Bears sign RB Josh Caldwell

BradyJay

Well-known member
Joined:
Sep 4, 2012
Posts:
2,077
Liked Posts:
1,374
Location:
WI Dells, WI
Don't they already have Davis?
 

gallagher

Nothing left to do but smile, smile, smile
Donator
Joined:
Sep 27, 2010
Posts:
6,242
Liked Posts:
5,496
Location:
Semi-Nomadic
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
  1. Michigan Wolverines
  2. Ohio Bobcats
Don't they already have Davis?
Honestly, once we drafted Monty, I stopped presuming that his spot was secure. I would want the goal to be Cohen as a gadget player and home run threat, and develop Montgomery as our primary runner. The next goal would be to find a primary backup for both types of backs. Whyte has the athleticism to back up Cohen, and it will be between Davis and Ball (and now Caldwell) to fight for the spot behind Montgomery.

What's the real penalty if we cut Davis? A few dollars down the drain? If an other back had better potential for the offense than Davis, then I'm not going to complain for it. At most he only affects our salary cap for one year.
 

Leomaz

Pissing people off the right way!
Donator
Joined:
Jul 15, 2012
Posts:
14,948
Liked Posts:
5,696
Location:
In the stratosphere
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago White Sox
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
  1. Indiana Hoosiers
  2. Notre Dame Fighting Irish
Honestly, once we drafted Monty, I stopped presuming that his spot was secure. I would want the goal to be Cohen as a gadget player and home run threat, and develop Montgomery as our primary runner. The next goal would be to find a primary backup for both types of backs. Whyte has the athleticism to back up Cohen, and it will be between Davis and Ball (and now Caldwell) to fight for the spot behind Montgomery.

What's the real penalty if we cut Davis? A few dollars down the drain? If an other back had better potential for the offense than Davis, then I'm not going to complain for it. At most he only affects our salary cap for one year.
I kinda doubt they cut Davis....why go out into free agency to get this guy if you thought you would just cut him.
 

number51

Señor Member
Donator
Joined:
Aug 25, 2012
Posts:
16,895
Liked Posts:
11,717
Location:
Funk & Wagnalls' porch
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
  1. Notre Dame Fighting Irish
I kinda doubt they cut Davis....why go out into free agency to get this guy if you thought you would just cut him.

WCBF is right they won't cut him, but why sign this new guy, who would he be replacing if he did make the team?

I have a hard time questioning Nagy/Pace with so many good decisions in the last two years. Whatever happens the Bears will have a solid group of RB's.
 

JoJoBoxer

Well-known member
Joined:
Aug 14, 2010
Posts:
11,579
Liked Posts:
8,008
WCBF is right they won't cut him, but why sign this new guy, who would he be replacing if he did make the team?

I have a hard time questioning Nagy/Pace with so many good decisions in the last two years. Whatever happens the Bears will have a solid group of RB's.
What I see is an UDFA rb becoming available from KC. I imagine that Nagy immediately called KC and asked about him and got a positive enough response to release Fry and replace his spot with Caldwell. If he show something, he will probably make the PS. If not, nothing is lost.
 

truthbedamned

I don't have a party
Donator
Joined:
Aug 31, 2014
Posts:
15,313
Liked Posts:
10,493
Location:
Socialist Republic of California
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
Special teams? Practice squad?

Mizzell moved to slot, was there really a roster spot for him there? He will be gone.
Yeah fumbling twice in the span of 4 carries will usually get you gone.
 

gallagher

Nothing left to do but smile, smile, smile
Donator
Joined:
Sep 27, 2010
Posts:
6,242
Liked Posts:
5,496
Location:
Semi-Nomadic
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
  1. Michigan Wolverines
  2. Ohio Bobcats
I kinda doubt they cut Davis....why go out into free agency to get this guy if you thought you would just cut him.
Everyone who buys insurance hopes they never need it. There was no guarantee we were in a place to grab a desired back, and they were hedging their bets.

I'm not saying that's certain, nor am I saying Davis will be cut. I'm only saying that it isn't unheard of, unreasonable, or even all-together bad.

If Cohen and Montgomery are secured in their roles, then there are limited spots for key backups behind them. Let's speculate to illustrate the same point in the other direction: If Nall looks better than Davis, why would they keep Davis and cut Nall?
 

hebs

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Jan 1, 2013
Posts:
5,058
Liked Posts:
4,064
I’d say they signed him so we don’t have to see Mizzell and Nall for 60 min on Saturday. ?? He practically knows our offense already and if he flashes enough, maybe he gets that last roster spot over Whyte. Otherwise the PS. At worst he spells some players during the next 2 preseason games.
 
Last edited:

number51

Señor Member
Donator
Joined:
Aug 25, 2012
Posts:
16,895
Liked Posts:
11,717
Location:
Funk & Wagnalls' porch
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
  1. Notre Dame Fighting Irish
When we wonder about how many and which WR's and RB's are making the roster Mizzel never counted as a RB, only a WR, and yes he will be gone but it will have no impact on how many or which RB's make the roster.
 

gallagher

Nothing left to do but smile, smile, smile
Donator
Joined:
Sep 27, 2010
Posts:
6,242
Liked Posts:
5,496
Location:
Semi-Nomadic
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
  1. Michigan Wolverines
  2. Ohio Bobcats
I
I’d say they signed him so we don’t have to see Mizzell and Nall for 60 min on Saturday. ?? He practically knows our offense already and if he flashes enough, maybe he gets that last roster spot over Whyte. Otherwise the PS
I doubt that they cut Whyte, he is the player with the closest athletic ability as Cohen. I think Whyte is here for that reason, not to generally back up the RB position.

Honestly, I wouldn't be shocked if Navy's offense specifically designates certain RBs as a move- or flex-back, as if a primarily-receiving back were its own position. Many teams already do just that for tight ends. Cohen and Whyte would be one set of backs, Montgomery and his primary backup would be a set of more dedicated runners.

Also, I'm amped for football season. Hurry up, football, I'm ready for us to take on GB!
 

hebs

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Jan 1, 2013
Posts:
5,058
Liked Posts:
4,064
I guess I still haven’t seen Whyte perform to to point where I see him being a backup to Cohen. (Honestly I think Montgomery is closer to that than Whyte) All he’s shown me is straight line speed. I’m not saying he doesn’t have it, but I don’t see the wiggle or shiftiness. He looks more like a one cut and go kind of guy. (Just my observation) Maybe those who saw him in training camp can chime in and provide some insight on Whyte?
 

Top