Bears Q&A: Is Greg Olsen a solution at tight end? Did Matt Nagy take notice of the fullbacks in the Super Bowl? Will Nick Kwiatkowski be re-signed?

The Tribune's Brad Biggs answers your Bears questions weekly.

Probably the first of many to ask, but do you see any chance that Greg Olsen signs with Bears, albeit likely on only a one- or two-year contract? — Jerry L.

It's rather unlikely the Bears will sign Olsen or even pursue him the player they drafted No. 31 in 2007. The Panthers officially parted ways with the veteran tight end Monday, meaning he's eligible to sign with another team before the start of the new league year March 18. The NFL Network reported Olsen is expected to visit the Bills and Redskins this week, and ESPN reported the Seahawks are also on his list. The first two teams are coached by guys Olsen knows well from his time in Carolina. Former Panthers defensive coordinator Sean McDermott is the head coach in Buffalo and, of course, Ron Rivera went from running the Panthers to running the Redskins. Also, Olsen's longtime position coach Pete Hoener is now coaching tight ends in Washington. The Bears are expected to pay Trey Burton $6.7 million this season ($4 million is fully guaranteed), and I doubt Olsen is planning to sign on the cheap, even though he turns 35 next month. The Bears don't have the salary-cap flexibi lity to sink big money into a second tight end, not right now anyway, and Olsen has missed 18 games over the last three seasons because of injuries. I expect him to land somewhere where he has a comfort level with the people in charge, like the Bills or Redskins, or with a team he believes is positioned to make a deep playoff run. The Bears need to solve their tight end issues for the long haul and not seek a one-year Band-Aid. The idea that he could return to the Bears is wishful thinking. There's no way Olsen is as interested in finishing his pro career where it started as Bears fans are in seeing that happen.

A lot of fans want the Bears to go after a slew of different QBs that will probably cost a large portion of the cap, either through trade with an existing contract or a free agent. My question is this: If the Bears did eat up a large portion of the cap (including with a new CBA bump and salary-cap movements like releases) with a QB acquisition, do they have the kind of roster with which a better skilled or more gifted QB can be successful? For example, if they paid X QB $25 million per year and filled roster holes through the draft and second/third wave of free agents, and X QB was enough of an upgrade on Mitch Trubisky, is the team capable of taking the NFC North? Or, are the roster holes/weaknesses enough to hamstring them regardless of who is under center (given the limits of who is likely to be available)? Is breaking the bank even a viable strategy? — Case B., Wichita, Kan.

Well, the roster still looks similar to what it was in 2018 when the Bears were 12-4 and won the division, earning the No. 3 seed in the NFC playoffs. The defense wasn't quite as productive in 2019 as it was in 2018, but it's still one of the better units in the league. The offensive line was pretty much the same, and it didn't perform as well last year. I believe the Bears can be better with improved quarterback play, whether it's by Trubisky or someone else. I hard a hard time seeing the Bears opting for a quarterback who is going to command a salary-cap hit of close to $25 million. Fold in Trubisky's cap hit of more than $9.2 million and you're looking at close to $35 million invested at quarterback. That would create a situation where it would be difficult to address other roster needs. Nothing would surprise me at the position, though, as I think Ryan Pace and Matt Nagy know they need a viable Plan B in the event Trubisky doesn't improve. How much they're will ing to budget for that plan and how they go about acquiring that player remains to be seen. Actions are going to speak much louder than words. Keep in mind that teams can find solid role players in the second wave of free agency, but it's generally slim pickings when you talk about the third wave, that often comes after the draft when teams part ways with veterans they deem replaceable by draft picks.

How can the Bears make the biggest impact to their roster with no first-round pick? Do you envision a trade, potentially bundling their two second-round picks to climb back into Round 1? — @coach_mcculloch

The simple answer is they can find Day 1 starters with both of their second-round picks. They need to find some young talent that can step in and, at minimum, contribute from the outset. That's not an unrealistic goal. If the Bears keep eight picks, or perhaps trade down and add to that total by one or two, they a good shot at improving depth at some positions with a host of Day 3 picks, and the second-round picks represent chances to get solid players. Ryan Pace has added nose tackle Eddie Goldman, center Cody Whitehair and wide receiver Anthony Miller in the second round. He also has made a poor pick with tight end Adam Shaheen. Let's see what he can do with the two picks, assuming he keeps them.

