How much should Chicago Bears pay for Jimmy Garoppolo?

[Deleted]

Sept 14, 2016 17:52:14 GMT -6 ptisme said:

Sept 14, 2016 14:52:01 GMT -6 @soulman said:

Agreed and no one is likely to know just how highly they value him until sometime during or after the 2017 season.  If he's even close to being what Aaron Rodgers was to Brett Favre he'll be in a Pats uni the rest of his career.  Bad Billy may love swapping players for picks but only the ones he can't use and we're far from certain he won't make Garopollo his next Tom Brady.

Here's the difference: Rodgers was better than Favre at that point.   I don't think Garopollo is better than Brady yet.   Remember, Favre looked REALLY old in the NFCCG against the Giants in 07'.   Even an average quarterback performance in that game and we are in the super bowl.  When you get old the cold weather sucks even more and TT knew if you are a QB in GB you HAVE to be able to win a playoff game in January.

BTW, People in the know say Rodgers was out performing Favre in practice on a daily basis near the end.    Rodgers used to take pride in destroying our first team defense with the scout team.  Rodgers was also going into his last contract year and had they let Favre walk into camp in 08' they probably would have lost Rodgers after the season.  Garapollo still has two years left.

Agreed but this is only Jimmy Gs second year in the NFL.  A year from now who knows.

It's also tough to compare Favre to Brady because their style of play is so very different.  I would never call Brady a gunslinger and I would never call Favre a very cerebral QB.  Other than that they both play or played in the cold and sometimes the snow in January.

And where Garopollo is now vs his contract would and has been my other point.  Why is this even a topic now when he's under contract through 2017.  If they plan on keeping him there's a very good chance he'll be extended before the 2017 season or during it.  I think it would be prudent to at least wait 'til then before speculating on whether or not he'll be a Pat for life.

Every time the Bears lose a game it seem de rigueur that someone write an article about replacing Cutler for the masses and I expect that will keep happening even if he eventually manages to win a Super Bowl.

[JABF]

Sept 14, 2016 17:47:57 GMT -6 ptisme said:

Sept 14, 2016 16:00:29 GMT -6 dachuckster said:

Understood.  But if Belichick thinks that Garappolo is really good (and I am not trying to hype him here), he is the master of unloading guys before they start to lose it.  

What I'm really trying to say is that Belichick will do things like what I am talking about.  So what he does with Garoppolo will say a lot about what he thinks of the kid.

Right but unless something changes, Brady is either the best or second best quarterback in the league right now (depending on who you talk to).   Why dump Brady now when you have this kid for two more years?

What a good problem to have.  Future Hall of Fame Coach.  Future Hall of Fame QB.  And their backup looks like a solid youngster now too.  The Bears?  We haven't drafted a stud QB in decades.  Coach?  It's been decades of frustration too.  

My hope is that we can finally have a GM who can draft a solid QB.  He doesn't have to be a Tom Brady or Aaron Rodgers.  

[ptisme]

Sept 14, 2016 19:37:29 GMT -6 JABF said:

Sept 14, 2016 17:47:57 GMT -6 ptisme said:

Right but unless something changes, Brady is either the best or second best quarterback in the league right now (depending on who you talk to).   Why dump Brady now when you have this kid for two more years?

What a good problem to have.  Future Hall of Fame Coach.  Future Hall of Fame QB.  And their backup looks like a solid youngster now too.  The Bears?  We haven't drafted a stud QB in decades.  Coach?  It's been decades of frustration too.  

My hope is that we can finally have a GM who can draft a solid QB.  He doesn't have to be a Tom Brady or Aaron Rodgers.  

When I was in the Navy we had a Senior Chief who was huge, built like a tank.   We called him the Senior Beast.   When asked why he decided to lift so much he said he came to the realization he was never going to get smaller, so he decided to get bigger:)

So for the Bears, instead of wasting draft after draft on quarterbacks, build an awesome team and go get a QB who is older but has some time left in the tank to manage a team like Denver did.

[xaosgorilla]

Sept 14, 2016 6:26:02 GMT -6 JABF said:

Sept 14, 2016 3:35:07 GMT -6 motm said:

I would be disappointed if we mortgaged the farm again to "fix" the QB situation. 

This.

When those picks were given up by Chicago for Cutler the reality became that Cutler would have to carry the Offense himself.  Those lost picks placed management in a situation where ANY missed pick leaves the team short on talent.  This leads to the team failing to meet expectations, finger pointing, firings.....  Any of this sound familiar?

