2 minutes ago, cunninghamtheman said:

Last season we traded Wentz…..not Hurts. Look it up. 

I did,he was traded Feb 18th 2021 to the COLTS-look it up!!!!! This is Feb 2023 that is 2 years????

So Fields sucks because his team is crap, ok got it. But Hurts is god because we gave him every weapon in the book. Amazingly DUMB. Why won't the Jags win the SB this year? I mean they got the TOP QB.should have been a shoe in. Why won't Cincy win the SB,I mean Burrow is a top QB also

5 minutes ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

I did,he was traded Feb 18th 2021 to the COLTS-look it up!!!!! This is Feb 2023 that is 2 years????

Moronic 

11 minutes ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

I did,he was traded Feb 18th 2021 to the COLTS-look it up!!!!! This is Feb 2023 that is 2 years????

This is just too dumb to even continue on with.

1 minute ago, cunninghamtheman said:

So the 2023 Draft Class will be a part of our 2023 Super Bowl victory?

Simple question Feb 2021 to Feb 2023 is not 2 years??? it's a simple yes or no

A season with the Colts and a season with the Wuss is not 2 years?

OK I give up LOL

33 minutes ago, cunninghamtheman said:

This is just too dumb to even continue on with.

You bet

https://saintswire.usatoday.com/2023/02/07/saints-raiders-derek-carr-trade-compensation-agreement/

Our SB win over NE is on NFLN at 9

https://saintswire.usatoday.com/2023/02/06/saints-sean-payton-broncos-hire-zach-strief-coach-nfl/

3 hours ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

So Ham tell me this who is the better QB Fields or Levis/Young/Stroud???? I mean this should be easy since you already KNOW

Idk myself...buy one would really have to stand out, otherwise if I'm the Bears I would take the better trade package.  There is a lot to consider.  I wouldn't be concerned with " this is rare you get the first pick so you need to take the QB"   I also wouldn't be locked in on Fields. 

It's rare that you are in the driver's seat like the Bears. Gotta explore taking advantage of it in all the possible ways.

What if you are the Bears.. you like the QB most people feel is 3rd best.  You could trade down take that guy and keep Fields.  Or trade Fields too.  You end up with your QB and extra picks from 2 trades.

A lot to consider. Being close minded in the situation is dumb, especially for the team with the worst record.

4 hours ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

So Fields sucks because his team is crap, ok got it. But Hurts is god because we gave him every weapon in the book. Amazingly DUMB. Why won't the Jags win the SB this year? I mean they got the TOP QB.should have been a shoe in. Why won't Cincy win the SB,I mean Burrow is a top QB also

 Cincy isn't as good at S, they have a rookie compared to CGJ.

31 minutes ago, joemas6 said:

Idk myself...buy one would really have to stand out, otherwise if I'm the Bears I would take the better trade package.  There is a lot to consider.  I wouldn't be concerned with " this is rare you get the first pick so you need to take the QB"   I also wouldn't be locked in on Fields. 

It's rare that you are in the driver's seat like the Bears. Gotta explore taking advantage of it in all the possible ways.

What if you are the Bears.. you like the QB most people feel is 3rd best.  You could trade down take that guy and keep Fields.  Or trade Fields too.  You end up with your QB and extra picks from 2 trades.

A lot to consider. Being close minded in the situation is dumb, especially for the team with the worst record.

No you are wrong,Ham knows what's best,just ask him,he knows everything there is to know.It's amazing! As I said a trade is possible,but seems like a longshot and would have to be insane for me to be replacing one(basically) rookie QB with another one. Seems pointless when all signs show Fields is capable IF, IF, IF, you give him some tools like we gave Hurts(tha god) The Bears suck because Fields sucks right? It's entirely his fault they had a bad season.Has nothing to do with the other 52 players? Why draft Fields if you're just going to start over again? Jags took Lawrence,they should have won the SB this year because he was QB1 in the draft. Although I am not the Bears,it seems to me trading out of 1 for a boatload of additional picks to help Fields would make the most sense. They need to rebuild the team anyway,why would they want to start all over again with a new QB? By most accounts Fields was/is not the problem with the Bears team. Why fix what ain't broke? I posted an article where the writer said if Fields was in this draft he would be QB1. of course that's his opinion,so I see no reason to lose what you invested in him by getting  another unknown with equal or lesser.talent Just doesn't make sense

2 minutes ago, joemas6 said:

 Cincy isn't as good at S, they have a rookie compared to CGJ.

 NO, thats the S we needed. Again ask Ham he knows. You and I just have to admit we are wrong and know nothing 🤣

1 minute ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

 NO, thats the S we needed. Again ask Ham he knows. You and I just have to admit we are wrong and know nothing 🤣

Well here is how I look at you guys arguing about one or two seasons  We traded Wentz going into 2021...   So Wentz to Colts was done before 2021 officially started...or at least the trade was agreed to by then.   We are 2 years , and 2 seasons from that date.

