It is currently Thu Nov 28, 2024 7:33 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 278 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Mike Glennon
PostPosted: Wed Mar 08, 2017 4:10 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2010 9:17 pm
Posts: 8011
pizza_Place: Rosati's
Nas wrote:
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
Minooka Meatball wrote:
Hoyer to the Niners :D
6 million per season.


What could the Bears spend an extra $9M on?


Geno Smith.

_________________
Not a mult.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Glennon
PostPosted: Wed Mar 08, 2017 4:24 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 10:32 pm
Posts: 13865
Location: France
pizza_Place: Baranabyis
Do people still not understand how NFL contracts work or do they just pretend to not know how NFL contracts work because its en vogue to grumble about the Bears being dysfunctional? The $45m figure is absolutely meaningless. If Glennon is good the Bears are paying below market value for a good QB for three years and can use that cap flexibility to strengthen other positions of need. If Glennon gets beat by a drafted rookie or Shaw (do not rule out the latter) in camp the Bears have many options: (1) Cut Glennon, save at least $30 of the $45m guaranteed and head into 2018 offseason with Glennon totally off their books (2) Keep Glennon as backup, cut at the end of the year if he shows nothing all season with similar benefits to option 1 (3) Trade Glennon, which may or not be feasible it depends on the landscape.

This is assuming they dont fuck it up and guarantee him money after this season (or if they do its a negligible amount). If they guarantee Glennon a ton of money I dont understand it either, but I honestly doubt they do that.

So right now, not knowing the guaranteed money, only a complete idiot is angry about this deal as a Bears fan. Like you are actually a mentally retarded person who should be incinerated for fuel or used as target practice for howitzers if you think this is some LOL TYPICAL BEARS CANT DO ANYTHING RIGHT move. You can be unenthused, you can not like Glennon the player, you can be mad that they might not draft a guy...but you cant harp on that $45m figure like it matters.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Glennon
PostPosted: Wed Mar 08, 2017 4:31 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 21, 2010 5:02 pm
Posts: 11735
pizza_Place: Angelo's Pizza in Downers Grove
Bears basically giving Glennon Cutler's money? Meh. As long as no guaranteed money beyond this season, I'm good.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Glennon
PostPosted: Wed Mar 08, 2017 4:32 pm 
Offline
100000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 8:06 pm
Posts: 81466
pizza_Place: 773-684-2222
I'm sure MANY know how contracts work in the NFL. MANY are saying that you shouldn't give him $15M PERIOD. Also we've seen that the structuring of a contract can make it impossible to cut a player.

_________________
Be well

GO BEARS!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Glennon
PostPosted: Wed Mar 08, 2017 4:57 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2016 3:07 pm
Posts: 7930
Location: A large oak tree.
pizza_Place: Nowhere
My problem with the signing is it shows management doesn't realize where they are. I don't want I sign a middling QB to a contract this size on a team that's going nowhere. I'd rather watch hoyer, Cook or David Fales be unproductive qbs than Gleanon be average and thus keep a drafted or potential developmental QB off field. 16 million doesn't sit as quick as 6 million.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Glennon
PostPosted: Wed Mar 08, 2017 5:03 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 21, 2010 5:02 pm
Posts: 11735
pizza_Place: Angelo's Pizza in Downers Grove
Drunk Squirrel wrote:
My problem with the signing is it shows management doesn't realize where they are. I don't want I sign a middling QB to a contract this size on a team that's going nowhere. I'd rather watch hoyer, Cook or David Fales be unproductive qbs than Gleanon be average and thus keep a drafted or potential developmental QB off field. 16 million doesn't sit as quick as 6 million.


