"...Over the years, Belichick has kept the Patriots playing at such a high level in part because he consistently trades players that he sees trending downhill in their talent level or because they aren’t as good as the national perception. He keeps getting high picks for these players, only a few of whom have panned out with their new team. So why give up such a high price for a player that Belichick essentially doesn’t want? If Belichick is willing to trade Garoppolo with Brady near the end of his career, he can’t be as good as the perception.....
...My feeling is that if you really want to trade for Garoppolo, the team has to protect itself because there’s potential downside to the deal. I would only do a deal that has clauses based on team performance and Garoppolo’s personal performance. I would give up a pick in the 2017 draft but not more than a third-rounder. In that situation, I would also include a pick in the 2018 draft that would have the performance clauses attached to it..."
Belichick is the master at selling players to chump teams who overpay. Some rube GM will pay too much for Garoppolo too. I hope we don't mortgage the farm to bring in a guy who will probably not amount to much. Fox isn't Belichick. The Bears are not the New England Patriots. Does any sane person believe Bill Belichick is going to let a franchise QB walk? But fans are acting like Belichick is getting rid of the next Tom Brady.
Yeah, Soul, but if Jimmy G pans out (as we would all hope he would), then you're paying him big bucks a year from now. Same thing can be said for paying big bucks to a rookie draftee down the line. Hhbb That's the goal isn't it? To get a long-term starter on the roster worth paying. Pretty sure every QB worth his salt is GONNA GET PAID. I would consider that a victory. It isn't a contest to have a "cheap QB". It's to have one good enough to win with here for long-range stability.
Like I said above, this is probably just an academic discussion only anyway. I doubt very much Washington is going to let Cousins get away and I think the chances of us working out an acceptable trade for Garrapolo is pretty remote too.
Well if you use that #3 pick on a QB as some project then you're gonna be paying that rookie big money day one not somewhere down the line and it's all gonna be guaranteed. For example.
Jared Goff; $27,487,673 guaranteed money Carson Wentz; $26,226,338 guaranteed money
So if that rookie sits for even one year it's costing you almost $7 mil for him to play backup or possibly only run a scout team and hold a clip board if he's not your #2. That's a pretty penny you'll spend on his education and development so that's why many of these guys are forced to start and as result many fail because it's too much too soon. What happens if you can't even make a dependable starter out of them by year two. Now you wasted $14 mil on that gamble. So when you draft a QB that high you better be damn sure he can start soon because the meters ticking hard and fast.
If we traded for a Garopollo or an AJ McCarron we get them cheap salary wise for a year but we risk a pick or maybe two. But wouldn't we be spending that same pick or maybe two if we had to trade up to get our guy in the draft anyway? That's what I don't get. It's like the guys who say Cutler wasn't worth two 1sts. Well it would have cost us one of those 1st to draft him anyway so the premium for a young vet with a Pro Bowl to his credit was actually one 1st round pick. In the case of Garoppolo that premium would be even less and with McCarron less than Garoppolo if anything at all. Him you might get for a mid round pick.
If we trade for either and as a 2017 starter they were quite successful and had the look of that guy we could build around why wouldn't we want to pay them? It's doubtful just one year of success would get them anymore in guaranteed money that the rookie #3 pick and you'd know exactly what you had in him vs hoping you had something. If the guy is a total washout well it's cost you a few hundred grand not millions and a pick you might well have used to draft a QB with anyway and you move on again in 2018. I really don't see where all the risk is coming from. It far far less.
My guess is there are those who can't get over the Cutler trade because they feel that it failed. In a sense it did but not totally and not because it was all Cutler's fault and he stunk. He didn't. He's the #1 QB in Bears history whose simply had the misfortune to play on some very very bad teams. Until Drew Bress came along Archie Manning played a similar role in NOLA and was their "goat". So all I can say to that bunch is "get over it".
It's like you guys had a date with a hot blonde and she stood you up so you've decided you won't ever ask a hot blonde for a date again. Fine, don't then. The rest of us with more balls than you have will be happy to take them off your hands. LOL
You make some really good points there Soul. I hadn't realized the guaranteed money is that high for the top few overall picks. Really puts it in perspective when you consider you're paying $25+ million in guaranteed money to a guy that has precisely ZERO NFL experience and is likely gonna need a lot of patience and development time given how few college QBs play in a pro-style offense anymore. Most of these guys in the NCAA have never even taken a snap from under center or been asked to read a coverage scheme much less run an actual NFL-like playbook.
You might shit horseshoes and get a Dak or a Russel Wilson who can start and succeed immediately. More likely you're gonna get a guy who needs a year of bench time and then another year of playing time to "come into his own". You may also end up with a Gabbert, a Locker, a Ponder, or a Bortles--someone you spent a very high pick on that is a dud as a starter.
There is a difference between trolling and TROLLING. Soul and I have been trolling eachother about QB and other things bears related for years, but its out of fun and prodding not out of trying to disrail threads or provoke entire sites and all posters.
HHM and his crew were trying to mess w/entire groups of posters AND derail entire threads. Got to know the difference and be a little less sensitive.
BINGO ^^^^
(now, back on topic of arguing about how the Bears can/will **** up this offseasons QB derby)
Well if you use that #3 pick on a QB as some project then you're gonna be paying that rookie big money day one not somewhere down the line and it's all gonna be guaranteed. For example.