As one could argue that you needed to say " our defense at full strength" to clarify Dallas scoring 40 ... then technically if one says we traded Wentz last season,  then he should say " before last season"   or " going into last season "  or " going into the 2021 season"   which while us and the Chiefs are still in 2022 season... everyone else is going into 2023. 

17 minutes ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

No you are wrong,Ham knows what's best,just ask him,he knows everything there is to know.It's amazing! As I said a trade is possible,but seems like a longshot and would have to be insane for me to be replacing one(basically) rookie QB with another one. Seems pointless when all signs show Fields is capable IF, IF, IF, you give him some tools like we gave Hurts(tha god) The Bears suck because Fields sucks right? It's entirely his fault they had a bad season.Has nothing to do with the other 52 players? Why draft Fields if you're just going to start over again? Jags took Lawrence,they should have won the SB this year because he was QB1 in the draft. Although I am not the Bears,it seems to me trading out of 1 for a boatload of additional picks to help Fields would make the most sense. They need to rebuild the team anyway,why would they want to start all over again with a new QB? By most accounts Fields was/is not the problem with the Bears team. Why fix what ain't broke? I posted an article where the writer said if Hurts was in this draft he would be QB1. of course that's his opinion,so I see no reason to lose what you invested getting him for another unknown

Ok....let's take a step back and relax for a second and keep an open mind.  I'll start off by saying that it's obvious Fields was not the problem.   That Chicago could get great trade value with their 1st pick. 

We know that...that is the obvious way to go.

But....but...let's take a look at 2 factors maybe 3 that could push it the other way.

1. It should be obvious Fields should have trade value...right. I mean if you think he is good, then he should return a nice package for Chicago in a trade... right. 

2.  He would be going into year 3 next year.   Chicago sux.  Let's say you rebuild a couple years..now Fields would have to be going into year 5,they would have to offer the 5th year...pay him big or sign him to a real contract.   Where I they drafted a QB this year, it's only going into year 3... Hurts situation before 2022 started.  Except with the 5th year option that Hurts doesn’t have.

3.  What if Chicago has one of the rookie QBs graded higher than Fields?  

Those are 3 legit reasons to where Chicago could decide to go the rookie QB instead of Fields.   Now think about it... those are 3 separate reasons... in reality the first 2 are guaranteed,  if reason #3 is there ( they like a rookie better) then the combo of all 3 put together...you would think they choose to trade Fields and draft a rookie. 

At the moment... it has to be minimum 50 % they go that route.  Th deciding factor should be how they grade the rookie QB and the potential they see vs Fields.  

But if they get average offer for Fields and phenomenal offer for the pick...that could flip it back to keeping Fields. 

It's why I say keep an open mind. Chicago is in the driver's seat. Let it happen organically. 

And also possibly they take the best non QB in the draft.  Without a trade.  Keep an open mind is the smart way to do business.   

22 minutes ago, joemas6 said:

Well here is how I look at you guys arguing about one or two seasons  We traded Wentz going into 2021...   So Wentz to Colts was done before 2021 officially started...or at least the trade was agreed to by then.   We are 2 years , and 2 seasons from that date.

As one could argue that you needed to say " our defense at full strength" to clarify Dallas scoring 40 ... then technically if one says we traded Wentz last season,  then he should say " before last season"   or " going into last season "  or " going into the 2021 season"   which while us and the Chiefs are still in 2022 season... everyone else is going into 2023. 

Feb 2021 to Feb 2023 is 2 years where i went to school. Wentz played in Indy and with the wuss,that is 2 years. I got tired trying to show logic,it doesn't work with some here. ASG tried also,to no avail. if you can't get the gist of the posts without posting every damn word you need to then I will stop posting because it's not worth trying to explain every damn word. It should be an enjoyable place,not calling someone out because there was a word added or left out. Once again if I need to post every damn word I will stop and just enjoy watching my team. I'm not here for semantics. I read your posts Joe and understand what is said. I'm sure I could got through every damn word and find one you missed LOL. I'm not here for that

I also have the ability to answer point blank questions. So if we're going to play semantics with every post,then count me out because i come here to trade thoughts and opinions,not be lectured to that I "know nothing",am a 'hater" and "a fool". Don't need it. I will call things out that don't make sense,that is how I am

11 minutes ago, joemas6 said:

And also possibly they take the best non QB in the draft.  Without a trade.  Keep an open mind is the smart way to do business.   

I'm fine with that. Ham even stated at first even if they kept Fields they should take the top QB. To me that is senseless. Then it changed into trade Hurts.Ok that is possible yet a long shot IMO. They got Fields to begin the rebuild process. I don't run the Bears but calling Fields terrible is wrong if you don't know. Wonder what Fields would look like if he was here for 2-3 years,with the team we have. That is not a knock on Hurts,but I don't think Fields is the problem in Chicago and frankly until they get him some talent there is no way to know,but ham thinks he knows and I find that comedic

29 minutes ago, joemas6 said:

Ok....let's take a step back and relax for a second and keep an open mind.  I'll start off by saying that it's obvious Fields was not the problem.   That Chicago could get great trade value with their 1st pick. 

We know that...that is the obvious way to go.