What we have is a chicken and egg argument.  If a team is so loaded with talent that the franchise can afford to give up the picks necessary to trade for a good starting QB, then that team is probably doing well enough that it can carry a QB to a super bowl.   IF the team is not talented enough, then the QB traded for has to be able to carry the team himself,  but if the QB is that good, then that QB will be needed where he is. 

[Deleted]

Sept 14, 2016 20:19:15 GMT -6 ptisme said:

Sept 14, 2016 19:37:29 GMT -6 JABF said:

What a good problem to have.  Future Hall of Fame Coach.  Future Hall of Fame QB.  And their backup looks like a solid youngster now too.  The Bears?  We haven't drafted a stud QB in decades.  Coach?  It's been decades of frustration too.  

My hope is that we can finally have a GM who can draft a solid QB.  He doesn't have to be a Tom Brady or Aaron Rodgers.  

When I was in the Navy we had a Senior Chief who was huge, built like a tank.   We called him the Senior Beast.   When asked why he decided to lift so much he said he came to the realization he was never going to get smaller, so he decided to get bigger:)

So for the Bears, instead of wasting draft after draft on quarterbacks, build an awesome team and go get a QB who is older but has some time left in the tank to manage a team like Denver did.

Works for me....Halas more or less did that back in '63 with Bill Wade.  He knew he had one of those once in a decade or longer defenses and brought in Wade who was an experienced vet and a capable game manager and basically let his defense bring him a championship.

Arguably you could say the same about the '85 Bears.  Although Mac's leadership skills were invaluable he wasn't much more than an average passer in the NFL.

Or we can hope Cutler get older and better simultaneously.  It's working so far. 

[ptisme]

Sept 14, 2016 21:16:02 GMT -6 @soulman said:

Sept 14, 2016 20:19:15 GMT -6 ptisme said:

When I was in the Navy we had a Senior Chief who was huge, built like a tank.   We called him the Senior Beast.   When asked why he decided to lift so much he said he came to the realization he was never going to get smaller, so he decided to get bigger:)

So for the Bears, instead of wasting draft after draft on quarterbacks, build an awesome team and go get a QB who is older but has some time left in the tank to manage a team like Denver did.

Works for me....Halas more or less did that back in '63 with Bill Wade.  He knew he had one of those once in a decade or longer defenses and brought in Wade who was an experienced vet and a capable game manager and basically let his defense bring him a championship.

Arguably you could say the same about the '85 Bears.  Although Mac's leadership skills were invaluable he wasn't much more than an average passer in the NFL.

Or we can hope Cutler get older and better simultaneously.  It's working so far. 

I remember as a kid, Mac doing serious damage to my inept Packer defense...   He may have been a manager but it seemed he always made plays on cue when the team needed it.

[Deleted]

Sept 14, 2016 21:33:04 GMT -6 ptisme said:

Sept 14, 2016 21:16:02 GMT -6 @soulman said:

Works for me....Halas more or less did that back in '63 with Bill Wade.  He knew he had one of those once in a decade or longer defenses and brought in Wade who was an experienced vet and a capable game manager and basically let his defense bring him a championship.

Arguably you could say the same about the '85 Bears.  Although Mac's leadership skills were invaluable he wasn't much more than an average passer in the NFL.

Or we can hope Cutler get older and better simultaneously.  It's working so far. 

I remember as a kid, Mac doing serious damage to my inept Packer defense...   He may have been a manager but it seemed he always made plays on cue when the team needed it.

Well Mac was anything but a game manager and he loved to drive Ditka crazy with audibles.  Let's just say as average as his arm may have been his brain and football intellect were not average. He had a better offensive mind than Ditka did and he wasn't afraid to use it.  Few if any NFL QBs today would dare challenge their HC as much as he did Ditka.  Mac knew how to win.

[JABF]

Sept 14, 2016 21:43:27 GMT -6 @soulman said:

Sept 14, 2016 21:33:04 GMT -6 ptisme said:

I remember as a kid, Mac doing serious damage to my inept Packer defense...   He may have been a manager but it seemed he always made plays on cue when the team needed it.

