for display only
Big Blue Interactive The Corner Forum  
Back to the Corner

Archived Thread

Justin Fields rejected 4 trades prior to Steelers deal

Vin_Cuccs : 3/17/2024 7:48 pm
Quote:
Apparently, there was no shortage of interest in the 25-year-old signal-caller, with at least four other teams having inquired with the Bears about a potential Fields trade. However, Fields’s representatives preferred that the QB not be sent to any of those teams and told Chicago he wanted to join the Steelers, according to Ian Rapoport of the NFL Network.

The Bears and GM Ryan Poles did right by the former No. 11 pick, sending him to his preferred destination instead of shipping him elsewhere for maximum value. The report did not indicate which other teams were interested in Fields, nor the offers Chicago received.


Interesting considering Fields is now firmly behind Wilson.

Link below.
Link - ( New Window )
Seems like some saving face  
George from PA : 3/17/2024 7:51 pm : link
For poor return....


I thought he wanted to go to the Falcons ?
Wow  
giantstock : 3/17/2024 7:51 pm : link
I couldn't believe no one else offered. Anyway- wish him the best.
...  
SFGFNCGiantsFan : 3/17/2024 7:52 pm : link
Fields is not a good QB. Again, I don't get the angst over not trading for him.
So basically, 4 yeams wanted to trade for  
NormanAllen_95 : 3/17/2024 7:54 pm : link
Fields, but his reps did not agree to those destinationsas being best for him, and so he got to choose which team could have the right to trade a 6th for Fields?

Scraping the bottom of the barrel for juicy material...
Did he have a no trade clause?  
pjcas18 : 3/17/2024 7:54 pm : link
if not, this seems like complete spin.

Sounds like damage control by the Bears.  
robbieballs2003 : 3/17/2024 7:55 pm : link
They may have went with the trade Fields liked the best and there may have been a better deal out ther but there is no way it was significant enough. If there was a 3rd out there, there is no way in hell they are turning that down.
I don’t believe it  
UConn4523 : 3/17/2024 8:02 pm : link
.
SI  
GiantsRage2007 : 3/17/2024 8:04 pm : link
Didn’t they fire everyone?

Did AI write this story?
RE: Sounds like damage control by the Bears.  
56goat : 3/17/2024 8:22 pm : link
In comment 16436829 robbieballs2003 said:
Quote:
They may have went with the trade Fields liked the best and there may have been a better deal out ther but there is no way it was significant enough. If there was a 3rd out there, there is no way in hell they are turning that down.


+1
Sounds like spin control  
GFAN52 : 3/17/2024 8:26 pm : link
to justify the lack of league interest to me.
RE: Sounds like damage control by the Bears.  
BigBlueShock : 3/17/2024 8:31 pm : link
In comment 16436829 robbieballs2003 said:
Quote:
They may have went with the trade Fields liked the best and there may have been a better deal out ther but there is no way it was significant enough. If there was a 3rd out there, there is no way in hell they are turning that down.

Yep. Could also be spin by Fields’ reps. Has to be a bit embarrassing that nobody wanted your client and he only got them a 6th when he’s gonna be looking for a contract.
RE: Did he have a no trade clause?  
RomanWH : 3/17/2024 8:34 pm : link
In comment 16436827 pjcas18 said:
Quote:
if not, this seems like complete spin.


Completely agree. The Bears don't owe him anything. Poles job isn't to look out for Fields' best interest. It is to extract maximum value when trading assets. This is damage control for the modest return they got.
So the only people on the planet who  
LauderdaleMatty : 3/17/2024 8:41 pm : link
Thought Fields was a franchise level QB we're some posters here. And these are the same people who us endlessly demand the Giants have take a Qb. lol
RE: RE: Did he have a no trade clause?  
GFAN52 : 3/17/2024 8:41 pm : link
In comment 16436886 RomanWH said:
Quote:
In comment 16436827 pjcas18 said:


Quote:


if not, this seems like complete spin.




Completely agree. The Bears don't owe him anything. Poles job isn't to look out for Fields' best interest. It is to extract maximum value when trading assets. This is damage control for the modest return they got.