But....but...let's take a look at 2 factors maybe 3 that could push it the other way.

1. It should be obvious Fields should have trade value...right. I mean if you think he is good, then he should return a nice package for Chicago in a trade... right. 

2.  He would be going into year 3 next year.   Chicago sux.  Let's say you rebuild a couple years..now Fields would have to be going into year 5,they would have to offer the 5th year...pay him big or sign him to a real contract.   Where I they drafted a QB this year, it's only going into year 3... Hurts situation before 2022 started.  Except with the 5th year option that Hurts doesn’t have.

3.  What if Chicago has one of the rookie QBs graded higher than Fields?  

Those are 3 legit reasons to where Chicago could decide to go the rookie QB instead of Fields.   Now think about it... those are 3 separate reasons... in reality the first 2 are guaranteed,  if reason #3 is there ( they like a rookie better) then the combo of all 3 put together...you would think they choose to trade Fields and draft a rookie. 

At the moment... it has to be minimum 50 % they go that route.  Th deciding factor should be how they grade the rookie QB and the potential they see vs Fields.  

But if they get average offer for Fields and phenomenal offer for the pick...that could flip it back to keeping Fields. 

It's why I say keep an open mind. Chicago is in the driver's seat. Let it happen organically. 

I understand this point,but the other thing is if you trade Fields,you are starting all over. i get the 5 years part,but we don't know how good he is because he's never had the team.To assume Fields sucks because the Bears suck is foolish when you DON'T KNOW. I also don;t know if a rookie QB would be any better because once again there is no team around either guy. You would just be repeating the Fields draft with a different name. They can trade the 1 back for alot of picks,get the guys in they need because they need to do it anyhow. If they still suck in 2 years,they should be near the top for a QB if they see Fields isn't cutting it. but by all accounts it's not him. So whatever. Sick of this subject. Now pick apart my sentence,word by word in the event I left some key word out because my god that's what's important here. We could get alot of trade value for Hurts too,should we do it????? We could save alot of money right? (Now Im totally sure someone thinks I want Hurts traded LOL) because that's how it works here. 

40 minutes ago, joemas6 said:

Ok....let's take a step back and relax for a second and keep an open mind.  I'll start off by saying that it's obvious Fields was not the problem.   That Chicago could get great trade value with their 1st pick. 

We know that...that is the obvious way to go.

But....but...let's take a look at 2 factors maybe 3 that could push it the other way.

1. It should be obvious Fields should have trade value...right. I mean if you think he is good, then he should return a nice package for Chicago in a trade... right. 

2.  He would be going into year 3 next year.   Chicago sux.  Let's say you rebuild a couple years..now Fields would have to be going into year 5,they would have to offer the 5th year...pay him big or sign him to a real contract.   Where I they drafted a QB this year, it's only going into year 3... Hurts situation before 2022 started.  Except with the 5th year option that Hurts doesn’t have.

3.  What if Chicago has one of the rookie QBs graded higher than Fields?  

Those are 3 legit reasons to where Chicago could decide to go the rookie QB instead of Fields.   Now think about it... those are 3 separate reasons... in reality the first 2 are guaranteed,  if reason #3 is there ( they like a rookie better) then the combo of all 3 put together...you would think they choose to trade Fields and draft a rookie. 

At the moment... it has to be minimum 50 % they go that route.  Th deciding factor should be how they grade the rookie QB and the potential they see vs Fields.  

But if they get average offer for Fields and phenomenal offer for the pick...that could flip it back to keeping Fields. 

It's why I say keep an open mind. Chicago is in the driver's seat. Let it happen organically. 

Option 4 and 5. 4- take the 1 pick for the best non QB at a spot you need. 5- trade the 1 pick back to a QB needy team and get a boatload of draft picks now and next year to help Fields and fill holes ( alot more than the 1 pick we traded away). So I agree they are in the drivers seat,so trade Fields is one option and I showed the other 2,but there is zero way I keep Fields AND draft a QB at 1 which was hams original statement(and no I am not scrolling back to find it)

I'm out for the night. Later

3 hours ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

I'm fine with that. Ham even stated at first even if they kept Fields they should take the top QB. To me that is senseless. Then it changed into trade Hurts.Ok that is possible yet a long shot IMO. They got Fields to begin the rebuild process. I don't run the Bears but calling Fields terrible is wrong if you don't know. Wonder what Fields would look like if he was here for 2-3 years,with the team we have. That is not a knock on Hurts,but I don't think Fields is the problem in Chicago and frankly until they get him some talent there is no way to know,but ham thinks he knows and I find that comedic

I don't think he is the problem either.  But you see where a rookie QB.is a better rebuilding tool than one going into year 3.  If it takes 2 years to rebuild...then you gotta pay that QB and make it harder to keep building.   

It's dumb,  I get it,to give up on a 3rd year QB like Fields... but the way the $$ works for QBs kinda forces the hand to make quick decisions. 

It's not a shot at Fields at all, just how the business works.  

The scenario of keeping Fields and drafting a QB with pick 1....that one I don't see at all.