Bears and NFL Talk Thread LIV: Khalil Mack's a Bear!

[ChiHawks10]

Obviously time will tell. 8-8 is in play. I just think that would be more on the high end of expectations.

But I look at it like this.

Most likely losses: @Min, Min, @GB, GB, NE, LAR. I think all of these teams are a step above the Bears. GB was 5-2 with Rodgers starting and beat us with Hundley.

Winable: @Det, Det, SEA, @Mia, @Buf, @ SF, @Ariz. I could see the results of any of these games going either way. I'd expect 1-1 vs Det.

Most likely wins: TB, NYJ, @NYG

Basically, I just don't trust the Bears to go 5-1 vs that middle group. Hopefully I'm wrong. But hey, I'm breaking down the schedule in July, which is a heck of a lot more than I was doing last year. The excitement level is up for me and I'll take that.

You just gave them the potential for 10 wins. I'm only arguing in favor of 8.

 

[b1e9a8r5s]

NFL Win Over Unders.... Not proof of anything, but it's interesting to me. I bolded teams the Bears play



Browns - 4.5
Bengals- 5.5
Cardinals - 5.5
Dolphins - 5.5
Redskins - 5.5
Bills - 6.5
Bears - 6.5
Buccaneers - 6.5
Colts - 6.5
Jets - 6.5
Broncos - 7.5
Chiefs - 7.5
Giants - 7.5
Lions - 7.5
Titans - 7.5
Ravens - 8.5
Panthers - 8.5
Cowboys - 8.5
Saints - 8.5
Raiders - 8.5
49ers - 8.5
Seahawks - 8.5
Falcons - 9.5
Texans - 9.5
Jaguars - 9.5
Chargers - 9.5
Rams - 9.5
Vikings - 10.5
Packers - 10.5
Patriots - 10.5
Eagles - 10.5
Steelers - 10.5

2018 NFL win totals, predictions: Vegas expert picks under 8.5 for 49ers

 

[ChiHawks10]

NFL Win Over Unders.... Not proof of anything, but it's interesting to me. I bolded teams the Bears play



Browns - 4.5
Bengals- 5.5
Cardinals - 5.5
Dolphins - 5.5
Redskins - 5.5
Bills - 6.5
Bears - 6.5
Buccaneers - 6.5
Colts - 6.5
Jets - 6.5
Broncos - 7.5
Chiefs - 7.5
Giants - 7.5
Lions - 7.5
Titans - 7.5
Ravens - 8.5
Panthers - 8.5
Cowboys - 8.5
Saints - 8.5
Raiders - 8.5
49ers - 8.5
Seahawks - 8.5
Falcons - 9.5
Texans - 9.5
Jaguars - 9.5
Chargers - 9.5
Rams - 9.5
Vikings - 10.5
Packers - 10.5
Patriots - 10.5
Eagles - 10.5
Steelers - 10.5

2018 NFL win totals, predictions: Vegas expert picks under 8.5 for 49ers

8-8 isn't asking all that much, eh?

Sorry, at this point I'm just busting your balls.

 

[b1e9a8r5s]

8-8 isn't asking all that much, eh?

Sorry, at this point I'm just busting your balls.

All in good fun.

Just think 8-8 would be a very good year, all things considered.

 

[piteus]

GB is not very good. The Lions are not very good. The only legitimately good team in the division is Minnesota. To say the division is a bear is a gross exaggeration. I expect splits in both those series. The other teams I listed... those should all be wins. So even at that, you're talking 7 wins. Then it's very, very possible they get at least a win against one of Arizona, NE, Tampa, Buffalo, KC, LA, or Seattle. To say it would be disappointing to finish anything less than .500 is not that much to ask with that schedule, IMO.

I'm not going to say a team with Aaron Rodgers is not good. History is not on our side. Stafford and Detroit is a wild card. They are not good, but certainly not terrible.

 

[ChiHawks10]

All in good fun.

Just think 8-8 would be a very good year, all things considered.

It would be. I just think anything less than that would be severely disappointing. In what, year 3 or 4 of a rebuild? The team should be .500 or better.

 

[piteus]

It would be. I just think anything less than that would be severely disappointing. In what, year 3 or 4 of a rebuild? The team should be .500 or better.

Emery and Trestman destroyed this franchise. The real rebuilding started when the Bears ditched Cutler. I say this is YEAR 3 of the rebuild. A goal of .500 is reasonable. Then the Bears need to make the playoffs next year.

 

[No Fun Shogun]

If the Bears go 8-8, I'd consider that a success. I'm guessing more along the lines of 6-10, but a two game +/- isn't that much of stretch.

 

[Illinihockey]

 

[piteus]

It's been said for a week now. We didn't know the exact detail, but this is a CAA vs. NFL fight. CAA sat out Joey Bosa due to the offset language too. CAA is also Sam Darnold's agent.

The Bears are caught in the middle. History says they won't take back bonus money for a suspension on the helmet rule, but the NFL doesn't want them to cave. The Bears never touched Danny Trevathan's money when he was suspended for the helmet to helmet hit on Devante Adams.

This isn't a Bears issue. It's a NFL concern. They don't want to give up possible bullets in future CBA negotiations to CAA. CAA runs the NBA. The NFL wants no part of that. The NFL / CAA is screwing the Bears.

 

[b1e9a8r5s]

I'm surprised that's even an option. I would think the player would have to lose money when suspended, otherwise how is that a deterrent?

 

[TorMenT]

I'm surprised that's even an option. I would think the player would have to lose money when suspended, otherwise how is that a deterrent?