I doubt he had a no trade clause from his rookie contract.
My view  
darren in pdx : 3/17/2024 8:55 pm : link
is that if you want to move on from Jones you're basically signing up for more of the same with Fields. Him turning it around would be shocking to me. Dynamic runner, but not good enough in the passing game.
Don't agree with most  
giantstock : 3/17/2024 8:55 pm : link
If they didnt get other offers then for a 6th why not keep him? A 6th is nothing.

The Bears are trying to win. If their QB (CW) gets hurt - you'd have Fields.
RE: Don't agree with most  
GFAN52 : 3/17/2024 8:57 pm : link
In comment 16436912 giantstock said:
Quote:
If they didnt get other offers then for a 6th why not keep him? A 6th is nothing.

The Bears are trying to win. If their QB (CW) gets hurt - you'd have Fields.


They wanted a clear path for Williams and no chance of a divided locker room.
RE: Don't agree with most  
Milton : 3/17/2024 9:00 pm : link
In comment 16436912 giantstock said:
Quote:
A 6th is nothing.
And it's in 2025.
RE: ...  
5BowlsSoon : 3/17/2024 9:10 pm : link
In comment 16436822 SFGFNCGiantsFan said:
Quote:
Fields is not a good QB. Again, I don't get the angst over not trading for him.


Do you prefer Lock?
I like Fields...  
Fishmanjim57 : 3/17/2024 9:28 pm : link
I really wish that Schoen would have made a stronger push to acquire him, but we are where we are in that respect.
What I hope the Giants do during the draft is to use the picks they have to improve the team at each window with the BPA approach. In that respect I hope that the Giants draft Odunze with the 6th pick, and draft either Nix or Penix in the 2nd round.Then they can fill in the holes on the OL and DL
...  
Optimus-NY : 3/17/2024 9:40 pm : link
I must be missing something  
JohnG in Albany : 3/17/2024 10:07 pm : link
It certainly wouldn't be the first time.

But what possible leverage would Fields and his people have had?
Not buying it  
Rudy5757 : 3/17/2024 10:09 pm : link
It clearly wasn’t anything more significant than what they got so they gave him a choice. If they got a 1st or a 2nd they would have sent him to Siberia. 3 years in the Bears we’re looking to dump him, so why pay a premium.

There was no way Fields would have coexisted with a 1st rounder.
Come on  
ZogZerg : 3/17/2024 10:15 pm : link
What BS.
He won't even play with the Steelers
How would that be better than 4 other teams?
This is one of the problems with third-hand reporting  
jhibb : 3/17/2024 10:20 pm : link
(or fourth-hand, fifth-hand, etc.) that happens these days.

Nowhere in the earlier "reports" this article is based on (and links to) does it say that the Bears got offered anything better than the deal they got from the Steelers. It just says four other teams were also interested and Fields preferred the Steelers. It's one thing when readers then assume things not said, but other reporters do the same and write their own articles with those assumptions included as facts or at least implications.
RE: I must be missing something  
jhibb : 3/17/2024 10:30 pm : link
In comment 16436963 JohnG in Albany said:
Quote:
It certainly wouldn't be the first time.

But what possible leverage would Fields and his people have had?


You're not missing anything. You're just not adding in your own assumptions. :)

Fields didn't reject anything - his representation reportedly just asked that he not be sent to four other teams that had purported interest in him. Since we don't know what the other teams even offered, we don't know if that request really even had anything to do with the Bears' decision to take the Steelers offer.
RE: Sounds like damage control by the Bears.  
nochance : 3/17/2024 10:32 pm : link
In comment 16436829 robbieballs2003 said:
Quote:
They may have went with the trade Fields liked the best and there may have been a better deal out ther but there is no way it was significant enough. If there was a 3rd out there, there is no way in hell they are turning that down.



The only person who would turn that down is Wellington Mara
IF  
SleepyOwl : 3/17/2024 10:43 pm : link
Poles turned down better offers than a 2025 6th; for a former 1st round QB;

with 3years of experience; on a rookie contract; whom btw they traded two 1st

round picks (i.e Toney and Neal) to acquire; then Poles should be FIRED

Immediately.
RE: I must be missing something  
giantstock : 3/17/2024 11:01 pm : link
In comment 16436963 JohnG in Albany said:
Quote:
It certainly wouldn't be the first time.

But what possible leverage would Fields and his people have had?


