If the Bears wanted to take a QB with the #1 overall pick and Justin Fields was available......

[Vee]

The only thing left to figure out is why the OP, clearly a Jets fan, is here on the Eagles forum?

 

[Wallyhorse]

1 minute ago, Vee said:

The only thing left to figure out is why the OP, clearly a Jets fan, is here on the Eagles forum?

 

You are looking at it from the emotional side.  I'm looking at it from the chance to bring in a QB who could very well be a superstar himself while still on a rookie contract for at least one more season beyond 2023 allowing the Eagles to bring in other players who can help keep this going as Hurts is likely to get paid THIS offseason (as Hurts was a second rounder).  The Jets I can see trading for Hurts in that scenario because Robert Salah and Joe Douglas blew it on Zach Wilson and if they don't make the playoffs next year they are GONE. 

[Aerolithe_Lion]

It’s not a terrible concept, I think Chicago will seriously consider QB at 1, but don’t give us Fields. Hurts for a couple of second rounders and a significantly worse QB? Why would we do that?

 

Rearrange it so we get something better than that. 

[Boogyman]

 

4 minutes ago, Aerolithe_Lion said:

It’s not a terrible concept, I think Chicago will seriously consider QB at 1, but don’t give us Fields. Hurts for a couple of second rounders and a significantly worse QB? Why would we do that?

 

Rearrange it so we get something better than that. 

Yeah it is. Hurts is 15-1 lmao. It's up there with the worst ideas anyone on this board has ever had.

[Wallyhorse]

Just now, Aerolithe_Lion said:

It’s not a terrible concept, I think Chicago will seriously consider QB at 1, but don’t give us Fields. Hurts for a couple of second rounders and a significantly worse QB? Why would we do that?

 

Rearrange it so we get something better than that. 

As said, I suspect with the ammo the Eagles have Fields would be a star QB.  Bears have ABSOLUTELY NOTHING right now other than David Montgomery besides Fields and resetting the rookie contract clock would be the driving force behind such a trade.  Fields likely dramatically improves with the Eagles and he already has shown glimpses in spite of having ZERO in Chicago to work with. 

[Boogyman]

Imagine we win a superbowl and trade our QB in the offseason lmao.

[Aerolithe_Lion]

6 minutes ago, Boogyman said:

Has a team ever traded a young QB immediately after a successful season and playoff run?

Yeah it is. Hurts is 15-1 lmao. It's up there with the worst ideas anyone on this board has ever had.

Even if Hurts wins the SB, that doesn’t automatically make him the greatest QB in the league. We can still improve our team, or more importantly reinvent our team for next year.

Of the 4 teams in the conference championship games, we’re arguably the most likely not to make it back next year. Our entire defense may be different in 2023. We narrowly won the hardest division even with all those pieces. If we get a proper valuation for Jalen, it should not be dismissed out of hand; no player in the nfl should be untradable. Real strides could be made with the assets we gain for the longterm health of the team.

[Aerolithe_Lion]

3 minutes ago, Wallyhorse said:

As said, I suspect with the ammo the Eagles have Fields would be a star QB.  Bears have ABSOLUTELY NOTHING right now other than David Montgomery besides Fields and resetting the rookie contract clock would be the driving force behind such a trade.  Fields likely dramatically improves with the Eagles and he already has shown glimpses in spite of having ZERO in Chicago to work with. 

But that is a colossal gamble, and the compensation received should reflect that we didn’t need to do that trade. Getting fields is only one aspect of this trade; The bears valuing him 2 2nd’s away from an MVP candidate is the issue.

Remember that Fields is also in his third year next year, so it’s not just great financial windfall we’ll receive by not re-signing Jalen. If Fields balls out, he’ll want the same. If he doesn’t, we made a catastrophic error. Has to be way more than 2 2’s

[Boogyman]

Just now, Aerolithe_Lion said:

Even if Hurts wins the SB, that doesn’t automatically make him the greatest QB in the league. We can still improve our team, or more importantly reinvent our team for next year.

Of the 4 teams in the conference championship games, we’re arguably the most likely not to make it back next year. Our entirely defense may be different in 2023. We played in the hardest division. If we get a proper valuation for Jalen, it should not be dismissed out of hand; no player in the nfl should be untradable. Real strides could be made with the assets we gain for the longterm health of the team.

