Saturday, June 15, 2024

The Jaguars Just Validated Bears’ Decision To Trade Justin Fields

-

Multiple reasons went into the Chicago Bears’ decision to trade Justin Fields to the Pittsburgh Steelers. For one, GM Ryan Poles felt the team had an opportunity to upgrade at the position with the #1 overall pick. There was Fields’ growing track record of getting injured due to his play style. It was also hard to ignore the fact this regime didn’t draft him. That is always a factor in such decisions. However, one big focal point of the move was money. Fields is entering the final year of his rookie contract. The 5th-year option would’ve cost over $25 million. Chicago almost would’ve been forced to consider a small extension for him, which might’ve gone even higher.

If people needed a reminder of how crazy the quarterback market is, the Jacksonville Jaguars provided it. Word dropped that the organization had reached a five-year extension with Trevor Lawrence. It goes for $275 million, which averages out to $55 million per year. That is the same amount as Joe Burrow. Keep in mind Lawrence has a passer rating of 91.9 over the past two seasons, with a 17-16 record. His lone foray into the playoffs involved two highly inconsistent performances.

This guy now makes more per year than Patrick Mahomes.

Justin Fields likely would’ve commanded big money, too.

Not money at that level, but in the Daniel Jones range. That amounts to $40 million per year. That is what the NFL considers on the cheaper side these days. It is a glaring reminder of how out of control the quarterback market has become. Teams are so desperate for stability at the position that they will pay ludicrous amounts of money to even the mediocre ones. Chicago didn’t want to imagine a scenario where they were stuck in the same situation with Fields. Better to start fresh.

Subscribe to the BFR Youtube channel and ride shotgun with Dave and Ficky as they break down Bears football like nobody else.

Caleb Williams provides them with four additional years of cheap play at the position and might be an instant upgrade as a passer. It is easy to understand why the Bears went in that direction. Justin Fields’ contract is the Steelers’ problem now. This might explain why they intend to keep him as a backup. Doing so would ensure he doesn’t perform too well going into free agency next off-season. That means they might be able to keep him at a reduced rate. Chicago never would’ve been able to sell that.

21 COMMENTS

Notify of
21 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
PoochPest
PoochPest
Jun 15, 2024 5:21 pm

I love this discussion of economics and the NFL, but while I like Bubba’s marketing pitch, I also want to point out to everyone talking about capitalism that the NFL (and all of our society for that matter) is a big gumbo of capitalism, socialism, crony capitalism, and whatever other spices are thrown into the mix. The NFL is Socialist: As an organization the NFL doesn’t have any credible competition after merging with the AFL years ago and snagging all the USFL players after guys like Herschel Walker and Steve Young had snagged huge mega contracts in their first years… Read more »

PoochPest
PoochPest
Jun 15, 2024 4:49 pm

@barry_mccockiner Can’t say I believe in how good Justin Fields “would have been,” had he stayed while the Bears fired Getsy, but I AM damn sure that Getsy was the major (80%?) reason for the Bears offense failures. While Lambert continues to downplay Getsy’s role in the offensive struggles, Las Vegas press is reporting that both O’Connell and Minshew are “struggling” with Getsy’s “complex schemes.” Saying Getsy’s offensive coordination was “complex” is wrong. It is nonsense. In was incoherent with Chicago for two years, and is incoherent for Las Vegas now. The descriptions coming out of Vegas is that there… Read more »

barry_mccockiner
Jun 14, 2024 1:31 pm

I would pay a thousand dollars to see throw a football.

barry_mccockiner
Jun 14, 2024 1:07 pm

No, it doesn’t “validate” anything. If Caleb Williams is anywhere between serviceable and good, he’ll be looking for $80m per year when his contract is expiring. If he sets franchise passing records, he’ll be reaching for $100m annually, regardless of record. If he underperforms, can’t stay healthy, etc., then this year’s off-season will have been a complete waste. While I’m excited to see him play, I’m still a Fields truther: I would’ve rather seen Poles extend Fields at a price that reflects his past performance and used the historic draft capital he had this off-season to obtain an absolute haul… Read more »

Tred
Tred
Jun 14, 2024 12:30 pm

– OK, you are one of the guys who thinks Fields simply stinks. Then tell me why the article uses the excuse that Fields would cost 40M a year to resign? If you think it was time to move on, then just say that in the article, not that the Bears would have been looking at 40M per year to resign Fields. Because neither of us thinks Fields would get that money.

Last edited 1 day ago by Tred

Chicago SportsNEWS
Recommended for you