Bears Acquisition of Khalil Mack Sends Shock-Waves Throughout the NFC North

The NFL world awoke this morning to news which will undoubtedly overshadow roster cutdown day, could reshape the NFC playoff picture, and make the NFC North the toughest division in football once again.  Ian Rappaport broke the news this morning that the Bears had shocked the football world and acquired Khalil Mack from the Raiders for two first round picks.  The Bears acquisition of Mack will solidify their defense and will send shockwaves throughout the NFC North, making them a force to be reckoned with once again.

Throughout the offseason, the Bears have added talent on both sides of the ball, but the acquisition of Mack is certainly their crowning achievement of this offseason and beyond.  With the addition of Mack, the Bears have added a double-edged sword to their arsenal against the Packers.  They have essentially prevented them from transforming their defense into an elite unit and will now be able to further exploit the questionable right side of their offensive line.

With this being said, the purpose of this article is not to second-guess the Packers front office, but to gain a perspective on what the Packers must do in order to continue to be a perennial force inside the NFC North.   

After extending Aaron Rodgers, the Packers sites must now be turned to fortifying their offensive line in any and every way possible in order to keep him on the field for the duration of his new contract.  In order to do this in the short term, the Packers will have to scour the free agent market in the next 24-48 hours in search of any tackles that may be available to upgrade the offensive line; and in the long term, they must seriously consider drafting an offensive tackle with one of their first-round selections in the 2019 NFL Draft.

With the addition of Mack to the NFC North, Brian Bulaga's health becomes even more paramount to the Packers success.  Without an effective and healthy Brian Bulaga, the right side of the line could expose Aaron Rodgers to punishment and derail the rushing attack.  With a healthy Brian Bulaga, the Packers will be able to provide Aaron Rodgers time to operate inside the pocket and allow the running game and screen games to be used a mechanism to control the pace of the game and keep elite pass rushers like Mack, at bay.

As I look ahead to the regular season, I foresee the most important key battle every week to be the how the Packers offensive line will fair versus the opposing defenses' front seven.  I realize that each and every season the majority of pundits ask the question of whether the Packers defense can be a middle of the pack group and make enough plays on a consistent basis for the team to win but, moving forward, the real question should be whether the Packers offensive line is capable of protecting Aaron Rodgers.  

Aaron Rodgers will turn 35 at the end of this campaign and has already endured two serious collarbone injuries.  It is safe to say that the soon to be 35-year-olds' body will not be able to rebound much longer from punishing hits of this magnitude.  I think we often take for granted, Aaron Rodgers superman-like qualities and continue to think that he is indestructible.  If anything, last season proved to us that he is merely mortal and that his protection should be of the utmost importance if the Packers hope to have one more Superbowl run during the final years of his career.

The Bears acquisition of Khalil Mack now presents the Packers with yet another jarring reminder of where their priorities in roster construction will have to shift over the next several years; the offensive line.                   

 

-------------------

David Michalski is a staff writer for Cheesehead TV. He can be found on Twitter @kilbas27dave 

NFL Categories: 
0 points

Comments (90)

Fan-Friendly This filter will hide comments which have ratio of 5 to 1 down-vote to up-vote.
Jonathan Spader's picture

September 01, 2018 at 11:10 am

Well ****... Guess I should pick up the Bears defense on FF waivers.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
4thand10's picture

September 01, 2018 at 12:01 pm

I’m glad the Packers didn’t sell the farm. Although Mack is an outstanding player, and not to jinx, but he is 1 ACL injury away from not doing what they expect. Again, I’m not jinxing him I’m just saying that giving up 2 1st’s plus all that money...way too much of a risk and has potential to hurt the team long term. But this is a win it all now gamble type mentality now. It still won’t help them because I believe they do NOT have a QB who can take them to the promised land.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Bearmeat's picture

September 01, 2018 at 12:39 pm

That's what it comes down to. Is Trubisky good. If he is, they're in great shape. If he's not, it doesn't matter, because everyone there will be fired in 2 years.

They've been all-in on Trubisky since they paid that king's ransom last April to get him. So this doesn't really change the parameters for them. And it's a very strong move because of that.

I don't think this makes them better than GB or MIN. I do think it may give them a puncher's chance to compete in the division.

Like I said: SHIT!

