It’s widely known that the Chicago Bears chose not to select CJ Stroud, who is now the quarterback for the Houston Texans. However, back when this decision was made, it was understandable why the Bears opted to stick with Justin Fields. Stroud himself acknowledged this during the 2023 NFL Combine, stating that Chicago was Justin’s team and expressed no desire to be drafted there. Fast forward to an interview on Radio Row, Stroud was asked about the Bears quarterback situation, given their possession of the number one pick. His response was nothing short of bold.
“They should (keep Justin) if they are smart but you know.”
The interviewer acknowledged the Chicago Bears long history of not finding a franchise quarterback, making a humorous remark saying “it’s the Bears”. Stroud, in agreement, responded with a light-hearted comment, “You said it, not me,” followed by laughter. Both of their opinions are valid, but is Justin truly the best choice? I believe he could be if the team decides to trade the No. 1 pick. Building the team around him could result in success, but would it be greater or lesser than if they chose Caleb Williams? That’s the question at hand.
Stroud is not the only current NFL player supporting Justin, and more are likely won’t be the last.
Is a trade for Justin Fields coming soon?
In this week’s episode of the BFR Podcast, presented by Sports Mockery, Dave and Ficky chat with Theo Ash of The Stay Hot Podcast. Tune in for an engaging discussion on all things Bears, including off-season news, Justin Fields trade rumors, and more! Catch the episode on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or your preferred podcast platform, or watch the video below.
Subscribe to the BFR Youtube channel and ride shotgun with Dave and Ficky as they break down Bears football like nobody else.
@BearDownTX I agree. If you get extra picks for #1 or 9 spending them on more than one QB that far down in the draft would be a waste. Maybe that’s not your point, but much of how Poles will be able to do is dependent on who he thinks is available at 9. If you don’t get exactly what you want, trading a pick from next year to get a couple more this year may be in the works. Not #1, but a #2 for more in the later rounds. The one thing that is sure, 6 picks is… Read more »
@Tred – It’s funny that you don’t see a savior at pick #1 but want two QB’s in the 4th and 5th range! What? Yes, nothing is 100% guaranteed, but I could almost guarantee that the #1 overall pick is more successful by percentages than a 4th or 5th rounder. Meaning if we take every #1 and their percentage of success vs every 4th or 5th rounder ever taken and the hit rate there. It’s the difference of hitting the “0” on the Roulette table (4th or 5th rounder) vs playing red or black (#1 pick) And probably much worse… Read more »
@BearDownTX Funny thing since you mention it, the Score was very proud of their recent interview with Caleb Williams’ high school coach. In case you missed it, he reported that Caleb Williams was really good in high school and he seemed to enjoy playing football.
@Arnie – I wanted to keep these replies separate for easier reading ( i.e. not to spam the board). We both agree on taking QB(s) later rather than at number 1. I like Rattler, and Pratt. If it was me, I’d trade back from 1 a couple of times, get a boatload of picks and take 2 QBs somewhere in rounds 4-5. I just don’t see a “savior” at the number one pick. And if we do take the wrong QB that high, say “HELLO” to the next two year rebuild that will take four or five years… Because by… Read more »
@Arnie -the funny thing is – we agree on about 75% of the stuff with Fields. And I’m not at all sure that the two biggest issues that I feel Fields needs to correct – holding the ball too long, and poor 4th qtr results aren’t due to poor coaching. It only takes one sentence from Eberflus, say, just for example, “We absolutely can’t have any 4th qtr turnovers,” to neuter the offense completely. Do I think something along those lines has happened? Yes, I do. Can I prove it – nope. The point for me, is none of the… Read more »