Well Mac was anything but a game manager and he loved to drive Ditka crazy with audibles.  Let's just say as average as his arm may have been his brain and football intellect were not average. He had a better offensive mind than Ditka did and he wasn't afraid to use it.  Few if any NFL QBs today would dare challenge their HC as much as he did Ditka.  Mac knew how to win.

I still watch those old games that have McMahon as out QB.  No joke, I've watched them hundreds of times (I originally recorded them on my olld Betamax recorder, but now have them on DVD).  McMahon didn't have a rocket arm, and he seemed to be playing with injuries a lot (he still played through a lot of injuries).  He didn't have "wow" numbers either.  But he was a smart QB.  He was an incredible leader.  You'd think Payton would have been the leader but it was McMahon, when he came on the field, you could tell he lifted up the offense (and when Steve Fuller was playing instead of McMahon, it was a very different vibe).

McMahon's best assets as a QB were:

1.  A fantastic offensive line.  I still love watching that OL play in the old videos.  Poetry in motion.  Men against boys in games.
2.  A running game that opposing defenses had to gameplan for... or downright fear.  

Our present Bears team has neither.  

[omc1969]

Sept 14, 2016 7:50:21 GMT -6 JABF said:

Sept 14, 2016 6:52:26 GMT -6 ptisme said:

Tom Brady, a fifth round draft choice could go down as the greatest to ever play the position. Matt Cassel looked like the second coming of Tom Brady, until he left New England. I think it's really tough for any person to judge whether a quarterback really is that good or whether it's the influence of Bill Belichick.

One other thought I had this morning is that until we fix the OL here in Chicago, it really doesn't matter who plays QB.  They are dead men.  The OL affects our run-game as well as our passing-game.  Hopefully the OL will get better.  Although I don't know what they are going to do with the Massie problem.  I don't know that he can get better.

I hope we get a QB in the draft.  Until then, let Cutler be the "designated punching bag" for the team.  When he goes down this year to injury, then trot out Brian Hoyer to take his turn/beatings.

I see it as a matter of balance. Jimmy G. would have been sacked as often as Jay was. ALL the pieces need to come together. "O" line comes first then WR's / RB's and finally at least a QB who can manage the game. Jimmy Mac was a "Winner". Not a great arm but he knew HOW to win and that was key. He had good but not great WR's who didn't drop the ball much and were relatively good after the catch. Walter was still a great RB as well so it all came together with great balance. Notice I didn't mention the "D" but that's because this is about building the "O" side.

[JABF]

Sept 15, 2016 8:08:02 GMT -6 omc1969 said:

Sept 14, 2016 7:50:21 GMT -6 JABF said:

One other thought I had this morning is that until we fix the OL here in Chicago, it really doesn't matter who plays QB.  They are dead men.  The OL affects our run-game as well as our passing-game.  Hopefully the OL will get better.  Although I don't know what they are going to do with the Massie problem.  I don't know that he can get better.

I hope we get a QB in the draft.  Until then, let Cutler be the "designated punching bag" for the team.  When he goes down this year to injury, then trot out Brian Hoyer to take his turn/beatings.

I see it as a matter of balance. Jimmy G. would have been sacked as often as Jay was. ALL the pieces need to come together. "O" line comes first then WR's / RB's and finally at least a QB who can manage the game. Jimmy Mac was a "Winner". Not a great arm but he knew HOW to win and that was key. He had good but not great WR's who didn't drop the ball much and were relatively good after the catch. Walter was still a great RB as well so it all came together with great balance. Notice I didn't mention the "D" but that's because this is about building the "O" side.

+1
That's an important note about the WR's back then.  It wasn't like we had fantastic talent there.  Willie Gault dropped some key passes, but the others seemed to be "money" making key receptions to keep drives going, and to score.  Walter Payton was a solid receiving option too.  And Gault may not have had the best hands, but he was a speed threat who stretched the field.  

The defense back then got a lot of turnovers for the O that shortened the field, and made it easier.  And when we did have a turnover on offense, the D quickly made a stop and the O would get another opportunity.

Our present offense and defense is just not at the same level.  We had the #1 defense back then.... but our offense was #2.  I still find that amazing.  

It is a "chicken or the egg" thing as far as QB play.  Was McMahon that great, or did he benefit from the powerful assets around him on O and D?  
Our present QB has to play with less OL help.  The WR's seem to struggle running routes.  The WR's drop key passes or quit on routes.  The present running game is struggling.  I just don't know what any QB can do to overcome all of these present problems.