Art Rooney II ‘Not Closing The Door’ On Steelers Trading For QB

So you're gutting the team in 2025 for a ****ty QB? Terrible idea, you might as well be tanking in this scenario

 

1. First, we wouldn't be trading Kenny, he'd be under contract for at least 2024 and 2025. He isn't going anywhere

2. The records are deceiving. Kenny is 14-11 but the Steelers have scored 18.1 (2022) and 17.9 (2023) points per game respectively. The 17.9 was bolstered by games played by Mason as well. The Steelers have scored 16.1 points per game in games started by Kenny Pickett. On the other hand, the Bears have scored 18.3 (2021), 19.2 (2022), and 21.3 (2023) ppg with Fields at the helm. Steady improvement and overall better for a guy that has a significantly worse team around him than Kenny does. I care more about their performance on the field and less about which team's defense is good enough to win the game for them.

3. None of this actually means that Fields (or Pickett for that matter) can (or can't) be a high end starter in the league, but it does show that Fields is simply a better player than Pickett. He is a better passer and adds an element with his legs that Pickett doesn't have.

Whether or not we want to try our hand with the Fields experiment is certainly debatable. But the argument that Fields is not better than Pickett isn't.

 

What gauntlet of Qbs???
You got P. Mahomes , Burrow (who may, or may not stay healthy), and CJ Stroud (who I'm very high on, but we've only seen one season of).....the rest are pipe dreams. They are the new versions of P. Rivers.

 

Tell that to people that actually watch the Bears....not people that just look at stats.

 

What he can do with a different OC and QB coach

 

Not what I said at all. We already have a sh*tty QB. We'd be spending a small amount of money trying to upgrade the position over a 2 year stretch. You're the one advocating tanking, not me. We wouldn't have to gut the team to spend 25 mill for a single season (2025) and our GM is good enough with the cap to be able to find a way to make it work. We'd essentially be spending a small amount of money and small amount of draft capital to take a shot on a guy who could potentially make us a better football team. If it didn't work, he wouldn't be financially tied to the organization past the 2025 season. Its a super low risk move imo. You wouldn't have to tank and risk missing on a draft pick that sets you back 5 years, and you wouldn't have to sign him for big money long term that would tie us to someone we wouldn't want to be tied to for the forseeable future.

Its simply a low risk move. It doesn't mean that we SHOULD do it.... but it is very low risk.

 

Fields might be better than Mitch don't you think. Better than Mayfield or mustache man. Minshew----- would give fields a chance but not for a really high price.

 

The entirety of my wife's side of the family is Bears fans. Mother in Law's side are all South-Siders and my Father in Law's side is all North-Siders. All Bears fans. I end up talking a lot more Bears football at family get togethers than you'd imagine.

Some of them don't love Fields, but they also acknowledge that the team around him didn't give him a great opportunity to succeed. Its a pretty even split from what I can see between rolling with Fields and improving the team, and dumping Fields and hoping Williams does better.

 

If that were the case, we should have fired Canada prior to 2023's season. I would feel more optimistic if Kenny had gotten more of what was available in a poor system, but he didn't. His issues aren't mechanical or that he was a fish out of water in a system that didn't suit him. His struggles are poor pocket presence and reading the defense/how he progresses through his reads. These are two issues that won't get better overnight no matter who the OC/QB Coach is. I'm not very optimistic on Kenny's future at all.

 

That's great.. I'm not talking to them....I'm talking to You. Again. Only one NFL team I watch even close to as much as I do the Steelers, and it's the Bears. Ever notice it's who I always take in our Draft thing we do on here......He is not good. I tried telling people this about Trubisky.
30 ints, and 38 fumbles in 38 games should be a clue for You people that don't even watch Chicago play.

 

No, $25 million is not nothing, especially in a league with a salary cap.

