clock menu more-arrow no yes mobile

Filed under:

You grade the Chicago Bears’ offseason

NFL: Preseason-Cleveland Browns at Chicago Bears Mike DiNovo-USA TODAY Sports

Now that we’ve had you guys give us your take on the best, and the worst, offseason moves by the Chicago Bears, it’s your opportunity to hand out a letter grade. I’ll bet you guys had no idea I was setting you up for more work!

You’ve no doubt had a chance to really pour over all the comments in those two articles. You’ve heard the pros and cons on the Mike Glennon signing, the Mitchell Trubisky trade, the new defensive backs, the players Chicago released, yada, yada, yada. So you’re perfectly qualified to give an educated, and well thought out opinion on the moves made by general manager Ryan Pace.

But before you give your grade, lets take a peek at when ESPN’s Bill Barnwell had to say about the Bears’ offseason. He gave Chicago a C-, which was the lowest of the four NFC North teams, and I see his reasoning. He had three categories for his analysis, and I’ll go over some of it right here.

What went right

The Bears' secondary is better. After fielding a series of truly terrifying defensive backfields since Charles Tillman and Tim Jennings left town, they finally invested in upgrades this offseason.

Chicago’s upgrades may not be the upgrades many of us fans were hoping for, but you can’t deny they did upgrade. Last year, the Bears had a number of injuries that forced them to play guys like Jacoby Glenn, Deon Bush, De'Vante Bausby, Chris Prosinski and Demontre Hurst.

The additions of Prince Amukamara, Marcus Cooper and Quintin Demps, will bolster the top of the depth chart and provide more competition among the other defensive backs.

What went wrong

They threw assets at their quarterback situation and came away with question marks. Even if the Bears end up finding a useful quarterback out of the combination of Mike Glennon and Mitchell Trubisky, it's difficult to admire how they approached the market in doing so.

The Glennon and Trubisky sagas have been beaten to death around here, so I won’t even bother. Some feel the Bears were hosed on both deals, some don’t.

In my opinion, the team is in a better place at the quarterback position than they were a year ago. Did they over pay to do so? Maybe. Does it really matter? I don’t think so.

What's next?

Wait to find a trade partner for Glennon. Glennon is not particularly useful to the Bears at this point because they basically have him signed to a one-year deal and have every intention of transitioning to Trubisky as their long-term quarterback in the near future.

Barnwell seems to think the Bears want to trade Glennon this year. That’s not happening.

Unless both he and Trubisky look like All Pros during the preseason and early in the regular season, there’s no point.

The best case scenario for the Bears is if Glennon proves worthy of being an NFL starter, plus Trubisky shows the promise they expect him to, then they trade Glennon next offseason.

Or not, because there’s nothing wring with having a capable backup quarterback on the roster, and a Trubisky / Glennon pairing for 2018 and 2019 won’t break the bank.

So take everything into consideration this offseason and grade the Bears.


You Grade the Chicago Bears 2017 offseason.

This poll is closed

  • 11%
    (155 votes)
  • 36%
    (493 votes)
  • 22%
    (295 votes)
  • 12%
    (166 votes)
  • 5%
    (68 votes)
  • 11%
    I’m not grading them until they play
    (158 votes)
1335 votes total Vote Now