 1st round pick. The goal is to NOT SUCK.
B) Even if you get a top-10/15 pick QB, many don't work out too well anyway.
It's difficult enough to consistently draft quality non-QBs. Cue up Green Bay last 5 years or so. Think of the awful Bears drafts prior to the last couple tries. Having to draft and redraft successfully for QB even just every 3 years or so seems like a herculean task.
I agree 100% with everything you typed. the writer seemed to believe that scheme transcended talent at the QB position, so you literally took any QB and just plugged him/her in. And yes, you would need first round picks to do this.
I do think you could get 1sts for Wentz and Goff, but not from teams drafting high.