Skip to main content

Henry posted:

It was a big trade to a division rival with a variety of possible, long term outcomes.  

Yes, I understand all of this. 

What I cannot understand is the total fear some people have about this.

Mack is not going to single handedly ensure the Packers lose games.

Actually, I am pretty sure he will not account for even one Packers loss.

The Packers actually have starting OT's that can negate most of his big play ability.

bvan posted:
PackerHawk posted:

I'm going to enjoy seeing them scramble to cobble together a first round pick to replace Trubitski. 

Who said you could come back?

Um, who's been demanding my return for years now? 

Looks like Mack to GB was never realistic...

If he had gotten GB's 2 firsts though, even if they're 32 and 30, that's still good ammo to move up higher. If Nagy gets Trubisky playing even serviceable the Bears are an 8-8 team with that defense and running game, so it's not like the Bears picks are going to be top 10. I don't think this was on Gute at all, sounds like Oakland was interested in trading with GB or LA. 

If Mack does start sacking QBs on a regular basis again, I hope it's Cousins who becomes his favorite target.  The only thing I like about having Mack in our division is knowing he gets to play against Minnesota twice each season.

PackerHawk posted:
bvan posted:
PackerHawk posted:

I'm going to enjoy seeing them scramble to cobble together a first round pick to replace Trubitski. 

Who said you could come back?

Um, who's been demanding my return for years now? 

You brought me here on your second attempt in '01.

Grave Digger posted:

Looks like Mack to GB was never realistic...

 

If he had gotten GB's 2 firsts though, even if they're 32 and 30, that's still good ammo to move up higher. If Nagy gets Trubisky playing even serviceable the Bears are an 8-8 team with that defense and running game, so it's not like the Bears picks are going to be top 10. I don't think this was on Gute at all, sounds like Oakland was interested in trading with GB or LA. 

Was or wasn’t?

Grave Digger posted:


I remember the last time a mid/low-tier franchise spent money in free agency on highly touted defensive players, and took a chance on a relatively unknown quarterback. They also picked up some receivers and got a pretty good fullback too...

Mack on the Bears is a big deal. Just like White and Dotson on the Packers was a big deal. The Bears are rebuilding just like we did in the early 90s. Taking them for granted right now is a cataclysmic mistake.

Last edited by "We"-Ka-Bong
NumberThree posted:
Grave Digger posted:


I remember the last time a mid/low-tier franchise spent money in free agency on highly touted defensive players, and took a chance on a relatively unknown quarterback. They also picked up some receivers and got a pretty good fullback too...

Mack on the Bears is a big deal. Just like White and Dotson on the Packers was a big deal. The Bears are rebuilding just like we did in the early 90s. Taking them for granted right now is a cataclysmic mistake.

He is really good. Make no mistake about it. Is he as good as the amount they paid for him? Up for debate.

Last edited by "We"-Ka-Bong
NumberThree posted:
Grave Digger posted:


I remember the last time a mid/low-tier franchise spent money in free agency on highly touted defensive players, and took a chance on a relatively unknown quarterback. They also picked up some receivers and got a pretty good fullback too...

Mack on the Bears is a big deal. Just like White and Dotson on the Packers was a big deal. The Bears are rebuilding just like we did in the early 90s. Taking them for granted right now is a cataclysmic mistake.

I respect Mack's abilities, but he is not in the class of Reggie White and did not have the impact on the Oakland defense that White had in Philly or GB.  Also, while there's always a chance that Trubitsky will become a great QB, the odds of him reaching Favre's level are long.  I'm not blind to the fact that the Bears have improved, but the fuss and concern over the addition of Mack is a bit overplayed.  Rodgers has played against a Fangio defense and seems to have its number.  I think the Bears will have more success against the Vikings and Lions, to be honest. 

Last edited by "We"-Ka-Bong

Mack will certainly have more success against the Queens and the Lions than against us, unless we pick up injuries at the tackle position. Tackle is one of the great strengths of our offense, but we lack depth.

I didn't even watch the game, but Everytime I walked by a TV, I saw Mack in Wilson's face, harassing him.

Of course he's gone up against a guy coming off ACL surgery & what I believe is the worst offensive line in the NFL.

Add Reply

Post
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×