Vin Scully, the best to ever do it in the broadcast booth, has a way about being a soothing voice in a stressful situation:
Vin Scully can still connect and comfort in a manner unmatched by any other sports figure in L.A.'s history.
And, man, do we need some connecting and comforting.
— Los Angeles Times (@latimes) March 23, 2020
- I can’t help but wonder what would have happened with the Bears’ quarterback situation this offseason under a more stable landscape where medical information could be attainable. The Panthers reportedly tried shopping Cam Newton to the Bears, but are now set to release the 2015 NFL MVP.
- Adding a player with Newton’s résumé and upside would have been ideal for a Bears franchise longing for great quarterback play. Bringing in someone with swagger, bravado, and skill would have done wonders to lift the spirits of a fan base that has long been troubled by mediocre and sub-par play from the signal caller. But I can understand if the Bears didn’t pull the trigger on a Newton deal because of his recent injury history. Two injury shortened seasons (shoulder and foot problems) were always going to be a cause for concern, and the inability to get medical clarity in these times likely hurt any serious pursuit.
- With that as our table-setter today, this is important:
And yes, this will have significant consequences for several NFL reasons. Can’t argue with the rationale, though. https://t.co/wLzWo01tXL
— Ian Rapoport (@RapSheet) March 24, 2020
- The NFL Physicians Society is discontinuing NFL-related physicals until the COVID-19 crisis is under control – a small sacrifice for the greater good. But without physicals, I’m curious if any trades or free agent additions won’t be pushed through due to a lack of medicals. And let’s not forget how this impacts the upcoming NFL Draft process. Even still … there are more important things than player physicals, which is an important lesson the NFLPS has passed along.
- Unfortunately, the situation regarding this decision isn’t 100 percent clear. Pro Football Talk’s Mike Florio shared the NFL’s statement in response to the NFLPS’ message:
“As previously announced, players who are free agents or subjects of a trade are not permitted to travel to meet with any club personnel, including members of the club medical staff. Club facilities are closed to any NFL player, unless that player has been receiving ongoing medical treatment by the club’s medical team. Club medical staff are prohibited from traveling to any location to meet with or conduct a medical examination of a player. This is consistent with procedures previously announced for draft-eligible college players. Clubs may arrange for a free agent or traded player to have medical exams conducted in the player’s home city or at another nearby location by a third-party doctor.”
- In the eyes of Florio, nothing has changed from the league’s perspective. Which leads to questions wondering why the NFLPS would issue a statement in the first place? I’m flustered by all this, but there are more pressing issues at hand right now. Hopefully, the NFL and NFLPS get their stories straight.
- There is no smooth transition to more awkward NFL news, but here goes nothing:
A statement from Trent Williams’ agent Vincent Taylor to ESPN: pic.twitter.com/jU04QMpegE
— Adam Schefter (@AdamSchefter) March 24, 2020
The issue for Trent Williams and the #Redskins has been, with him wanting top dollar for a LT contract, teams haven’t been willing to offer WAS top dollar as far as draft compensation. Usually, contract & draft compensation are comparable. But not on this deal.
— Ian Rapoport (@RapSheet) March 24, 2020
- New year, same dysfunctional Washington football organization. Good luck with all that, Ron Rivera.
- Trent Williams wants out of Washington. And Washington seems willing to work with Williams to an extent. But these appear to be testy times for both sides, who are clearly not happy with each other. Nothing sinks trade negotiations like airing out dirty laundry. But if you’re a team interested in Williams, wouldn’t this public approach be a bit off-putting?
- “Star Wars” Visual Dictionaries and Encyclopedias for the movies (which are, in my opinion, awesome to explore) are just about all discounted significantly at Amazon right now. #ad
- Well, this is certainly a fire take:
Bears are wishing they didn't trade for a star defensive end right now pic.twitter.com/pChCW1BXNw
— PFF (@PFF) March 23, 2020
- OFF-SCREEN NARRATOR: “No, they’re not.”
- Here is a simple breakdown of the Khalil Mack trade: Good process, results yet to be determined. After 2018, the results were good. The Bears acquired a player whose talent shifted the tide of the NFC North race, helped turn them from a 6-win team to a 12-win division champion, and ultimately put the team in a position to compete with a star-studded defense and a quarterback on a rookie scale contract. But when said quarterback didn’t take another step forward in his development, it left the Bears spinning their tires.
- It’s almost as if the regret was rolling the dice on the wrong quarterback prospect, and *NOT* trading for an established star.
- One of the weirdest trends to emerge from the ever-expanding sphere of sports media coverage is the concept of think-tank conclusions that teams shouldn’t trade for star players. Acquiring good players is a good thing. Don’t get me wrong. Professional teams in salary capped leagues have budgets. But if you can fit a star player on your team without breaking your budget, then you’re doing right by your squad – and the fans who cheer them on – by bringing a high-end player onto the roster.
Check out this play that I found while doing research for my article. Mitch Trubisky missed an easy TD to Riley Ridley, and this has become a constant issue for Trubisky. It's mistakes likes these that will give Nick Foles a great opportunity to start for the #Bears come Week 1. pic.twitter.com/zzne4syf73
— Nicholas Moreano (@NicholasMoreano) March 23, 2020
- Surprising not to see the Bears here …
Per the NFL's internal cap report, 10 teams with least space as of this AM.
1. Chiefs $555K
2. Patriots $2.80M
3. Saints $9.02M
4. Steelers $10.64M
5. Falcons $14.28M
6. Packers $14.80M
7. Cardinals $15.71M
8. Ravens $17.42M
9. Niners $19.49M
10. Rams $19.65M
— Albert Breer (@AlbertBreer) March 23, 2020
- … but there is an obvious catch:
Just to reiterate: Lots of moving pieces this time of year with these numbers, so take them with a grain of salt. The Lions, for example, haven't yet submitted any of their new contracts, so their figure will come down.
Will update this at the end of the week. https://t.co/t9Zo8Ek0Is
— Albert Breer (@AlbertBreer) March 24, 2020
- That the NFL’s official accounting can be wonky this time of year doesn’t feel normal. But I suppose this is the cost of doing business as usual during a time of pandemic. I’m looking forward to seeing what any update holds at the end of the week.
- This is inspiring:
#BroncosCountry, be like Coach Fangio.
— Denver Broncos (@Broncos) March 23, 2020
- Happy birthday to a real one:
— Chicago Bears (@ChicagoBears) March 24, 2020
- This might be my favorite thing Eli has written over at BN Bulls:
Throwback Game 3: WELCOME TO THE SPACE JAM!https://t.co/AuxhboDPmw
— Bleacher Nation Bulls (@BN_Bulls) March 23, 2020