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
NickPerry's picture

September 01, 2018 at 01:36 pm

Good point about the "Kings Ransom" BM. The Bears already gave up how many picks to get Trubisky? Now they'll be giving up their next two #1 and according to Rappaport there's a player currently on the Bears going to the Raiders as part of the deal....Who is that going to be? I would think it's much more than just a "Throw-In", maybe a starter at another position or even one of their younger players their high on. Between Trubisky and now Mack the Bears have traded away 2 firsts, 2nd, 3rd, and a 4th round pick acquiring those 2 players plus the player we're waiting on to be named. Picking where they do that's a lot of quality swings.

Mack is 27 years old and has 4 years of wear and tear on him. Hey Mack may be one of those guys like Suggs who is terrorizing QB's into his early 30's. BUT he may be one of those who completely falls off a cliff. He's also going to cost maybe more than Donald cost the Rams...The Packers will NEED that cap money they would have had to use to get Mack. Give me the two 1st round picks who will be under contract for 5 YEARS and cost less than half of what Mack will once he's signed.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Bearmeat's picture

September 01, 2018 at 02:00 pm

NP,

Come on. Tell me with a straight face that you didn't think 2 #1s was the right move for Mack.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Spock's picture

September 01, 2018 at 02:30 pm

Bearmeat, I don't know what NP thinks but I can tell you with MY straight face that giving up two #1's given our limited draft capital w/o them would have screwed up our future drafts big time, IMHO. Of course, I never even heard of Mack before all this rumor stuff was going on. :)

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
jeremyjjbrown's picture

September 01, 2018 at 04:18 pm

The chances of landing a guy like Mack with one of those two picks is well below 5%

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
GBwastedthe12thoverallpick's picture

September 01, 2018 at 04:22 pm

In the back end of the 1st, less than 1%.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
AaronNagler's picture

September 01, 2018 at 07:58 pm

If you have never heard of Khalil Mack, you area not much of an NFL fan.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Spock's picture

September 02, 2018 at 06:38 am

Aaron, I beg to disagree. I am an NFL fan of the PACKERS. I don't watch other teams or college ball. I'm well aware of him now because of the interest of fans signing him. I'm an avid fan of the Packers. No need for you to go with a personal attack of my fandom. I never claimed to be an NFL fan, just a Packers fan; What' wrong with that? I'd never heard of Reggie White either until the Packers signed him in FA. Doesn't mean I'm less of a fan here or on any other Packers site. :)

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
NickPerry's picture

September 01, 2018 at 05:04 pm

Oh no...Don't get me wrong..I would have LOVED to see Mack as a Packers. BUT the the amount the Bears gave up was an awful lot AND when you combine Rodgers and Mack's salaries, well sorry friend that doesn't leave room for anything else. Nor only that it puts an enormous amount of pressure on Gutekunst to hit on the picks he would have left otherwise this team is going to get old and be lacking young talent in a hell of a hurry.

Just look at what's happened to the depth on this team because of all the missed picks by Thompson. There was a reason they went 3-8 without Rodgers last year with 2 of the 3 wins coming against the Browns and Bucs....The Packers NEED every pick they have BM. We both sat here at the start of TC saying 2019 would be a better year for the Packers yet we still have hope for this year. The 2019 draft is LOADED with pass rushers and with 2 #1's the Packers are primed to make a move to get one or even 2.

The Bears get:
Outside linebacker Khalil Mack
A 2020 second-round round draft pick
A conditional 2020 fifth-round draft pick

The Raiders get:
A 2019 first-round draft pick
A 2019 sixth-round pick pick
A 2020 first-round draft pick
A 2020 third-round draft pick

That's a lot of cheddar for a guy who will probably be disgruntled again in a few years IF he performs. # TOO RISKY

EDIT...BTW..The Bears are already without their #2 NEXT year because of the deal to move up and draft Anthony Miller. They better PRAY Mack is dominate for YEARS because if not they'll suck for YEARS and be in Cap Hell when they pay this dude $20 Plus million a year.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Rak47's picture

September 01, 2018 at 05:14 pm

I did up until I saw what Aaron Donald signed for. I thought Mack might sign for around 100mil over 5 years which they could possibly afford. No way can they do 130-140 mil in the Aaron Donald range which is what Mack and his agent are going to want. The Bears just handed out huge contracts to the WR from Jacksonville, and the CB that Gute made them spend bank on to keep, lol. That move is looking better now btw. and traded away picks for Trubisky. Now add in the Mack trade and what it will take to sign him in his prime and the Bears could be financially crippled for years. :-}

