mannc

So you're saying that no rookie this year would have helped and no rookie next year would have helped. OK, but that's impossible to prove. Here's the bottom line: As good as Mack is and has been for Chicago, the trade appears to be a failure. The Bears were hoping to get to--and maybe win--a Super Bowl in a narrow window. They had a great record last year, but crapped out in the first round at home. Then they pretty much stunk this year. Their offense and defense regressed, they aren't sure if they've got a QB, and they have no first round pick (again). Mack is still a great player, but he'll be 29 in February. How many more years of greatness does he have left?

And they didn't have one last year. Josh Jacobs, for example, would have been a very nice piece for their offense to have this year. Perhaps Trubisky would not have regressed if they had given him more to work with. You don't think they could use a mid-first round pick this year, with all the great receivers coming out?

Bennett was 21-years old. Donald is going to be 29 before 2020 season and is the highest paid defensive player in the league. And that was more than 30 years ago.

Aaron Donald is a great player. No question. But Aaron Donald and Khalil Mack are comparable players. At the time Mack was traded to the Bears, Mack and Donald were neck-and-neck for best defensive player in the league. I hate to try to defend Jalen Ramsay, but he's a supremely talented player at a premium position and he's only 24 years old. Both the Rams and the Bears were convinced that the player they were acquiring would put them over the top in their quest for a Super Bowl title. Both were wrong and are now paying a heavy price. Fortunately, Beane knows that spending multiple first round picks on extremely highly paid 29-year old defensive linemen is NOT the formula for NFL success these days.

Dude, you're the one that was touting all the cap room they'll have, not me. I can't believe this is even a conversation. The last two teams that traded multiple first round picks for a defensive player are both dead in the water, with no first round picks to fall back on. The Bills have a top-three defense in the league and just used the ninth overall pick on a guy who plays Donald's position. And our offense is primitive, at best, and in need of a major talent infusion at multiple positions. If we were talking about signing Aaron Donald (or a premier edge rusher) as an unrestricted FA, then I'm all in, but that's not what we're talking about.

They’ve stopped the run pretty effectively all year. I didn’t like what I saw Saturday either, but it was one game. Right...who needs first round draft picks anyway? And if we trade for Donald, we won’t have $90 M in cap room.

Please...Don’t be disingenuous. I never said they could use Donald. The issue is giving up two first round draft picks (or more), when we have an offense that struggles to score 17 points in a game.

Don’t be obtuse

We already have one of those.

Where did that get the Bears?

Haven't we learned that it is a mistake to trade two first round picks (which is what LA would want) for a defensive player, no matter how good? Any any rate, we need our picks to help our offense. We already have a top 3 or 4 defense (despite that display on Saturday).

We played them tough last year, but the games weren't competitive? How's that possible? (I agree, BTW, that we weren't competitive v. NE last year.) But I do admit I was probably being overly harsh. I can't help it, though. I despise that franchise and it just sucked to see them dominate us on both sides of the ball on Saturday. I know it came down to the last series, but it was really discouraging to see their offense, which has been lousy the last six games, move the ball up and down the field against our vaunted defense. I'm sorry, but nothing less than putting our foot on the Patriots' throat and crushing them will make me happy. It's great to make the playoffs and all, but until that happens, we've fallen short. What I saw on Saturday didn't give me confidence that things will be different if we see them in the playoffs, and I really thought that wouldn't be the case.

0-6 vs Belichick, and no sign of a breakthrough. Still coaching no to lose—and losing. It’s a concern.

No thanks. I’m sure he’s good, but unless he can be had in round 3 or later, hard pass. There will literally be dozens of good RBs available in this year’s draft. And Wisconsin RBs perennially underperform in the NFL.

Makes sense. I’m not sure what incentive Houston has to win the game, other than possibly avoiding Buffalo in round 1.

For some reason, the Texans are 4.5 point underdogs at home v Titans. I think maybe they are planning to rest guys.

I stand by my comment.

Why do people feel the need to start these asinine threads? We aren’t swapping QBs with anyone.

Alvin Kamara. Can flat out fly.

Browns gonna Brown.

I thought they looked like the same old Patriots last night. They dominated on both sides of the ball. I have no idea how we had a chance to tie it at the end. That being said, I’d probably rather go to Foxborough in the second round than to Baltimore.

Don’t underestimate Darnold’s ability to put points on the board for the Stillers.

Yep. It’s possible that the Bills could go on a run in the playoffs, but it’s unlikely. When you can only score 10 to 17 PPG against good teams, your margin for error is just too small. Everything has to go right, and that rarely happens, especially on the road against a good team.

“Number 34 was in the area” will go down in NFL officiating infamy, along with “Just give it to ‘em.” An absolute disgrace. We did get one break that mattered. I thought Sanu had the first down on that third down pass play at the end of the first half. Johnson stuffed Harry on fourth down, and the Bills scored a TD a couple plays later.

Disgusting.