As far as trading into the first round, that's unlikely. The Bears hold the 43rd and 50th overall picks in Round 2, and if you simply combine those two selections, they're worth roughly the 22nd overall pick, which happens to be owned by the Bills. Just as there are no certain things in the middle of Round 2, there are no certain things at No. 22. The Bears would be better off taking two swings in Round 2 than one swing at No. 22 (or that vicinity).

Are the Bears re-signing Nick Kwiatkoski? — @narchy4all

Lions quarterback Jeff Driskel breaks a tackle from Bears inside linebacker Nick Kwiatkoski on Nov. 10, 2019. (Armando L. Sanchez / Chicago Tribune)

That's a good question and a somewhat complicated one when you consider that he is one of three inside linebackers set to become unrestricted free agents on March 18. Danny Trevathan and Kevin Pierre-Louis are also coming out out of contract and the Bears could lose all three of them. Last season some wondered if it was wise for the Bears to bring Kwiatkowski back for the fourth year of his contract when the proven-performance escalator bumped up his base salary north of $2 million, a lot to pay a reserve inside linebacker. He proved to be worth it when he filled in for Roquan Smith and later Trevathan. Kwiatkowski likely has his sights set on a starting spot and a significant pay increase. How much the Bears are willing to invest in a starter alongside Smith remains to be seen. The Bears could choose a cheaper option and perhaps look at Pierre-Louis, who runs a little better, on a short-term deal, maybe a two-year contract. Let's see how this plays out. All three should have options. Keep in mind if Trevathan and Kwiatkowski leave via free agency and the team opts to re-sign Pierre-Louis, it could potentially benefit in 2021 with compensatory draft picks.

Are there other players besides running back Tarik Cohen who saw their 2020 salary rise because of the bonus for players in the final year of their contract? — Jimmy M., Naples, Fla.

Cohen's base salary for 2020 basically doubled to $2.147 million because of the proven-performance escalator, which is a fourth-year escalator in the contracts of draft picks selected in the third through seventh rounds. A player triggers the escalator by playing 35% of a team's offensive or defensive snaps in two of his first three seasons or 35% of all offensive or defensive snaps over the first three years combined. When a player triggers the PPE, his contract rises to the level of the lowest tender for restricted free agents that season. Cohen qualified for the PPE after his second season as he was on the field for more than 35% of the snaps in 2017 and 2018. The Bears do not have another player from the 2017 draft class who would qualify as free safety Eddie Jackson already signed a contract extension that far exceeds the PPE raise. Tight end Adam Shaheen was a second-round pick, so he's not eligible for a PPE raise. He never has reached 35% playing time i n a season. His base salary for 2020 is $1,270,980.

Now that the Falcons decided not to extend Vic Beasley, do you think he can be a good fit for the Bears, especially placing him across from Khalil Mack and giving Leonard Floyd some competition? Can the Bears afford him? — @basucally

After leading the NFL with 15½ sacks in 2016, Beasley had only five in the 2017 and 2018 seasons, and he looked to be on pace for another five-sack season before a four-sack flurry in the final four weeks gave him eight in 2019.

Beasley started 60 games for the Falcons during his five years with the team. He finished his time in Atlanta with 156 tackles, 37½ sacks, 36 tackles for a loss, 11 forced fumbles and two touchdowns.

How aggressively do you think the Bears will try to find a legit speed threat at WR this offseason? Taylor Gabriel might be cut, and that leaves them with no speed within that group. Seeing the Chiefs model, seems like speed is a pretty important part of what Matt Nagy/Andy Reid want to do on offense. — @mazyar79

Bears wide receiver Taylor Gabriel scores a touchdown against the Redskins on Sept. 23, 2019. (Brian Cassella / Chicago Tribune)

The playbooks the Chiefs and Bears use are similar and the philosophies are rooted in the same ideas. The personnel is quite different and while that starts at quarterback, as we all know, it extends to the wide receivers. The Chiefs can resemble a 4x100 track team when they have three wide receivers and one of their speedy running backs on the field. Outside of Gabriel, the Bears lack players who can take the top off a defense. I've said for some time, I am not sure Gabriel has a future with the Bears, considering his production over the last two seasons and his contract. If they replace him, they will need to find a wide receiver with speed. I suppose they could also keep Gabriel and if they do, they still need to seek speed. Penn State wide receiver K.J. Hamler might be an interesting target to consider with a second-round pick if he's available because he's a speed merchant who was productive last season for the Nittany Lions.

