I didn't know we ever could offer the 5th and rescind it later. That's not too glowing of a review that we're not going for it.
He's not a $25M / year QB. Even the biggest Mitch supporters can't agree to that.
We could draft somebody in the 2nd round this year, develop them for a year and give them the reigns at a fraction of the cost and probably get the same result.
If we're forced to go the $25M / year route then we have to see if guys like Carr are available.
OMG YES!!!11 We must save monies on the QB position. Bargain basement QBs are Bears Footbaw.
I think the odds of Mitch becoming a great QB are almost zero and was all for picking another high pick the year after he was drafted (we may not have been in this situation if we had BTW) but do you people ever read what you type?
You want to save money on every position on the offense. Anyone can play oline, WRs are divas, RBs are too injured, we could save so much at QB. Yes that is Bears' football, and you want to keep on going back to it and wonder why the Bears suck so hard.
We've got one of the best defenses in the NFL and we still can't win with a bad offense. If you want to save money get rid of those pass rushers you all thing we need 20 of. Until we can learn to make an offense we need to spend all the money on offense, that's where we need gods at every position.
We can't develop a high pick QB projected to be good. What makes you think we can develop QBs projected to be less? Yes we could end up in the same boat of suckage for less money. And we still suck. Is it your money?
Teams figured out how to defeat great defenses, they put their talent on offense so the rules are stacked in their favor. If the Bears can't come around to that fact of modern NFL they may as well sell the team to a different city and save all the money.
Trubisky is here for his 4th year. If he sucks we have a pick to replace him with. And we better pick right because it will be an instant starter.