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Rak47's picture

September 01, 2018 at 05:36 pm

I'm hearing reports that Mack is signing or signed for 6 yrs 141 mil with 90mil guaranteed. That's 23.5mil per year.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Tundraboy's picture

September 01, 2018 at 08:08 pm

I confess. I did. But holding on to both #1s with Gute drafting or even dealing one of them ,is pretty nice to look forward to.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Oz40's picture

September 01, 2018 at 03:39 pm

No, but we do have a QB that can take us to the promissed land......He would have had a huge impact on GB future.....but man those 2 first rounders could be huge for us...sarc...overvaluing pics vs proven talent is idiotic at best....what a huge mistake the Packers made by not landing Mack

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Oz40's picture

September 01, 2018 at 03:40 pm

and PS...How did the Biegal pick vs TJ Watt work out...I haven't seen much from King..Have you????

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
NickPerry's picture

September 02, 2018 at 05:13 am

Your leaving out an important part...Thompson is no longer making the picks...Different GM now and one I have a hell of a lot more confidence in.

Let me ask you something. How do you know what the Raiders were asking from the Packers? Maybe because of WHERE they figured the two 1st's were coming from (late 20's or 32 hopefully) they wanted a extra 2nd too.

Lastly HOW in the hell would the Packers have afforded Rodgers new contract AND Mack at $23.5 million a season which is what he got? Talking about seriously screwing yourself for your future. Not only that but your also trading away your next 2 opportunities to lock up a potential Mack or Rodgers for 5 years at a predetermined amount.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Oz40's picture

September 02, 2018 at 06:24 pm

You guys can dislike this post all you want. But the modern NFL has proven me correct. Ted Thompson’s pass draft picks have proven Me correct. How many are left on the team right now? It is amazing how many people on here will agree with whatever the Packers brass does. I’ve been a Packer fan all my life but that doesn’t mean I won’t acknowledge when they made mistakes Future draftpicks are not worth more than proven stud players. Mack was worth more to us than he was to the Bears

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
GBwastedthe12thoverallpick's picture

September 01, 2018 at 04:21 pm

Mack has absolutely no injury history. Let's not play the "what if" game. Good move by Chicago, as they now have a DEF that can carry the team. Gutey flinched & lost out on a generational talent. Life goes on.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
GBPDAN1's picture

September 01, 2018 at 01:21 pm

So instead of acquiring Mack we let him go to a division rival....what a bummer. The Bears D is going to be great, they were top 10 last year and now they added the best ILB in the draft and the best-all world- OLB. And of course we play them first game.

I'm praying Bak and Bulaga stay healthy. Can you imagine Mack against one of our inferior O tackles. I really hope Trubisky turns out as a poor NFL QB because if he's good, that running game and defense is good enough to contend.

But, we have Rodgers, so, we're are still the better team

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
The TKstinator's picture

September 01, 2018 at 02:09 pm

Can any one player (even one as good as Mack) make a defense “elite”?

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Spock's picture

September 01, 2018 at 02:32 pm

TK, Even Reggie White needed players next to him and from what I've read Mack is no Reggie.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
The TKstinator's picture

September 01, 2018 at 02:44 pm

Eggs
Act
Lee
!

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Oz40's picture

September 01, 2018 at 03:44 pm

How good would Clark, Daniels, Wilkerson look with Mack looming in the picture...a player like him makes those guys that much better....all three are dam good now. Huge mistake not getting Mack..Instead the Bears have good D-line that will now be great

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Oz40's picture

September 01, 2018 at 03:47 pm

Vegas has a pretty good handle on all things NFL

https://www.yardbarker.com/nfl/articles/khalil_mack_trade_leads_to_stunn...

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
jeremyjjbrown's picture

September 01, 2018 at 04:20 pm

Obviously. A bunch more people are now going to bet on the Bears. Vegas wants the potential payout on each team to be as equal as possible. They don't care who wins.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
The TKstinator's picture

September 04, 2018 at 06:51 pm

Way too soon to say ”huge mistake”.
It’ll be interesting, but let it play out.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Jonathan Spader's picture

September 01, 2018 at 03:52 pm

TK, back when he was healthy JJ Watt did. He took a mediocre Texans defense to being one of the better defenses in the NFL.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Lphill's picture

September 01, 2018 at 11:09 am

So the Bears are an instant Super Bowl contender because they got a disgruntled player who was ranked I think 15 th in sacks last year? Did he want to go to the Bears ? And will they give him a long term deal to his liking or will he sit out whenever he feels under appreciated? So maybe next year the Packers move up with one if their first round picks and take a pass rusher. Kirk Cousins and the Vikings should be more concerned about it since their O line is a mess .