 

That $25m equals to $77m being locked into 3 players and we're not talking about Najees 5th year option as well as Muth, Daniels, DJ, and Warren getting new contracts. You're going to have to let someone like DJ walk in this scenario, which I'm not completely opposed to... but due to this trade we're still lacking a T or a C... None of this checks out, especially considering how horrendous the guy is. That's not low risk, that's piss poor management.

 

Comparing team points per game while ignoring turnovers is misleading and inaccurate.

 

It virtually is. Fields would be carrying roughly 30 million bucks against the cap for 2024 and 2025. That is less than 5% of the total salary cap in that span. It is definitely not "nothing" in the fact that it literally isn't 0 dollars, but in the grand scheme of the future of the franchise... its pretty much nothing.

 

I've actually watched quite a few Bears games and they do not have these weapons that you seem to think they do. Who are Fields' weapons that you referenced? Pickett had more weapons and a better team in Pittsburgh.

 

Why? The point of the offensive side of the ball is to score points. Yes, turning the ball over less could help the defense give up less PPG slightly... but we should be playing offense to score points, not help the defense give up less.

There are a lot of highly successful QB's that turn the ball over a lot. We'd have to be pretty confident that Fields would improve enough to be able to score even more PPG than he did last season with the Bears to make it worth it. I'm not sure if the Steelers are or not. I am also not 100% advocating making the move on Fields... But to make an argument that Fields isn't currently better than Pickett is ludicrous.

 

STD, I asked you who the weapons in Chicago were but you only rated the post hilarious instead of answering.

 

They've got very little. They have a bad OL, no RB, an ok TE, and DJ Moore. The rest pretty much sucks.

I think with an improvement at C, the Steelers at least have a solid OL, two pretty good WR's, a good receiving TE, and two quality RB's. There's a lot more to work with here.

 

Y'all make Me laugh. This is exactly like dejavu from a few years back.....exactly the same wrong stuff everyone spouted about Trubisky. Exactly to the freaking T.
Without having to go through all the guys like DJ Moore (who's been good with almost everyone He's played with), or Cole K....who is a better TE than what we have....the 38 fumbles, and 30 ints in 38 games should be enough for most knowledgeable fans as a super red flag.
Oh sorry I didn't answer right away....I do work You know.

 

LoL. So you are going with the same thing most of You said about Trubisky..., and later when You same people are wrong....You will hide, and act like You didn't say it.

 

The only reason Fields is in the trade market is because the Bears have the first overall pick because of the trade with the Panthers last year. Otherwise, Fields would be in Chicago for several more years...The bears and their fans had enough of Trubisky during his year 3 back in 2019....It's not comparable and that's why the price for Fields is also much higher

 

Yes, there are still decisions to be made like extensions, cuts, etc. Najee's 5th year option is worth 6.6 million. Not breaking the bank. There are others that we can extend, but we can make their 2025 hit lower and move the money later in their deal. This also doesn't include any money saved from re-structures or extensions on the guys that are under contract already for 2025. You've also forgotten that the NFL draft exists and we can make moves there to replenish positions like CB, C, T and others that need attention. We would have the 2024 and 2025 drafts to do this under this scenario.

Its not poor management, its taking a relatively small monetary risk in hopes of improving the most important position on the whole team. It is extremely low risk because we are neither tied to Fields long term nor are we giving up massive capital to get him here. If we wanted to do it, we absolutely could and at a very low risk point for the organization.

However, I don't think the organization will do it. We seem to be pretty dead-set on letting Kenny scrub out before we look to make any real improvements at the position.

 

I'm still baffled by your answer because your reply actually supports my claim that the Bears had no weapons for Fields to suceed.

 

Just because it was not the case for one individual, doesn't mean it won't be for another. Also, Trubisky had much better Bears teams around him than Fields has had.

 

I still don't think the Bears will get full asking price for Fields. The whole world knows they are going QB and they have very little leverage outside of hoping for a bidding war. It's my guess that Fields will be traded for a 3rd or two. Maybe a third and some pick swaps. Not because he isn't worth the price, but because the Bears have no leverage.