I didn't say close to that lmao. 

 

Trading a guy who just won a superbowl and will have gone 17-1 in a season is nuts. Add to it he will have probably been top three in the MVP discussion and is what, 24?

 

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, Aerolithe_Lion said:

But that is a colossal gamble, and the compensation received should reflect that we didn’t need to do that trade. Getting fields is only one aspect of this trade; The bears valuing him 2 2nd’s away from an MVP candidate is the issue.

Remember that Fields is also in his third year next year, so it’s not just great financial windfall we’ll receive by not re-signing Jalen. If Fields balls out, he’ll want the same. If he doesn’t, we made a catastrophic error. Has to be way more than 2 2’s

The only positive you could say about this entire idea, is you have the 5th year option with Fields.  But it would take until that 5th year to get him to a point where he could get the Eagles as far as Hurts has this year.

[Iggles25]

[jojodancer]

[Aerolithe_Lion]

7 minutes ago, Boogyman said:

I didn't say close to that lmao. 

 

Trading a guy who just won a superbowl and will have gone 17-1 in a season is nuts. Add to it he will have probably been top three in the MVP discussion and is what, 24?

 

But that’s why I wrote it that way; it’s not nuts to trade a guy who just won the SB. If the Rams had traded Stafford after the SB for a bigger haul than they got him for, would they be nuts? If we traded Foles after 2017, would we be nuts? You can play this game with any QB who won made the SB the last 10 years minus GOAT A and B. Brady, Mahomes, and then everyone else. If you fall in the grouping "everyone else”, there’s a price that could get them.

If we were offered Joe Burrow and 4 1st round picks, you’d be the only man on the planet to say no to that, and your reasoning is because it would be what? You won’t do it out of principle? Thats obviously a hyperbolic example, but it shows the point to your absolutist statement: no player (maybe minus Mahomes) is untradable. Jalen’s price would simply be really, really high. Definitely higher than an iffy QB and a couple of day 2 picks.

[Hawkeye]

The Eagles just spent 3 years developing him into one of the 3 top quarterbacks in the league.  NO WAY should they or would they move on from him anytime in the next decade. 

[Boogyman]

1 minute ago, Aerolithe_Lion said:

But that’s why I wrote it that way; it’s not nuts to trade a guy who just won the SB. If the Rams had traded Stafford after the SB for a bigger haul than they got him for, would they be nuts? If we traded Foles, would we be nuts? Brady, Mahomes, and then everyone else. If you fall in everyone else, there’s a price that could get them.

If we were offered Joe Burrow and 4 1st round picks, you’d be the only man on the planet to say no to that, and your reasoning is because it would be nuts to think Burrow could produce in this offense? Thats obviously a hyperbolic example, but it shows the point to your absolutist statement: no player (maybe minus Mahomes) is untradable. His price would simply be really, really high.

Hurts is 24 and showed a huge improvement from 1st year as a starter to his second. 

 

And no, I'd probably trade him for Burrow depending on the other assets in the trade. But that's not what was presented in this post. But any QB like Burrow or Mahomes isn't getting traded, so I didn't even consider them in my statement.

[Swoop]

You know you messed up when both sides of the Hurts argument are unanimous in telling you how wrong you are.

OP, just say that's what you were trying to do and stop doubling down.

[Aerolithe_Lion]

16 minutes ago, downundermike said:

The only positive you could say about this entire idea, is you have the 5th year option with Fields.  But it would take until that 5th year to get him to a point where he could get the Eagles as far as Hurts has this year.

That true, but it goes out the window if he has a pro bowl year lobbing ducks to AJ Brown and demands a similar contract to Jets’ star QB Jalen Hurts after his third year. Do we trade him too and start again?

[Aerolithe_Lion]

9 minutes ago, Boogyman said:

Hurts is 24 and showed a huge improvement from 1st year as a starter to his second. 

 

And no, I'd probably trade him for Burrow depending on the other assets in the trade. But that's not what was presented in this post. But any QB like Burrow or Mahomes isn't getting traded, so I didn't even consider them in my statement.

Right, and I also refuted what was presented in the post. But just because Op’s offer is bad doesn’t mean Hurts is completely untradable, which was my point.