No leverage only that his team was much better 2nd half of season and unlike Jones he was extremely liked by organization, players, and fans.
RE: RE: ...  
section125 : 3/18/2024 5:14 am : link
In comment 16436926 5BowlsSoon said:
Quote:
In comment 16436822 SFGFNCGiantsFan said:


Quote:


Fields is not a good QB. Again, I don't get the angst over not trading for him.



Do you prefer Lock?


Absolutely - he was free. No picks involved.
RE: I like Fields...  
section125 : 3/18/2024 5:19 am : link
In comment 16436935 Fishmanjim57 said:
Quote:
I really wish that Schoen would have made a stronger push to acquire him, but we are where we are in that respect.
What I hope the Giants do during the draft is to use the picks they have to improve the team at each window with the BPA approach. In that respect I hope that the Giants draft Odunze with the 6th pick, and draft either Nix or Penix in the 2nd round.Then they can fill in the holes on the OL and DL



What in God's name could you possibly like about Fields? He is Daniel Jones 2.0 lite, just cheaper. I didn't like him at OSU, coming out of OSU or at any point with the Bears. I saw nothing that said anything more than backup in him.
He is not a pocket passer...  
DefenseWins : 3/18/2024 6:21 am : link
/eom
I don't think it is hard to believe that Chicago tried to do right  
ThomasG : 3/18/2024 8:28 am : link
by Fields to some degree here. Maybe there were other circumstances as well leaning CHI to reject but it was all reported as one message.

Why does this matter?
The only thing they ~might~ have turned down  
UberAlias : 3/18/2024 8:55 am : link
Is a higher 6th. That's not saying much. It means that nobody saw him as a starter --i.e. they did him a favor by letting him be the backup for one team instead of another.

It sucks for us honestly, because Fields as a viable answer as a starting QB would have taken one more QB needy team out of the fight. But as it remains, demand remained greater than supply, hence we may be forced to either overpay, potentially significantly, or pushing the answer to our franchise QB down the road.
And if we don't get our QB this year  
UberAlias : 3/18/2024 9:05 am : link
We're going to have a lot of unhappy/angry fans ripping JS/BD. But the truth is, passing is probably the right move unless a guy is a slam dunk or can be had without massive overpay. And the signing of DJ was a bad move, but not nearly as bad as people think. If we didn't resign DJ, the team still needs a QB and is still no closer to that answer and would have had to pay someone else. The deal was set up to get out of in two years, so that's what we're looking at there.

If we can't make our way to 3 without getting raped in the deal or Minn acts more desperate to jump us for JJM at a cost that his grade as a prospect does not justify matching, the right move is probably to go with DJ and look for a developmental QB later, likely pushing the search to next year. It's the right move the goal is to get the QB, not just any QB at any cost.

Problem is fans won;t have any patience, understandably so, but that can easily add to more years of false hope over real answers, which is what we really need.
We gave $90M guaranteed to a QB  
Darwinian : 3/18/2024 9:13 am : link
who puts up 32nd rank QB stats when he's on the field, which is rare because he has a bad neck. The contract is every bit as bad as people think.

And no option is worse than Jones. Tyrod Taylor and DeVito were better than Jones. Jones can't play the position to the most basic minimal standard.
There is no rosy picture here if they didn't resign Jones  
UberAlias : 3/18/2024 9:20 am : link
Don't kid yourself. And Fields wasn't the answer either.
RE: We gave $90M guaranteed to a QB  
UConn4523 : 3/18/2024 9:27 am : link
In comment 16437165 Darwinian said:
Quote:
who puts up 32nd rank QB stats when he's on the field, which is rare because he has a bad neck. The contract is every bit as bad as people think.

And no option is worse than Jones. Tyrod Taylor and DeVito were better than Jones. Jones can't play the position to the most basic minimal standard.


Be fair, those 2 aren’t better players and couldn’t do what Jones did in 2022. Jones was injured in 2023 by the looks of it, not an excuse because he isn’t good enough even when healthy, but I think it’s more accurate depiction of what happened. If they all cost the same there’s no question who the better player is IMO.
I'm talking in terms of impact  
UberAlias : 3/18/2024 9:30 am : link
It was never going to be an option to run into 2023 with Tyrod Taylor and DeVito. They would have had to sign a starting caliber veteran.
RE: And if we don't get our QB this year  
HomerJones45 : 3/18/2024 9:55 am : link
In comment 16437157 UberAlias said:
Quote:
We're going to have a lot of unhappy/angry fans ripping JS/BD. But the truth is, passing is probably the right move unless a guy is a slam dunk or can be had without massive overpay. And the signing of DJ was a bad move, but not nearly as bad as people think. If we didn't resign DJ, the team still needs a QB and is still no closer to that answer and would have had to pay someone else. The deal was set up to get out of in two years, so that's what we're looking at there.