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Samson's picture

September 01, 2018 at 11:19 am

Sour grapes maybe? --- Suddenly Mack isn't all that good because he's a Bear?

Gilbert & Mack would have been a nightmare for the opposition to deal with. --- Now GB has a worn down and oft injured CM3 and an over rated and oft injured Perry. --- Hope the DL makes up for the lack of LB talent.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Branden Burke's picture

September 01, 2018 at 12:19 pm

Well, cm3 had better stats his first 4 years in the league in less games than Mack has. And cm3's stats fell down to ordinary at his age 27 season (same age as mack).

Jj watt was rewriting the history books, unlike Mack. Was pretty much never injured too. That is until his age 27 season (same age as Mack).

Mack's stats haven't exactly matched his hype or talent. His numbers have declined each year since he peaked in 2015. And even his defensive mvp campaign wasn't all that impressive. He was the 12 best pass rushers that year in a down year. The sack leader, Vic Beasley, tied the lowest total by a sack leader in the past 20 years. It had more to do with the raiders being the surprise media darling than being other worldly. I'm just saying, he isn't jj watt.

There are about 15 to 25 guys in the NFL that give you similar production. Not worth 2 high first round picks plus QB money on a team not ready to compete. They could have got into a bidding war for a similar production player in next year's free agency, probably saved money, and have both their first round picks and whatever starter we find out they traded.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Minniman's picture

September 01, 2018 at 03:44 pm

I'm inclined to think that he's (mostly) the right player, but it's the wrong time to pull the trigger on a deal like that. There are too many unknowns in the new guys that GB brought in to do a "sell the farm" deal.

That said, as TGR posted a couple of months ago when we were talking about FA Edge guys that like decent QB's, good pass rushers almost never make it to FA.

I still like the idea of poaching a big name edge defender, but only once I see how the young secondary and the retooled d-line goes - perhaps Gute looks at who's (on paper) coming off contract this year and starts the ball rolling......... I'm sure that if he said "we are going to be in the market for an Edge guy (BS or not)" that every player who is coming off contract would take notice...... there's probably anti-tampering violations in there somewhere, but I can dream........

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
henry113's picture

September 01, 2018 at 07:08 pm

Samson, you got that right. CM3's best days are behind him. Mack surely would have been a game changer. Opportunities like this don't come around that often. I hope this don't come back to bite us in the ass. Time will tell.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
holmesmd's picture

September 01, 2018 at 07:24 pm

You’re a Vikings fan, right? I was just wondering why you post here? I mean I would never care to read or post on a Viking’s site. Odd....

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Kb999's picture

September 01, 2018 at 11:54 am

Rodgers gets to see Mack twice a year now. Not a Good day.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Minniman's picture

September 01, 2018 at 03:48 pm

Mr Mack, please meet Mr Bulaga and Mr Lewis.

Sub-optimal, but effective. Let AR take care of the rest.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
LayingTheLawe's picture

September 01, 2018 at 11:10 am

The team Mack was on last season went 6 - 10 so maybe he can drag the B*#rs up to 6 - 10.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Branden Burke's picture

September 01, 2018 at 12:21 pm

Jj watt was making NFL history and couldn't make Houston a playoff team.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
NickPerry's picture

September 01, 2018 at 01:42 pm

AND he had 4 sacks....FOUR!!!!

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Qoojo's picture

September 01, 2018 at 11:11 am

This just in, Bears still suck.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
henry113's picture

September 01, 2018 at 07:13 pm

They suck less today. But your right, they still Suck

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Samson's picture

September 01, 2018 at 11:15 am

It's a strong move by the Bears.
As good as Gute has done so far, obtaining Mack would have made his first year as GM a rousing success and probably put GB in the SB in season 2018.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
tincada's picture

September 01, 2018 at 12:21 pm

Not anymore. They have a porous OL and fair to medium DL. AR take out a huge insurance policy.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Branden Burke's picture

September 01, 2018 at 12:23 pm

The strongest position on the Packers roster is their D line followed by TE.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Kb999's picture

September 01, 2018 at 09:16 pm

The strongest position is QB. Without mr. Rodgers we don't win.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Oppy's picture

September 01, 2018 at 12:36 pm

Weren't you just comparing the Packers to the Vikings, stating the Packers "have a ways to go" before they are NFL elite.. but signing Mack "probably put(s) GB in the SB in season 2018"? You also stated that the Vikings are good enough, "They don't need (Mack)".