[DawkinsOwnage03]

Only if Hurts wins the superbowl 

 

[Boogyman]

3 minutes ago, Aerolithe_Lion said:

Right, and I also refuted what was presented in the post. But just because Op’s offer is bad doesn’t mean Hurts is completely untradable, which was my point.

My only point was this thread is retarded lol. 

I admit I didn't consider a few completely off limits players that would never get traded. My bad.

[Aerolithe_Lion]

19 minutes ago, Boogyman said:

My only point was this thread is retarded lol. 

I admit I didn't consider a few completely off limits players that would never get traded. My bad.

Here’s a not off limits one, consider the entirety of the post before you dismiss it:

Houston is picking 2nd overall and 12th overall(browns for Deshaun). Their owner is tired of losing and is smitten over Texas prodigy Jalen Hurts. He offers Howie 3 1sts and any 1 player on his roster for Jalen. A team once gave 3 first round picks for RGIII without even knowing if he could play on the NFL level. Rams gave a pro bowl QB and 2 firsts for 33 yr old Stafford who could retire after only 3-4 years with the team. This is a perfectly plausible trade for a 24 yr old, potential SB champion, 2nd team all-pro.

Texans have a completely depleted roster. So that means even with Jalen, they’re picking top 10 again next year.

pick 2, pick 10, pick 12, top 10 next year and pick a player. With a couple moderate trade ups in this draft we end up with Will Anderson, Jalen Carter, a top QB prospect (Will Levis?), next year’s Will Anderson, and Derek Stingley. none need a major extension before 2026.

Unlikely yes, but not implausible. Would this be an easy trade to refuse?

[Kinase77]

I think another point that you are not considering Wallyhorse is how you would COMPLETELY piss off your team by making this move.  It's BLATANTLY obvious that Jalen is firmly entrenched as the leader of this team, and you want to go and trade him because he will cost too much?!?  You would totally destroy the team that way, because the players would no longer trust management.  Jalen earned his contract extension.  How would you feel as a player if you worked your tail off for a team, built up bonds and chemistry with your teammates, only to be traded away because you were going to cost too much?!  I don't think you are considering the human side of this trade proposal.  All around, it's just a bad idea and would screw up team chemistry and trust in management for years to come.

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, Aerolithe_Lion said:

Here’s a not off limits one, consider the entirety of the post before you dismiss it:

Houston is picking 2nd overall and 12th overall(browns for Deshaun). Their owner is tired of losing and is smitten over Texas prodigy Jalen Hurts. He offers Howie 3 1sts and any 1 player on his roster for Jalen. A team once gave 3 first round picks for RGIII without even knowing if he could play on the NFL level. Rams gave a pro bowl QB and 2 firsts for 33 yr old Stafford who could retire after only 3-4 years with the team. This is a perfectly plausible trade for a 24 yr old, potential SB champion, 2nd team all-pro.

Texans have a completely depleted roster. So that means even with Jalen, they’re picking top 10 again next year.

pick 2, pick 10, pick 12, top 10 next year and pick a player. With a couple moderate trade ups in this draft we end up with Will Anderson, Jalen Carter, a top QB prospect (Will Levis?), next year’s Will Anderson, and Derek Stingley. none need a major extension before 2026.

Would this be an easy trade to refuse?

Was just coming to post something similar.  While I would not trade Jalen, the Texans have the assets to get my attention.

They have two 1st in each of the next two drafts.

4 minutes ago, Kinase77 said:

I think another point that you are not considering Wallyhorse is how you would COMPLETELY piss off your team by making this move.  It's BLATANTLY obvious that Jalen is firmly entrenched as the leader of this team,

I wouldn't go that far.  While Jalen is highly respected, Kelce, Lane, BG are the leaders of the team.

[RememberTheKoy]

58 minutes ago, Boogyman said:

 

Yeah it is. Hurts is 15-1 lmao. It's up there with the worst ideas anyone on this board has ever had.

 

20-3 in his last 23 starts too.  15-1 this year with us in the NFC Championship Game at home with the #1 seed. 

 

 

[ManchesterEagle]

35 minutes ago, Swoop said:

You know you messed up when both sides of the Hurts argument are unanimous in telling you how wrong you are.

OP, just say that's what you were trying to do and stop doubling down.

I’m warming to the idea now. Maybe we could trade AJ Brown back to the Titans for Treylon Burks and a fifth? Open up even more cap space!