Jared Goff; $27,487,673 guaranteed money Carson Wentz; $26,226,338 guaranteed money
So if that rookie sits for even one year it's costing you almost $7 mil for him to play backup or possibly only run a scout team and hold a clip board if he's not your #2. That's a pretty penny you'll spend on his education and development so that's why many of these guys are forced to start and as result many fail because it's too much too soon. What happens if you can't even make a dependable starter out of them by year two. Now you wasted $14 mil on that gamble. So when you draft a QB that high you better be damn sure he can start soon because the meters ticking hard and fast.
If we traded for a Garopollo or an AJ McCarron we get them cheap salary wise for a year but we risk a pick or maybe two. But wouldn't we be spending that same pick or maybe two if we had to trade up to get our guy in the draft anyway? That's what I don't get. It's like the guys who say Cutler wasn't worth two 1sts. Well it would have cost us one of those 1st to draft him anyway so the premium for a young vet with a Pro Bowl to his credit was actually one 1st round pick. In the case of Garoppolo that premium would be even less and with McCarron less than Garoppolo if anything at all. Him you might get for a mid round pick.
If we trade for either and as a 2017 starter they were quite successful and had the look of that guy we could build around why wouldn't we want to pay them? It's doubtful just one year of success would get them anymore in guaranteed money that the rookie #3 pick and you'd know exactly what you had in him vs hoping you had something. If the guy is a total washout well it's cost you a few hundred grand not millions and a pick you might well have used to draft a QB with anyway and you move on again in 2018. I really don't see where all the risk is coming from. It far far less.
My guess is there are those who can't get over the Cutler trade because they feel that it failed. In a sense it did but not totally and not because it was all Cutler's fault and he stunk. He didn't. He's the #1 QB in Bears history whose simply had the misfortune to play on some very very bad teams. Until Drew Bress came along Archie Manning played a similar role in NOLA and was their "goat". So all I can say to that bunch is "get over it".
It's like you guys had a date with a hot blonde and she stood you up so you've decided you won't ever ask a hot blonde for a date again. Fine, don't then. The rest of us with more balls than you have will be happy to take them off your hands. LOL
You make some really good points there Soul. I hadn't realized the guaranteed money is that high for the top few overall picks. Really puts it in perspective when you consider you're paying $25+ million in guaranteed money to a guy that has precisely ZERO NFL experience and is likely gonna need a lot of patience and development time given how few college QBs play in a pro-style offense anymore. Most of these guys in the NCAA have never even taken a snap from under center or been asked to read a coverage scheme much less run an actual NFL-like playbook.
You might shit horseshoes and get a Dak or a Russel Wilson who can start and succeed immediately. More likely you're gonna get a guy who needs a year of bench time and then another year of playing time to "come into his own". You may also end up with a Gabbert, a Locker, a Ponder, or a Bortles--someone you spent a very high pick on that is a dud as a starter.
It gets even more expensive when you have to invest in a rod job. White is killing us.
You make some really good points there Soul. I hadn't realized the guaranteed money is that high for the top few overall picks. Really puts it in perspective when you consider you're paying $25+ million in guaranteed money to a guy that has precisely ZERO NFL experience and is likely gonna need a lot of patience and development time given how few college QBs play in a pro-style offense anymore. Most of these guys in the NCAA have never even taken a snap from under center or been asked to read a coverage scheme much less run an actual NFL-like playbook.
You might shit horseshoes and get a Dak or a Russel Wilson who can start and succeed immediately. More likely you're gonna get a guy who needs a year of bench time and then another year of playing time to "come into his own". You may also end up with a Gabbert, a Locker, a Ponder, or a Bortles--someone you spent a very high pick on that is a dud as a starter.
It gets even more expensive when you have to invest in a rod job. White is killing us.
I'm sick about Kevin White. I know he was "bpa" at the time but damn beyond that he sure is looking a lot like Shea right now--the very 1st pick of a new GM and a total bust.
"The Patriots are open to trading Jimmy Garoppolo and they are going to listen to all offers, as they have over the last couple years for Garoppolo -- and they have gotten a couple inquiries," Rapoport said. "But from what I am being told there are several complicating factors: First of all, the price tag, expected to be at least a first-round pick -- just based off the quarterback market. Will anyone give them that? Second of all, are the Patriots really comfortable going forward with Jacoby Brissett as their backup quarterback in case Tom Brady gets hurt? That might be the biggest question of all."
*ricza opinion, They have had offers for him in previous years, and they decided to keep him that could still happen.
The Eagles got first- and fourth-round picks from the Vikings in the Sam Bradford trade, so that could be the starting point if a team is desperate enough -- as Minnesota was last season. Any team that gives up a top pick would need assurances they could get a long-term deal done with Garoppolo.
*w/a "weak" qb class teams could be desperate
A team like the Cleveland Browns would make a lot of sense for a landing spot -- former Browns GM and long-time Belichick confidant Mike Lombardi has already reported Cleveland would go hard after Garoppolo.
*This is why they will get at least a 1st for him. 1st and 12th picks allow the Browns to get the top prospect in the draft and get a QB they feel comfortable starting day 1. Another team could easily up the offer. My guess is that the Browns start w/the first overall in the 2nd, but get raised by another team into the 12th pick, and possibly more.
"A team like the Cleveland Browns would make a lot of sense for a landing spot -- former Browns GM and long-time Belichick confidant Mike Lombardi has already reported Cleveland would go hard after Garoppolo.
*This is why they will get at least a 1st for him."
The rich just get richer. Pats are amazing. Right now I am watching their undrafted WR, Chris Hogan (that they stole from the Bills) light it up against the Steelers.