The Steelers seem intent on making a move at the quarterback position this off-season. That move may be to provide veteran backup depth behind Kenny Pickett, to bring in a legitimate challenger to Pickett for the starting job, or to re-sign Mason Rudolph and allow him to compete with Pickett. Below is a link to my recent article on the pros and cons of signing Ryan Tannehill in free agency should the Steelers choose the veteran depth route. This article examines the arguments for and against acquiring a legitimate challenger — or perhaps successor — to Pickett by trading for Chicago’s Justin Fields.

Ryan Tannehill Pros and Cons

PROS

Interest in acquiring Fields seems legitimate. Mike Tomlin is said to have been enamored with Fields when he was a prospect coming out of Ohio State, and Fields seems to fit Arthur Smith’s offense to a T. Anyone who has wondered what Kordell Stewart might have looked like in a contemporary NFL system would probably get a glimpse of that if Pittsburgh were to pair Fields and Smith. The wide zone, boot, play-action and read-option concepts Smith favors are perfectly suited for a quarterback with the athleticism Fields possesses. Fields was trained in this style of offense at Ohio State under Ryan Day, who blended his experience as an assistant under Chip Kelly and Urban Meyer into a system that leaned heavily on the concepts Smith is likely to employ in Pittsburgh. Acquiring Fields would create a match of quarterback and coordinator that seems ideal.

Playing for Tomlin would likely benefit Fields as well. Fields was drafted by the Bears in 2021 and played his rookie season under Matt Nagy, whose tenure in Chicago was volatile. Nagy feuded with players and oscillated between Fields and Andy Dalton — two players with completely different skill sets — at quarterback. His failure to develop Fields in a system suited for his needs got Nagy fired that off-season. Chicago then hired Matt Eberflus, a coach with a defensive background. Eberflus tapped Green Bay assistant Luke Getsy to run the offense. Getsy had never coordinated an NFL offense before, and it showed. The Bears finished in the bottom third of the league in most meaningful offensive metrics the past two seasons while Fields turned the ball over too much, ran for his life behind a terrible offensive line and was exposed to far too many hits. Chicago has since parted ways with Getsy.

In short, Fields’s three seasons in Chicago have been defined by a lack of continuity and an inability to tailor the offense to his strengths. In Pittsburgh, the stability of the organization, coupled with Tomlin’s leadership and Smith’s quarterback-friendly system, would provide the structure he needs.

Despite the coaching dysfunction in Chicago, Fields played solid football down the stretch this past season. Upon returning from a dislocated thumb that kept him out of four mid-season games, Fields led the Bears to a 4-3 mark over their final seven contests, including wins over the Vikings and Lions. He threw just three interceptions in 207 pass attempts and rushed for an average of 60 yards per game. Fields’s overall stats for 2023 aren’t impressive — he completed 61.3% of his passes, threw 16 touchdowns against nine interceptions and averaged 6.9 yards per attempt — but he showed significant improvement over 2022. He was considerably better at protecting the football and avoiding sacks, which are two of the most crucial components of playing quarterback. He also generated more explosive plays, often by keeping his eyes down the field as he escaped the pocket. On a bad Chicago team, his progress was notable.

Fields is also well respected in the Chicago locker room and was lauded by his teammates and coaches for providing a young Bears team with steady leadership. When you put all of these things together — scheme fit, a beneficial change of scenery, solid leadership and an athletically-gifted, 24-year-old quarterback who seems to be improving — it makes sense for the Steelers to pursue Fields in a trade. What that would mean for Kenny Pickett’s future in Pittsburgh is a significant question for which the Steelers would need an answer. But that’s a different bridge to cross. If Pittsburgh believes they can maximize the potential of the talented Fields, it’s well worth exploring what it would take to acquire him.

CONS

Therein lies the rub. What would it take, exactly? Chicago owns the top pick in this year’s draft thanks to their trade with Carolina that landed the Panthers Bryce Young. The Bears are rumored to be high on both USC quarterback Caleb Williams and North Carolina signal-caller Drake Maye. Should the Bears draft one of those players, moving on from Fields would be all but certain. While doing so would signal to the rest of the league that their decision to select Fields was a mistake, Fields was the 11th overall pick in the 2021 draft, which suggests the compensation won’t be cheap.

ESPN’s Jeremy Fowler had this to say in a recent article on the subject:

The consensus in an informal poll of league evaluators is that Fields would be worth a second- or third-round pick in a pre-draft trade. When compared to former top-10 picks recently traded, that’s better than Trey Lance, whom Dallas acquired from San Francisco for a fourth-round pick, but slightly worse than Sam Darnold, who, along with a sixth-round pick, went from the Jets to Carolina in exchange for second- and fourth-rounders.

My suspicion is it would take at least Pittsburgh’s second round pick to secure Fields, with a late-round or even future pick a likely component of the deal. Given the fact the Steelers spent their top pick in 2022 on a quarterback, and with needs along the offensive and defensive lines as well as at cornerback, parting with a second rounder for Fields feels like a lot. If the Steelers could pry him loose for a third round pick, or even in a straight-up exchange for Pickett, they might find that more appealing.

Then there’s the fact the Steelers cannot be sure Fields will become the player they would need him to be. Reclamation projects of highly-drafted quarterbacks who didn’t light the world on fire with the team who selected them rarely succeed. Tannehill was better in Tennessee than he’d been with Miami, who selected him eighth overall in 2012. Brett Favre became legendary in Green Bay after scuffling through a season in Atlanta, where he was taken 33rd overall. Jared Goff has revitalized his career in Detroit after playing mediocre football for a Rams team who selected him first overall in 2016 (to be fair, Goff did take the Rams to a Super Bowl). There may be others, but none who jump immediately to mind. The point is, trading for Fields is a gamble. While he improved in 2023, he has never played solid football on a regular basis. There’s no guarantee he’ll do so simply by joining the Steelers.

Finally, there’s the financial component to consider. Trading for Fields means the Steelers will almost certainly pick up his fifth-year option in 2025, which stands at almost $22 million guaranteed. That type of commitment will be tough to swallow for a franchise perennially straddling the salary cap. If the Steelers keep Pickett as their starter, they can defer any major financial decision on him for another year. The nightmare scenario for Pittsburgh would be moving on from Pickett, having Fields play mediocre football in 2024 and then feeling compelled to pick up his option because there are no better alternatives. Pittsburgh cannot ignore this as a potentiality.

WHAT’S THE RIGHT MOVE?

Not trading for Fields.

While I love his athleticism, and I’m intrigued by the notion of him operating in Arthur Smith’s system, the inconsistencies in his play make this deal too risky. Is Fields more of a sure thing to succeed in Pittsburgh’s new offense than Pickett? I don’t think so. The issues that have plagued Fields (ball security, taking too many sacks) are not the same ones that have hamstrung Pickett (pocket presence, reading coverage). Why trade a second round pick for a quarterback with a new set of flaws? Why not retain that pick, use it on a lineman who can keep the current quarterback clean, then put it on the new coordinator to develop him?

If Fields had proven himself to be significantly better than Pickett, I’d say go for it. Then again, if that were the case Fields wouldn’t be potentially available in the first place. If the choice at quarterback for the Steelers in 2024 is between trying to fix Pickett or trading valuable draft capital for Fields, I’ll take the former.