Easy way to keep money open for future offseasons. No QB they draft is playing right away, so they pay him a low-end starting QB salary for 1 season while the pick develops. Then cut him next offseason if he sucks and use the money for another couple big free agent signings.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Glennon
PostPosted: Wed Mar 08, 2017 5:04 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 11:17 am
Posts: 72380
Location: Palatine
pizza_Place: Lou Malnatis
America wrote:
Do people still not understand how NFL contracts work or do they just pretend to not know how NFL contracts work because its en vogue to grumble about the Bears being dysfunctional? The $45m figure is absolutely meaningless. If Glennon is good the Bears are paying below market value for a good QB for three years and can use that cap flexibility to strengthen other positions of need. If Glennon gets beat by a drafted rookie or Shaw (do not rule out the latter) in camp the Bears have many options: (1) Cut Glennon, save at least $30 of the $45m guaranteed and head into 2018 offseason with Glennon totally off their books (2) Keep Glennon as backup, cut at the end of the year if he shows nothing all season with similar benefits to option 1 (3) Trade Glennon, which may or not be feasible it depends on the landscape.

This is assuming they dont fuck it up and guarantee him money after this season (or if they do its a negligible amount). If they guarantee Glennon a ton of money I dont understand it either, but I honestly doubt they do that.

So right now, not knowing the guaranteed money, only a complete idiot is angry about this deal as a Bears fan. Like you are actually a mentally retarded person who should be incinerated for fuel or used as target practice for howitzers if you think this is some LOL TYPICAL BEARS CANT DO ANYTHING RIGHT move. You can be unenthused, you can not like Glennon the player, you can be mad that they might not draft a guy...but you cant harp on that $45m figure like it matters.

Well, the money does matter.

Here's the thing. Glennon either has to be pretty damn good or Osweiler-esque bad in his first season here. If he's good enough to win a SB with, like top 10-12, it was a great signing. I think there's a very minimal chance of that being the case. If he's so bad they know they can't keep him, like you said they can probably get off the hook after one season with minimal damage. However, I think what you're missing is that he will very likely end up in the completely average-below average spot of about 15-30th overall. Just good enough for the Bears to keep and pay $15 a mil for, not good enough to actually take them anywhere. So yeah, if that happens it's easy to criticize the signing AND the money part of it.

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Glennon
PostPosted: Wed Mar 08, 2017 5:21 pm 
Offline
100000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 8:06 pm
Posts: 81466
pizza_Place: 773-684-2222
I liked Glennon years ago and wouldn't be against his signing if they didn't give him a ridiculous contract.

_________________
Be well

GO BEARS!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Glennon
PostPosted: Wed Mar 08, 2017 5:29 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 10:32 pm
Posts: 13865
Location: France
pizza_Place: Baranabyis
But $15m a year is about the going rate for an average-ish NFL quarterback. A lot of people are keen on comparing Glennon to Osweiler with the contracts and backup roles. Assuming the reports are correct and the money is not all guaranteed the Bears will only be forking over ~$13-15m guaranteed and be able to cut him with no cap ramifications in a year. Osweiler got more than double that amount guaranteed and was handed $72m overall. Bears could have two Glennons for the price of one Osweiler, so to me that comparison falls pretty flat. Other than that they are both tall and have been backups, traits a lot of NFL players have in common.

Glennon is going to easy to move on from if things aren't working out. The contract is not the issue at all.

The issue is whether the Bears will still draft somebody in the first three rounds and actively look to improve the position. If they do that they will have options and not be tied to Glennon the way they have been tied to Cutler for 8 years. Signing Glennon for this money, assuming no more than 1/3 of it is guaranteed, keeps the Bears flexible. This move is closer in character to Matt Flynn to the Seahawks than Osweiler to the Texans.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Glennon
PostPosted: Wed Mar 08, 2017 5:53 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2015 9:46 pm
Posts: 10111
pizza_Place: Q's Hillside
I'd like to see them trade up from #35 to get a pick around 30 and take Mahomes so they get the fifth year. Go either OT or defense with the #3 pick.

_________________
"When people want their version of the truth, they go find it, no matter how baseless their beliefs." -- Ken Rosenthal


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Glennon
PostPosted: Wed Mar 08, 2017 6:03 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 11:17 am
Posts: 72380
Location: Palatine
pizza_Place: Lou Malnatis
America wrote:
But $15m a year is about the going rate for an average-ish NFL quarterback. A lot of people are keen on comparing Glennon to Osweiler with the contracts and backup roles. Assuming the reports are correct and the money is not all guaranteed the Bears will only be forking over ~$13-15m guaranteed and be able to cut him with no cap ramifications in a year. Osweiler got more than double that amount guaranteed and was handed $72m overall. Bears could have two Glennons for the price of one Osweiler, so to me that comparison falls pretty flat. Other than that they are both tall and have been backups, traits a lot of NFL players have in common.

Glennon is going to easy to move on from if things aren't working out. The contract is not the issue at all.

The issue is whether the Bears will still draft somebody in the first three rounds and actively look to improve the position. If they do that they will have options and not be tied to Glennon the way they have been tied to Cutler for 8 years. Signing Glennon for this money, assuming no more than 1/3 of it is guaranteed, keeps the Bears flexible. This move is closer in character to Matt Flynn to the Seahawks than Osweiler to the Texans.

Right, and the Matt Flynn signing was a waste of time and a little bit of money. Same will be the case with Glennon. No, it's not a franchise killing move. But if the Bears don't draft a QB early in the draft this might fuck them up for the next couple years, especially if Glennon plays just good enough to warrant keeping but not good enough to actually win anything for them, which I think has a good chance of being the case.

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Glennon
PostPosted: Wed Mar 08, 2017 6:09 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 21, 2010 5:02 pm
Posts: 11735
pizza_Place: Angelo's Pizza in Downers Grove
FavreFan wrote:
America wrote:
But $15m a year is about the going rate for an average-ish NFL quarterback. A lot of people are keen on comparing Glennon to Osweiler with the contracts and backup roles. Assuming the reports are correct and the money is not all guaranteed the Bears will only be forking over ~$13-15m guaranteed and be able to cut him with no cap ramifications in a year. Osweiler got more than double that amount guaranteed and was handed $72m overall. Bears could have two Glennons for the price of one Osweiler, so to me that comparison falls pretty flat. Other than that they are both tall and have been backups, traits a lot of NFL players have in common.

Glennon is going to easy to move on from if things aren't working out. The contract is not the issue at all.

The issue is whether the Bears will still draft somebody in the first three rounds and actively look to improve the position. If they do that they will have options and not be tied to Glennon the way they have been tied to Cutler for 8 years. Signing Glennon for this money, assuming no more than 1/3 of it is guaranteed, keeps the Bears flexible. This move is closer in character to Matt Flynn to the Seahawks than Osweiler to the Texans.

Right, and the Matt Flynn signing was a waste of time and a little bit of money. Same will be the case with Glennon. No, it's not a franchise killing move. But if the Bears don't draft a QB early in the draft this might fuck them up for the next couple years, especially if Glennon plays just good enough to warrant keeping but not good enough to actually win anything for them, which I think has a good chance of being the case.



What's next year's QB class looking like? May be a good enough bridge between the drafts. Not seeing much consensus about franchise QB's in this draft.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Glennon
PostPosted: Wed Mar 08, 2017 6:16 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 30, 2005 4:54 am
Posts: 22704
pizza_Place: A few...
USC guy is supposed to be a stud. Overall, I think it's a stronger QB class next year.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Glennon
PostPosted: Wed Mar 08, 2017 6:19 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 10:32 pm
Posts: 13865
Location: France
pizza_Place: Baranabyis
FavreFan wrote:
America wrote:
But $15m a year is about the going rate for an average-ish NFL quarterback. A lot of people are keen on comparing Glennon to Osweiler with the contracts and backup roles. Assuming the reports are correct and the money is not all guaranteed the Bears will only be forking over ~$13-15m guaranteed and be able to cut him with no cap ramifications in a year. Osweiler got more than double that amount guaranteed and was handed $72m overall. Bears could have two Glennons for the price of one Osweiler, so to me that comparison falls pretty flat. Other than that they are both tall and have been backups, traits a lot of NFL players have in common.

Glennon is going to easy to move on from if things aren't working out. The contract is not the issue at all.

The issue is whether the Bears will still draft somebody in the first three rounds and actively look to improve the position. If they do that they will have options and not be tied to Glennon the way they have been tied to Cutler for 8 years. Signing Glennon for this money, assuming no more than 1/3 of it is guaranteed, keeps the Bears flexible. This move is closer in character to Matt Flynn to the Seahawks than Osweiler to the Texans.

Right, and the Matt Flynn signing was a waste of time and a little bit of money. Same will be the case with Glennon. No, it's not a franchise killing move. But if the Bears don't draft a QB early in the draft this might fuck them up for the next couple years, especially if Glennon plays just good enough to warrant keeping but not good enough to actually win anything for them, which I think has a good chance of being the case.

Well it was a "waste of time and money" because the Seahawks drafted one of the ten best QB's in the league that year also. The Seahawks decided they needed a quarterback and used all avenues to try and find one, lo and behold they did. Matt Flynn cost $10m guaranteed (in the neighborhood of what I expect Glennon to get) and never played for them, somehow the Seahawks have been one of the best teams in the NFL despite that.

As for Glennon being an in-between guy...I just dont see it. Well not that I dont see Glennon being average-to-mediocre I just dont see the Bears tolerating it for more than a season. If they win 5 games again at least Fox gets fired, Pace almost certainly either gets the axe or is given one more season before getting the axe. So I doubt Pace will put his job in the hands of Glennon after him having a bad year. If Pace is fired the new regime wont be married to Mike Glennon the way Emery was to Cutler, they'll just cut his ass and find their own guy.

A lot depends on the draft and what the details of this contract are, but if the guaranteed money is lower than I am expecting I would put the odds of Glennon never even taking a regular season snap in a Bears uniform at 1 of 3. This is what it costs to spin the ol wheel quarterback wheel and get a guy with upside into camp without burning a draft pick to do so. I would be shocked if the Bears dont also draft a QB and have an open competition in camp.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Glennon
PostPosted: Wed Mar 08, 2017 6:22 pm 
Offline
100000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 8:06 pm
Posts: 81466
pizza_Place: 773-684-2222
Peoria Matt wrote:
USC guy is supposed to be a stud. Overall, I think it's a stronger QB class next year.


Which is why sucking should be important IF you don't draft a QB.

_________________
Be well

GO BEARS!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Glennon
PostPosted: Wed Mar 08, 2017 6:22 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 10:32 pm
Posts: 13865
Location: France
pizza_Place: Baranabyis
Sam Darnold and Josh Allen would go 1-2 to CLE and SF if they were in this year's draft class. If Josh Rosen were to light it up at the combine and in pro days you'd probably be talking about him at #3.

Some people say Darnold is a better prospect than Luck or Manning.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Glennon
PostPosted: Wed Mar 08, 2017 7:36 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 30, 2005 4:54 am
Posts: 22704
pizza_Place: A few...
Nas wrote:
Peoria Matt wrote:
USC guy is supposed to be a stud. Overall, I think it's a stronger QB class next year.


Which is why sucking should be important IF you don't draft a QB.


Pace has to draft one now. He's almost forced to. It's Glennon, Shaw and no one.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Glennon
PostPosted: Wed Mar 08, 2017 7:50 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2015 1:15 pm
Posts: 41380
Location: Small Fringe Minority
pizza_Place: John's
America wrote:
Sam Darnold and Josh Allen would go 1-2 to CLE and SF if they were in this year's draft class. If Josh Rosen were to light it up at the combine and in pro days you'd probably be talking about him at #3.

Some people say Darnold is a better prospect than Luck or Manning.

Josh Allen is fucking horrible. That's is just incorrect.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Glennon
PostPosted: Thu Mar 09, 2017 9:25 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2005 2:35 pm
Posts: 82260
America wrote:
Do people still not understand how NFL contracts work or do they just pretend to not know how NFL contracts work because its en vogue to grumble about the Bears being dysfunctional? The $45m figure is absolutely meaningless. If Glennon is good the Bears are paying below market value for a good QB for three years and can use that cap flexibility to strengthen other positions of need. If Glennon gets beat by a drafted rookie or Shaw (do not rule out the latter) in camp the Bears have many options: (1) Cut Glennon, save at least $30 of the $45m guaranteed and head into 2018 offseason with Glennon totally off their books (2) Keep Glennon as backup, cut at the end of the year if he shows nothing all season with similar benefits to option 1 (3) Trade Glennon, which may or not be feasible it depends on the landscape.

This is assuming they dont fuck it up and guarantee him money after this season (or if they do its a negligible amount). If they guarantee Glennon a ton of money I dont understand it either, but I honestly doubt they do that.

So right now, not knowing the guaranteed money, only a complete idiot is angry about this deal as a Bears fan. Like you are actually a mentally retarded person who should be incinerated for fuel or used as target practice for howitzers if you think this is some LOL TYPICAL BEARS CANT DO ANYTHING RIGHT move. You can be unenthused, you can not like Glennon the player, you can be mad that they might not draft a guy...but you cant harp on that $45m figure like it matters.


don't project your lack of knowledge onto the rest of us

$20-30 million guaranteed is as widely reported as the $45 total

_________________
O judgment! Thou art fled to brutish beasts,
And men have lost their reason.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Glennon
PostPosted: Thu Mar 09, 2017 9:31 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2005 2:35 pm
Posts: 82260
Caller Bob wrote:
America wrote:
Sam Darnold and Josh Allen would go 1-2 to CLE and SF if they were in this year's draft class. If Josh Rosen were to light it up at the combine and in pro days you'd probably be talking about him at #3.

Some people say Darnold is a better prospect than Luck or Manning.

Josh Allen is fucking horrible. That's is just incorrect.


Josh Allen is a myth created by the not so bright Matt Miller. Any problem people have with Kizer can be attributed to Allen but against much worse competition.

_________________
O judgment! Thou art fled to brutish beasts,
And men have lost their reason.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Glennon
PostPosted: Thu Mar 09, 2017 9:33 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Dec 09, 2010 1:30 am
Posts: 4113
pizza_Place: Palermo's 95th
One of the recurring justifications for this is that this year's quarterback class is simply too poor to take a guy in the first round. What's amusing about that is Glennon himself is from the worst quarterback class of the past decade.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Glennon
PostPosted: Thu Mar 09, 2017 11:35 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 08, 2008 3:49 pm
Posts: 9340
Location: UM?
pizza_Place: Aurelios
Adam schefter is reporting that it's going to be a 3-year deal for Glennon and it's going to be 19 million dollars guaranteed

That pisses me off.

_________________
Hank Scorpio wrote:
What the hell, I would. Post op is OK right? Right?!?!?!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Glennon
PostPosted: Thu Mar 09, 2017 11:43 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2005 6:45 pm
Posts: 38373
Location: Lovetron
pizza_Place: Malnati's
Chris_in_joliet wrote:
Adam schefter is reporting that it's going to be a 3-year deal for Glennon and it's going to be 19 million dollars guaranteed

That pisses me off.


Don't be.

If those numbers are correct, then the Bears can chop him after year one if he sucks. And they will still have a high pick again next year.

_________________
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
The victims are the American People and the Republic itself.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Glennon
PostPosted: Thu Mar 09, 2017 11:47 am 
Offline
100000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 8:06 pm
Posts: 81466
pizza_Place: 773-684-2222
Seacrest wrote:
Chris_in_joliet wrote:
Adam schefter is reporting that it's going to be a 3-year deal for Glennon and it's going to be 19 million dollars guaranteed

That pisses me off.


Don't be.

If those numbers are correct, then the Bears can chop him after year one if he sucks. And they will still have a high pick again next year.


They'll owe a bum another $5M after wasting $15M instead of plugging holes on offense and defense.

_________________
Be well

GO BEARS!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Glennon
PostPosted: Thu Mar 09, 2017 11:50 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 92106
Location: To the left of my post
This is looking like a way to protect a rookie from being ruined by playing too early.

Expensive to do it but hopefully they can avoid a Goff situation.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Glennon
PostPosted: Thu Mar 09, 2017 11:50 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2005 6:45 pm
Posts: 38373
Location: Lovetron
pizza_Place: Malnati's
Nas wrote:
Seacrest wrote:
Chris_in_joliet wrote:
Adam schefter is reporting that it's going to be a 3-year deal for Glennon and it's going to be 19 million dollars guaranteed

That pisses me off.


Don't be.

If those numbers are correct, then the Bears can chop him after year one if he sucks. And they will still have a high pick again next year.


They'll owe a bum another $5M after wasting $15M instead of plugging holes on offense and defense.


They have between $35 and $40M dollars left to plug holes with.

_________________
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
The victims are the American People and the Republic itself.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Glennon
PostPosted: Thu Mar 09, 2017 11:51 am 
Offline
100000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 8:06 pm
Posts: 81466
pizza_Place: 773-684-2222
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
This is looking like a way to protect a rookie from being ruined by playing too early.

Expensive to do it but hopefully they can avoid a Goff situation.


You could have signed a Hoyer for a lot less and accomplished the same thing.

_________________
Be well

GO BEARS!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Glennon
PostPosted: Thu Mar 09, 2017 11:51 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Dec 09, 2010 1:30 am
Posts: 4113
pizza_Place: Palermo's 95th
Nas wrote:
Seacrest wrote:
Chris_in_joliet wrote:
Adam schefter is reporting that it's going to be a 3-year deal for Glennon and it's going to be 19 million dollars guaranteed

That pisses me off.


Don't be.

If those numbers are correct, then the Bears can chop him after year one if he sucks. And they will still have a high pick again next year.


They'll owe a bum another $5M after wasting $15M instead of plugging holes on offense and defense.

This. Haugh's column today was on the money. It's the same type of half-in/half-out type of rebuild move that the Sox were doing for years and the Bulls are continuing to do.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Glennon
PostPosted: Thu Mar 09, 2017 11:52 am 
Offline
100000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 8:06 pm
Posts: 81466
pizza_Place: 773-684-2222
Seacrest wrote:
Nas wrote:
Seacrest wrote:
Chris_in_joliet wrote:
Adam schefter is reporting that it's going to be a 3-year deal for Glennon and it's going to be 19 million dollars guaranteed

That pisses me off.


Don't be.

If those numbers are correct, then the Bears can chop him after year one if he sucks. And they will still have a high pick again next year.


They'll owe a bum another $5M after wasting $15M instead of plugging holes on offense and defense.


They have between $35 and $40M dollars left to plug holes with.


They could have almost $50M if they signed Hoyer or someone like him. Far too much for an unproven guy.

_________________
Be well

GO BEARS!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mike Glennon
PostPosted: Thu Mar 09, 2017 11:54 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 92106
Location: To the left of my post
Nas wrote:
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
This is looking like a way to protect a rookie from being ruined by playing too early.

Expensive to do it but hopefully they can avoid a Goff situation.


You could have signed a Hoyer for a lot less and accomplished the same thing.
Hoyer sucks though. He's Case Keenum. Glennon may be a decent NFL starter.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 278 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group