If we can't make our way to 3 without getting raped in the deal or Minn acts more desperate to jump us for JJM at a cost that his grade as a prospect does not justify matching, the right move is probably to go with DJ and look for a developmental QB later, likely pushing the search to next year. It's the right move the goal is to get the QB, not just any QB at any cost.

Problem is fans won;t have any patience, understandably so, but that can easily add to more years of false hope over real answers, which is what we really need.
You are trying to sugar coat a turd. The contract was dumb. If the Giants weren't tied to that stupid contract, they would have moved on to a cheap qb and have major cap dollars. Someone would have played qb for the NY Giants last season (someone did anyway because Jones got hurt) but for a hell of a lot less money and we would have had flexibility to exercise all option this season.
I love how the Steelers operate  
djm : 3/18/2024 10:19 am : link
not afraid to add 2 VET QBs and not afraid of the stupid ass made up media/fan narrative that cries on and on about QB controversy. That only distracts the fans and sports writers. Let the players form alliances. Who cares. Just win.

Not afraid to build a defense first and not afraid to let two established QBs come in and immediately battle it out for the starting job. Steelers aren't afraid of anything except losing and it shows.
RE: ...  
djm : 3/18/2024 10:20 am : link
In comment 16436822 SFGFNCGiantsFan said:
Quote:
Fields is not a good QB. Again, I don't get the angst over not trading for him.


It would only annoy me if the Giants can't draft a QB this April.

And it would annoy you too. Maybe that never happens but if no QB is drafted this team was perfect for Fields.
Homer  
UberAlias : 3/18/2024 10:39 am : link
I am most certainly not sugar coating a turd, as you say. I simply said it hasn't crippled us in the manner many suggest.
Yes, they would have had more cap money, never said they wouldn't. But I am curious to know what you mean by "flexibility to exercise all option this season". What QB options would they be flexing? Cousins? Yeah, that doesn't move the needle for me, sorry.
The worst thing about the Jones contract  
UberAlias : 3/18/2024 10:52 am : link
Is not what it cost us. It's the questionability of the signing to begin with. On the other side of the ledger, the fact that the team appears inclined to accept it as a loss and determined to move on, something their predecessor would not have had the ability to do. In terms out outcomes, this is at the least encouraging. Some here even refuse to accept this as the thinking, but I think there's more than enough signs of this being the case.
this doesn't seem like legit info  
Matt M. : 3/18/2024 3:52 pm : link
and doesn't make much sense, as many have pointed out here. What I don't understand is why any Giants fans are/were fascinated with him in the first place. He certainly has talent. He is a great runner and has a very good arm in terms of strength. But, he makes a slew of terrible throws every game. I am not even talking about the bad decisions. I mean he physically makes some throws that are so far off target, weak, etc. that it makes one wonder how he is even a pro. Once in a while is one thing. Every week is another.

For Pittsburgh, he is less of a question mark because he will sit behind Wilson and they are hoping they can groom him for the future. For us, it makes no sense because he is one of the few QBs in the league 100% worse than Jones without dispute. And anyone who thought he would have come in here and been a different/better QB right off the bat is nuts.
RE: I love how the Steelers operate  
TyreeHelmet : 3/18/2024 3:59 pm : link
In comment 16437248 djm said:
Quote:
not afraid to add 2 VET QBs and not afraid of the stupid ass made up media/fan narrative that cries on and on about QB controversy. That only distracts the fans and sports writers. Let the players form alliances. Who cares. Just win.

Not afraid to build a defense first and not afraid to let two established QBs come in and immediately battle it out for the starting job. Steelers aren't afraid of anything except losing and it shows.


And moving on quickly from a 1st round qb who stinks.

But this story is bullshit. Why not just cut him and give him 100% freedom if they "wanted to do right by him".
Back to the Corner