I think the player would still lose money, just not the “guaranteed” part.

 

[piteus]

I'm surprised that's even an option. I would think the player would have to lose money when suspended, otherwise how is that a deterrent?

Teams can and have threatened to take back bonus money for PEDs / off the field suspensions. Bonus money is technically tied to games available to play (minus injuries from football). CAA is trying to make a point that on the field suspensions should not impact a player's bonus. They want it in writing. IMO, the Bears don't care. They didn't screw with Trevathan's bonus money. I don't even think they touched Freeman's bonus for the PED suspension.

This is bascially an ego fight between CAA and the NFL. Roquan as an inside LB might be most affected by the helmet to helmet rule. Roquan is the most high profile to make a point. The Bears are caught in the middle.

 

[clydesdale line]

Lets hope they get this resolved. Buffalo's first round pick (Edmunds) was granted the contract language over the same issue. When it comes to football, I always side with the players given their contracts aren't fully guaranteed and the life long consequences the game causes.
New helmet-targeting rule injects uncertainty into contract...

 

[TheSting]

ahha, that's a good one! Let Roquan sit out the full season.

On a side note this kid already had ominous beginnings when he lost his playbook by getting his car broken into literally days after the draft, lol!!! And now he wants a clause in his contract to pay for future fines...GTFO!!!

 

[HeisenBaez]

I'm not going to say a team with Aaron Rodgers is not good. History is not on our side. Stafford and Detroit is a wild card. They are not good, but certainly not terrible.

Packers are not a good team. Replace Rodgers with Kizer and the Packers are a 4-6 win team. It would not surprise if G.B. ends up in last place in the division. I will take the Bears roster over the Packers any day of the week.

Safe prediction is that the Bears win 7-10 games and that is if "Pretty Boy Assassin" stays healthy.

 

[ChiHawks10]

ahha, that's a good one! Let Roquan sit out the full season.

On a side note this kid already had ominous beginnings when he lost his playbook by getting his car broken into literally days after the draft, lol!!! And now he wants a clause in his contract to pay for future fines...GTFO!!!

You have absolutely no understanding of the situation or what he wants.

 

[Illinihockey]

ahha, that's a good one! Let Roquan sit out the full season.

On a side note this kid already had ominous beginnings when he lost his playbook by getting his car broken into literally days after the draft, lol!!! And now he wants a clause in his contract to pay for future fines...GTFO!!!

Lots of teams already do this. Trumane Edmunds got similar language from the Bills.

 

[Blue Liner]

Lets hope they get this resolved. Buffalo's first round pick (Edmunds) was granted the contract language over the same issue. When it comes to football, I always side with the players given their contracts aren't fully guaranteed and the life long consequences the game causes.
New helmet-targeting rule injects uncertainty into contract...

Rich Campbell of the Trib was on 670 this morning and he said that's Buffalo's team-wide policy. They have that language in all of their contracts for every player as part of their standard.

 

[clydesdale line]

Rich Campbell of the Trib was on 670 this morning and he said that's Buffalo's team-wide policy. They have that language in all of their contracts for every player as part of their standard.

Now that's interesting. Thanks for sharing.

 

[piteus]

Rich Campbell of the Trib was on 670 this morning and he said that's Buffalo's team-wide policy. They have that language in all of their contracts for every player as part of their standard.

That's not the issue anymore. Now both tbe Bears and CAA are going to the media to explain their positions. That means it's getting acrimonious. ESPN just wrote the Bears are being disingenuous. They want language in the contract that could void the guarantee for even a team fine.

The Bears just got skewered for being "unreasonable." After the great thing they did Zach Miller, this is not good PR. The Bears should give in a bit. Some of their demands are over the top ... even if they promise not to act on it. This is not a Pace thing. It implies it's a Bears ownership issue.

Roquan Smith's holdout is justified: Why Bears are to blame

 

[Blue Liner]

That's not the issue anymore. Now both tbe Bears and CAA are going to the media to explain their positions. That means it's getting acrimonious. ESPN just wrote the Bears are being disingenuous. They want language in the contract that could void the guarantee for even a team fine.

The Bears just got skewered for being "unreasonable." After the great thing they did Zach Miller, this is not good PR. The Bears should give in a bit. Some of their demands are over the top ... even if they promise not to act on it. This is not a Pace thing. It implies it's a Bears ownership issue.

Roquan Smith's holdout is justified: Why Bears are to blame

I was just addressing that poster's post regarding the Bills, specifically.

 

[BK]

Once again the Bears are looking to be cheap on something that they shouldn't. Think this on Pace or above him?

 

[Blue Liner]

Once again the Bears are looking to be cheap on something that they shouldn't. Think this on Pace or above him?

I'm going to guess it's above him but obviously don't know that for certain.

 

[piteus]

Once again the Bears are looking to be cheap on something that they shouldn't. Think this on Pace or above him?

The ESPN article implies it's on Bears ownership. This is how they've done it for years and don't want to set a precedent for other rookies. It's about control even though the Bears DON'T have a history of taking back guarantees. At least that's what I inferred.

I'm sure CAA was the source for Graziano's story ... and he followed up by detailing Trubisky and Floyd's contract. After the Giants and Bills relented on the contract language regarding Barkley and Edmunds respectively, the Bears are now losing the PR battle. Unless CAA is demanding Smith's bonus should be guaranteed despite PED suspensions, felonies, etc., I suspect the Bears are going to lose the PR battle.