Breer suggests there would need to be a cap on how far the Bears would go to land Hendrickson or Crosby. Hendrickson represents a potentially more affordable path in terms of draft capital, since he would hit free agency this offseason, while Crosby would likely require premium draft picks. Age is a factor here as well: Hendrickson is three years older (31) than Crosby (28).
However, Breer argues that pursuing a veteran edge rusher is not a long-term fix. If Chicago committed significant years and money to Hendrickson, it wouldn’t guarantee a sustainable solution for more than a few seasons, raising questions about how the move would age alongside a developing roster.
Breer also cautions the Bears to avoid the missteps of the Washington Commanders, who aggressively rebuilt around a rookie quarterback with veteran help and later faced aging rosters and dwindling draft capital as injuries mounted. The Commanders’ approach is cited as a cautionary tale about relying too heavily on aging veterans without preserving future flexibility.
Context for the Bears underscores a broader roster strategy: the team is building around a rookie quarterback and has already added a mix of older veterans, including Grady Jarrett (32), Durham Smythe (30), Joe Thuney (33) and Kevin Byard (32). With Montez Sweat turning 30 before the 2026 season, the Bears must weigh whether another premium edge rusher fits long-term plans without compromising future balance.
Ultimately, Breer’s take suggests that while landing a top-edge talent would be exciting, Hendrickson or Crosby may not be the ideal, lasting solution for Chicago. The Bears could face a delicate trade-off between immediate impact and preserving future draft capital and roster depth as they navigate the offseason.