Do big splash signings, historically speaking, almost always get the teams that make them into the Super Bowl that season... ?

I think we're getting carried away here.

Mack could have been a nice piece, no doubt (if the price was reasonable). But there's so many factors that go into getting to the super bowl.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Bearmeat's picture

September 01, 2018 at 11:29 am

SHIT.

That's all I have to say about it.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
PatrickGB's picture

September 01, 2018 at 11:37 am

He was really out of reach. Too many draft picks and too much money. We have a lot of players coming up for contracts anyway. Still...

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Bearmeat's picture

September 01, 2018 at 11:42 am

It was doable. Unless the Bears went 3 #1s, it was doable.

SHIT.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Samson's picture

September 01, 2018 at 11:56 am

Of course it was doable.
Truth is, he would have put the Pack's "D" over the top.
He's an All-Pro at LB. -- The Pack need an All-Pro at LB.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Kb999's picture

September 01, 2018 at 11:59 am

Amen brother. They also wouldn't have to face him twice.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
MytQ's picture

September 01, 2018 at 12:19 pm

What does "doable" look like? Two firsts and a second or third round pick? Not worth it. GB would have still had to make a higher offer then the DaBears to get him.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Bearmeat's picture

September 01, 2018 at 12:36 pm

2 #1s and a 3rd perhaps.

And yes, I do think with a 35 year old HOF QB, that price is worth it for a talent like Mack at his position when our starters suck.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
NickPerry's picture

September 01, 2018 at 01:41 pm

Why don't we all settle down and find out WHO the player is on the Bears that was part of the deal. According to Rappaport it was two 1st's AND a player...Well who is the player?

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Bearmeat's picture

September 01, 2018 at 02:01 pm

Other than ARod, Bakh or Adams, who would you not ship off of this team for Mack?

I can't think of anyone.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
SJ EC's picture

September 01, 2018 at 12:06 pm

My question now is how much this might change what we had planned for the opening game? Obviously this has to have some impact on the game plan.... let’s hope that Mack is still getting acclimated and won’t see too much action game 1 (a guy can hope, can’t he??)

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
4thand10's picture

September 01, 2018 at 12:08 pm

It might mean we are keeping a Fullback or 2.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
4thand10's picture

September 01, 2018 at 12:10 pm

I’m still excited for this year. Rodgers to JIMMAY Graham = awwwwweeeesomesauce.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
JohnnyLogan's picture

September 01, 2018 at 12:11 pm

I love how it's always described as two #1's. In fact it's one #1. The other is Mack. How many #1 picks did Thompson screw up. I think the Bear's #1's were more attractive and the pack would have had to throw in a #2. I'd do it in heartbeat. The money?... Mathews and Cobb come off the books next year. There are replacements for them. No one for Mack. Pettine or no Pettine we still don't have the talent on D. No pass rush, no LB's, young CB's, and mediocre safeties. Gute flinched.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Branden Burke's picture

September 01, 2018 at 12:27 pm

You don't sell the farm for the chance to play in a Superbowl in 2018. He took over a rebuild and has done a really good job. Hopefully this year goes well, but 2019 is the year Green Bay needs to start looking to sell the farm to win. Loads of cap space, draft picks, and Rodgers closing window.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Minniman's picture

September 01, 2018 at 03:54 pm

I response-posted something not dissimilar above.

Right player - wrong time.

Too early to see how the D rebuild goes before going all-in

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
NitschkeFan's picture

September 01, 2018 at 10:54 pm

I would have loved to get Mack, but it looks like perhaps the Bears outbid the Packers. They had higher draft picks to offer, and perhaps more money to offer Mack himself to get the deal done.

We may never know how serious a bid the Packers made to the Raiders so it is hard to judge Gute without that info.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
tincada's picture

September 01, 2018 at 12:18 pm

"The Bears still suck!"
-- Mike McCarthy

Really Mikey?

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
henry113's picture

September 01, 2018 at 06:47 pm

The Bears suck a lot less with Mack

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
4thand10's picture

September 01, 2018 at 08:53 pm

Can Mack cover?