What would it take for the Bears to be playing in February? — @dabayrz

The Bears need something to hang their hat on offensively. They need to develop an offensive identity. They didn't do anything well offensively in 2019, and they need to become much more efficient and explosive. Defensively, they will have to regain the form they had in 2018 when they were excellent at creating takeaways, stopping the run and putting pressure on the opposing quarterback. It seems like a long shot, but the opening Super Bowl odds at Caesars were more encouraging than you might have imagined as the Bears opened at 30-1 along with the Chargers, Raiders, Texans, Bills and Titans. The defending champion Chiefs were tops at 6-1 followed by the Ravens at 7-1, 49ers 8-1 and Saints 11-1.

Who will be the biggest player acquisition the Bears will make outside of the draft, so via trade/free agency? — @danny_bobrowski

Well, if the Bears make a truly big acquisition this offseason, it will be a quarterback with substantial starting experience to take over for Mitch Trubisky or challenge him for the starting role. Other than that, the Bears will be limited in their ability to make splash additions via free agency unless a new collective bargaining agreement is reached that bumps up the salary cap for 2020. As it stands, the Bears are 27th in the NFL in available cap space. For comparison in the NFC North, the Lions are 17th, Packers are 23rd and Vikings are 32nd. The Vikings project to be above the salary cap, so it's worth watching what they do not just to be in compliance but to create some space.

Any chance the Bears draft a quarterback in this upcoming draft? — @jojopuppyfish

Sure. There is a chance the Bears will consider drafting a quarterback, but at this point, I think that would come on Day 3. The Bears have only two draft picks on Day 2 — both in Round 2 — and it seems unlikely that with the team's stated commitment to Mitch Trubisky and other roster needs that general manager Ryan Pace would target a quarterback in the second round. It all depends on whether or not they identify a quarterback with skills they believe can be developed. The Bears' inability to develop a quarterback hasn't been limited to the starter. They also have failed to develop a backup quarterback they have drafted. Before Trubisky replaced Mike Gannon as a starting quarterback in Week 5 of the 2017 season, you have to go all the way back to Week 12 of the 2008 season for the last time a draft pick was used to replace the starting quarterback. That is when Kyle Orton replaced Rex Grossman as the starter under former coach Lovie Smith.

Do you think Matt Nagy took notice that both the Chiefs and the 49ers have quality fullbacks on their rosters and how important they are to each offense? — @saskbear

There is a pretty big difference in Kyle Juszczyk and how the 49ers use him and Chiefs fullback Anthony Sherman. Juszczyk is a rare guy because he's very versatile in what the 49ers do with Kyle Shanahan's playbook. He's not a devastating blocker and he's not like the old-school fullbacks you remember from the 1980s and early 1990s. They use him to create numbers in the run game and matchups in the passing game. He's a huge part of the offense, and they don't always line him up in the backfield. He also plays H-back and tight end and does a lot of things for the 49ers. Sherman's role has really been reduced over the years in Kansas City. He is more of a special teams contributor now than anything else. Unlike the 49ers, the Chiefs are not a downhill running team. They will use 21 personnel — two backs and one tight end — on occasion, but they prefer 12 personnel with one back and tight ends Travis Kelce and Blake Bell, and their offensive core is based around 11 personnel with one back and Kelce, in order to get their speedy wide receivers on the field.