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Bearmeat's picture

September 02, 2018 at 06:51 am

No, but Fuller can.

Their D is going to be very good.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
KnockTheSnotOutOfYou's picture

September 01, 2018 at 12:30 pm

I'm glad the Pack didn't give up 2 first round picks. Look at how good Gute has appeared to have drafted this year. Gute does not appear to draft like TT. If Thompson was still running the show Id certainly say cough up 2 draft choices because he likely would screw them up.

Remember the Bears first round draft choice was this stud LB. Everyone was drooling over him. Him with Mack could make things really interesting.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Minniman's picture

September 01, 2018 at 04:01 pm

Good point, I forgot about Roquan Smith.

I'm still OK with Bulaga+Lewis on Mack and DBAKH on Smith.

They will keep an O-line honest though

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Dean Ticks's picture

September 01, 2018 at 12:56 pm

Sounds like Chicago gave up more than 2 first round picks. I would like Evans back on OL for insurance. But the OLB spot is not a strength. Mack would've been a game changer IMO.
Bears a Wc contender if their O gets consistent.their D is stout now. If the O isnt consistent, they'll battle Det for cellar

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
TheBigCheeze's picture

September 01, 2018 at 02:19 pm

WOW!!!......WHAT A BUNCH OF SCARED-A** FOOLS.........Mack is NOT going to be a game changer for the lowly bears....Packers made the right choice....Mack is too much money....too much risk........hear me now.....you'll thank me later.....THE BIG CHEEZE HAS SPOKEN!!!

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Since'61's picture

September 01, 2018 at 03:21 pm

Mack will do for the Bears what Suh did for Miami. Almost nothing. Thanks, Since ‘61

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Cartwright's picture

September 01, 2018 at 03:51 pm

I'm cynically thinking they went for this trade with the express purpose of taking Rodgers out, thinking that Bulaga's going down at some point. I'm also cynically thinking there aiming for that ankle from snap one. This is a heated rivalry going back from the beginning and I'm sure Khalil is going to be told all about it. George Hallas is smiling somewhere.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Minniman's picture

September 01, 2018 at 04:08 pm

The good news is that Mack will have not trained or played yet this season, so he's not going to be anywhere near top form in week 1.

Double team him early and up-tempo the offense and we will see how effective he is in the second half.

it will also see how well Smith has adjusted to the NFL step up when he's getting rapid-fire reps against a true NFL left tackle and QB.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Ustabeayooper's picture

September 01, 2018 at 04:11 pm

The reality is that the Bears 2 first round picks are worth more than the Packers 2 first round picks. The Packers picks are probably in the late 20 to 32 range,while the Bears picks will probably be in the 10 to 15 range at best (2019 & 2020). They have a significant chance of being in the 5 to 10 range. Gruden has a. 10 year/100 mil contract. This was a no brainer. I hope Mack gets a huge deal. Reminds me of the Hershel Walker deal and the Ricky Williams fiasco with the Saints.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
AaronNagler's picture

September 01, 2018 at 08:22 pm

Reminds you of the Herschel Walker trade? The trade which garnered Ricky Williams? I am 100% confident you don't "remember" the specifics of either deal, and you fail to account for the entirety of this deal for Mack (ie. the Bears will receive a Raider 2 along with Mack, and give up more than the 2 ones).

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

September 01, 2018 at 08:27 pm

Probably so. Chicago sends a first in 2019 and another in 2020, whereas GB might have sent two first both in 2019, a draft that is supposed to be loaded with pass rushers. Still, you may be right that Chicago's picks looked better than GB's.

IDK, Chicago looks improved. Depends on Trubisky, but the defense ought to be top 10, and Robinson/Gabriel/Burton ought to help the offense. Maybe Chicago's picks are in the teens, maybe later teens.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
D.D.Driver's picture

September 02, 2018 at 09:30 am

Or Jay Cutler...gave up 2 first rounders, won the division once and spent nearly a decade (so far) in the cellar. The media coverage on the Cutler trade has not, um, aged well:

"The Bears, who trotted out 21 starting quarterbacks in the 16 years Brett Favre led the Green Bay Packers, now have the most talented and established quarterback in the division."

http://archive.jsonline.com/sports/packers/42357167.html

It's doubly bad, here, as the Bears are a rebuilding team. It's one thing if you are a good team trying to land on piece, its another thing if you are the 5-11 Bears and can't start adding top rookie talent until 2021.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
LayingTheLawe's picture

September 01, 2018 at 04:13 pm

It is interesting that the B&$rs apparently believe Mitch can drive the bus with his new receiving corps and they go all in on a move like this. They give up a lot of future draft picks to try and go from 5 - 11 to where? The B&$rs seem to believe they are ready to contend and I like the boldness of it but I can't really see this team as ready to go deep yet. If they go 8 - 8 they have done well so I am not sure I see why they made such a move

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

September 02, 2018 at 09:57 am

In all honesty, aren't they following the Eagles' model of 2017? Rams, too. Scary number of parallels...

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
PAPackerbacker's picture

September 01, 2018 at 08:27 pm

Just what was Oakland's record with Mack playing? Do you really think he will instantly make the Bears a contender? It takes a team effort to win championships, not huge salaries. I'm not taking anything away from Mack's skills but he didn't make Oakland a contender while he was with the team last season. He will make an impact for sure and make the Bears a better team, but he won't be the whole team. In order for the Bears to be good they must score points as well as defend against other teams from scoring. Can the Bears build a playoff team now that they gave so many draft choices away?

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

September 01, 2018 at 08:30 pm

Reports are that GB made a strong offer. I am satisfied.

The money sounds a bit more than I anticipated, about 10% more. It would have been very difficult to fit Mack in, particularly in 2020 when AR's cap jumps to $32.6M. It would have put a squeeze on things in 2019 as well unless some of our young players make a few of our FAs to be expendable - Cobb, CM3, and HHCD.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
johngalt's picture

September 01, 2018 at 09:50 pm

Got a feeling not pursuing Mack is gonna really bite the Packers hard.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
NitschkeFan's picture

September 01, 2018 at 10:50 pm

I would have loved to get Mack, but it looks like perhaps the Bears outbid the Packers. They had higher draft picks to offer, and perhaps more money to offer Mack himself to get the deal done.

We may never know how serious a bid the Packers made to the Raiders so it is hard to judge Gute without that info.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Kb999's picture

September 02, 2018 at 10:28 am

The key is that we don't know how serious of a bid was made. They just gave Aaron the kings ransom and maybe didn't want to tie up that kind of money on 2 guys.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

September 02, 2018 at 09:59 am

Let's not turn this into Beast Mode 2.0. They did pursue. They didn't get him. Let's move on.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
4thand10's picture

September 02, 2018 at 12:21 am

“Oakland will get first-round selections in 2019 and 2020, a sixth-rounder next year and a third-rounder in 2020. Oakland also included its second-round selection in 2020 and a conditional fifth-rounder that year.

Mack and the Bears agreed to a six-year, $141 million extension that guarantees $90 million. That makes him the highest-paid defensive player in league history one day after Rams defensive tackle Aaron Donald, the 2017 Defensive Player of the Year, signed a six-year, $135 million”

That is a whole lotta cheddar. But the big question is...can he cover?

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
JLab3's picture

September 02, 2018 at 05:53 am

I'm no Bear fan but in a hard cap league this is how you build a team. Less all the hype, it's a carbon copy of what the Rams are doing and success now depends on Trubisky.

Belechick does it with a great QB plus pieces and parts and we should measure ourselves against his example.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

September 02, 2018 at 10:01 am

It's what the Eagles did last year, although they lacked a centerpiece defensive acquisition like this. Working heavily to shore up around a young QB on a rookie deal.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
sheppercheeser's picture

September 03, 2018 at 08:28 am

I think we all remember when Suh left Detroit for a boat-load of cash and what he was gonna bring to Miami. Well, THAT didn't work out too good, did it? Mack can't win the game by himself- it's just going to be a good time to challenge the offensive line coaches and players. Maybe some imaginative schemes, some TE/FB blocking help or quick screen passes to slow Khalil down a bit.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
gflore34's picture

September 05, 2018 at 11:03 am

Perhaps, however, prior to Suh' arrival Miami was 20th in defense, last season the Bears were 10th, not too bad. There's a chance, I know its minuscule because its the Bears, with the additions of Mack and Roqaun Smith, the Bears will improve on defense. Mack' very presence means teams must scheme around stopping him meaning Floyd and Hicks will become more effective by default. But, I know its the Bears who never get anything right, so lets dismiss them as having no chance.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0

Log in to comment and more!

Not a member yet? Join free.

If you have already commented on Cheesehead TV in the past, we've created an account for you. Just verify your email, set a password and you're golden.