Fullback Kyle Juszczyk of the 49ers dives into the end zone for a touchdown against the Chiefs during the 2020 Super Bowl on Feb. 2, 2020. (John McCall / South Florida Sun Sentinel)

The Bears used J.P. Holtz at fullback some last season. He had 72 snaps as a fullback. He played tight end for 208 snaps and was in the slot for 26 and flexed out wide for 21. So Holtz was used as a fullback for 22% of his 327 total snaps. I'm sure Nagy is well aware of Juszczyk's value to the 49ers, but I don't expect him to overhaul his playbook based on what the 49ers do well. Shanahan does his thing and Nagy will do his thing.

How does a QB master coverages in the offseason? Is it just a whole lot of tape? — @terrence_j_naus

Mitch Trubisky will have to do a whole lot of learning on his own until the voluntary offseason program begins April 20. That is the first time he will be able to get together with coach Matt Nagy, passing game coordinator Dave Ragone, new offensive coordinator Bill Lazor and new quarterbacks coach John DeFilippo. I am sure they are putting together a plan for improving Trubisky's comprehension both pre-snap and after the snap, but until then Trubisky will have to do work on his own and I would assume that involves watching film to better understand defenses and what looks lead to what coverages.

With cap money projected to be really tight, is it possible that given Cordarrelle Patterson's special teams prowess both as a return man and gunner that the Bears decide to let Sherrick McManus go and keep Patterson? — @stewart_errol

Patterson is making a lot of money for being a multidimensional player on special teams and a gadget player on offense. He is signed for one more year at $4.25 million in base salary with an opportunity to earn another $500,000 in per-game roster bonuses ($31,250 per game he's on the 46-man game-day roster). I expect him to be on the team, but there's no doubt the Bears would be better off if Patterson was making about 70% of that. McManis, 32, will be an unrestricted free agent after completing his 11th season and finishing a two-year, $3.5 million contract. The Bears really like McManis and what he brings to special teams and the locker room. I could see him potentially returning, but he would likely have to take a pay reduction to do so. And teams have to ask themselves what a player's value is when he has as much mileage as McManis. Fortunately, the groin injury he suffered at the end of the season didn't require surgery, so he should be healed up and ready to go by sp ring. It will be interesting to see what kind of options McManis has and how the Bears value him. He could explore the open market. I doubt the Bears would sign him right out of the gate entering free agency.

Jesper Horsted played real well in the little time he was on the field. Is he a viable option at tight end? The Bears need more great names like Jesper on the Bears. — @williamlkepper

Bears tight end Jesper Horsted heads up the field after a reception against the Cowboys on Dec. 5, 2019. (Chris Sweda / Chicago Tribune)

The Bears need more great players on the roster, and the names don't matter. If John Doe is a perennial All-Pro player, he'd be one of your favorite players. Horsted has some ability as a receiving tight end. It will be interesting to see how he looks in the spring and summer after taking a year to adjust to professional football coming from a small-time program like Princeton. I've always thought undrafted free agents really need to make a jump in Year 2 in order to solidify their status because there just isn't much of an investment in them. When you look at undrafted free agents the Bears have had success with lately — wide receiver Cameron Meredith, cornerback Bryce Callahan and defensive end Roy Robertson-Harris — they were much better in their second season, which propelled them to greater opportunities. Horsted will have to show that he has a better ability to execute on the field in all areas of his game. He's a smart guy, so understanding the playbook isn' t an issue. He has to produce to remain, as you said, a viable option.

Is there anyone in the Bears organization that wanted Patrick Mahomes back in 2017 and gets to say, "Told you so" to Ryan Pace almost daily? — @lastcalllesko

That doesn't seem like a very good way to protect one's employment future, does it?

Will the NFL ever consider expanding the regular season but keep the number of games the same? Say 20 weeks, 16 games, four bye weeks. Teams that play on Thursday would have a bye week before their game. Players would get more rest, Fans would get more football. — @keithq6s

I have not heard any proposal that would seek to lengthen the regular season with bye weeks. The NFL is pushing hard to expand the regular-season schedule by one week to 17 games. It would be the first change in the length of the season since it was increased from 14 to 16 games in 1978. The league is also seeking to expand the playoffs with seven teams qualifying in each conference, so only the top team in each conference would receive a first-round bye. I don't think adding three bye weeks would make the season any more entertaining. While fans would get more football, it would also cut into the offseason time players have.

Tweet

Subscribe to receive free email updates: