PDA

View Full Version : 2011 Chicago Bears General Discussion


Pages : 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

BeerBaron
02-08-2008, 11:33 PM
i dont think anyone body in the world can convince us that taking jackson so he can take over return duties and let hester become a receiver would be a good thing. he would still need time to develop, which is essentially taking points away from us as there's no way jackson can do what hester does.

as far as what we do from here. say we dont do anything of note in FA, we still need a OT at 14, god would only be so kind to let clady slip, but it looks like it'll be b/t Otah and Williams and i wouldn't mind any of these 3. in the 2nd i would say WR it would have to be a big guy type. if bowman didnt have a ****** senior bowl that has turned a lot of people away i would say him. 3rd would be RB and BPA at S/OL/WR.
if we sign someone like starks, then we can trade down to the late first and pick up a 2nd. i would love if we could talk SF into a trade for their picks at those spots. it would give us 3 picks in 17 spots(16-the pats) and in a place where there is still a bunch of talent

eh, with the probable loss of berrian imminent, i think a speedier threat to replace him would be necessary. ive got a crazy crush on devin thomas as a potential 2nd rounder. i think he could be brilliant as a replacement to berrian.

now if it was berrian who was staying, id be all for signing ernest wilford and parting ways with muhammad before he gets too much further downhill...

Smokey Joe
02-08-2008, 11:39 PM
We're not going to resign Briggs. The two aren't related at all.
while it's unlikely, it's not outside the realm of possibility.

DaBear89
02-09-2008, 02:39 AM
eh, with the probable loss of berrian imminent, i think a speedier threat to replace him would be necessary. ive got a crazy crush on devin thomas as a potential 2nd rounder. i think he could be brilliant as a replacement to berrian.

now if it was berrian who was staying, id be all for signing ernest wilford and parting ways with muhammad before he gets too much further downhill...

damn, i keep forgetting wilford is available. i think that may be a good way to go even if BB is gone. and my thing for drafting a speedy WR, isn't that what we're grooming Hester for? Wilford, Bradley(if he ever gets out of this weird doghouse), Hester, and Bowman/Thomas/Hardy. I'ld say we could have a respectable receiving corps in a few years

BeerBaron
02-09-2008, 11:34 AM
damn, i keep forgetting wilford is available. i think that may be a good way to go even if BB is gone. and my thing for drafting a speedy WR, isn't that what we're grooming Hester for? Wilford, Bradley(if he ever gets out of this weird doghouse), Hester, and Bowman/Thomas/Hardy. I'ld say we could have a respectable receiving corps in a few years

i like to think of hester as more of a wildcard rather than relying on him to be the "speedy threat" guy.

keeping moose, or signing wilford, or both would give us a decent possession threat plus bradley if he develops further as a good balanced player, plus a speedy threat picked up in the draft or something, plus a wildcard like hester who's just not a natural receiver, but could be good for a few big plays a game, plus the further development of greg olsen......

i forget where i was going with all that but its a decent list of what we should/could have going into the future as pass catchers

add in KO and his 66% career winning percentage and we may have somewhat of a passing attack! now...about that run game...

dabears10
02-09-2008, 11:47 AM
i like to think of hester as more of a wildcard rather than relying on him to be the "speedy threat" guy.

keeping moose, or signing wilford, or both would give us a decent possession threat plus bradley if he develops further as a good balanced player, plus a speedy threat picked up in the draft or something, plus a wildcard like hester who's just not a natural receiver, but could be good for a few big plays a game, plus the further development of greg olsen......

i forget where i was going with all that but its a decent list of what we should/could have going into the future as pass catchers

add in KO and his 66% career winning percentage and we may have somewhat of a passing attack! now...about that run game...

I think we've talked about cutting moose, because he is on the tail end of his career. If we could restructure to a much lower salary than yes it would be a very good move. But currently it is not good talent salary matchup.

I agree that Hester should not be any more than a situational player, and I would not have a problem if he was only on the field in the 2 min drill to sprint downfield.

I'm not a big Wilford fan, but understand what you want. I'm thinking more and more our corps of receivers is appearing quite subpar.

BeerBaron
02-09-2008, 12:11 PM
I think we've talked about cutting moose, because he is on the tail end of his career. If we could restructure to a much lower salary than yes it would be a very good move. But currently it is not good talent salary matchup.

I agree that Hester should not be any more than a situational player, and I would not have a problem if he was only on the field in the 2 min drill to sprint downfield.

I'm not a big Wilford fan, but understand what you want. I'm thinking more and more our corps of receivers is appearing quite subpar.

ive always liked what ive seen of wilford. (though i admit its not too much...not many jag games on tv) until this most recent year where reggie williams stepped up a little, he seemed like he could be their best all around receiver.

hes a big guy, good jumper, catches most of what ive seen thrown his way...

be a good replacement for moose in the future, if not right away.

then like i said earlier, id love to see devin thomas be the pick in round 2.

Gay Ork Wang
02-09-2008, 01:45 PM
Whats with Hardy? Id be really sad if Berrian left.

BeerBaron
02-09-2008, 02:00 PM
ive got nothing against hardy. hes a big dude, hed be there (at least) in the 2nd...

but if berrian is gone, i get teh feeling that our WR corps becomes a good deal slower. (discounting hester as a situation kind of player)

and id prefer to draft a speedier threat

regoob2
02-09-2008, 02:45 PM
http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d80694bd0&template=without-video&confirm=true

hopefully he'll be back to his pro bowl form.

Gay Ork Wang
02-09-2008, 04:06 PM
Mayer said it looked alright so i guess hes gonna be fit again

bearsfan_51
02-09-2008, 05:26 PM
ive got nothing against hardy. hes a big dude, hed be there (at least) in the 2nd...

but if berrian is gone, i get teh feeling that our WR corps becomes a good deal slower. (discounting hester as a situation kind of player)

and id prefer to draft a speedier threat

I think Hester is going to be much more than a situational player next year. I'd say it's at least 50/50 that he's a regular starter. Bradley has some real good speed too.

It really depends on what type of quarterback he have, but we could certainly use a guy with size.

BeerBaron
02-09-2008, 06:27 PM
I think Hester is going to be much more than a situational player next year. I'd say it's at least 50/50 that he's a regular starter. Bradley has some real good speed too.

It really depends on what type of quarterback he have, but we could certainly use a guy with size.

well i would hope that he works out well as a full time WR, as i would with anyone the bears would play there, but seeing him play WR a few times last year, he just didnt look comfortable. you could tell that hasnt been his true position. maybe another off season of work there will fix that, but i see him as a 3rd receiver who can come in and run a streak or take a screen and run with it as about his max. but like i said, i hope he could do more than that

DaBear89
02-09-2008, 11:24 PM
one thing i think people forget is that just b/c a guy is fast doesn't mean we need a QB who can throw great bombs, if so grossman might have suceeded more. Hester on a slant over the middle is just as dangerous as Hester running a straight line. right now our WR corps looks like **** but it won't take that much to salvage it.

regoob2
02-10-2008, 08:16 PM
I know that everyone has a big board for the draft but what is everyones big board for free agency. We always seem to wait until everyone else throws a ton of money around and then we take whoever's left over.

BeerBaron
02-10-2008, 08:25 PM
I know that everyone has a big board for the draft but what is everyones big board for free agency. We always seem to wait until everyone else throws a ton of money around and then we take whoever's left over.

i have a feeling that that is the most likely place we'll pick up a o-lineman. as bad as id still like to see one drafted high, we'll probably end up with another retread (see tait, brown, miller....even garza....st. clair....)

possibly WR to get someone who can make a bigger impact initially than a rookie would

regoob2
02-10-2008, 08:38 PM
I was hoping we could be specific with this.

BeerBaron
02-10-2008, 10:13 PM
hmm....i dont know of all the FA's out there but i know max starks will be one and hes experienced at RT. would seem to fit nicely.

and ive been saying ernest wilford for weeks now, but that was also hoping berrian would come back. neither seem likely now but you never know...

bearsfan_51
02-11-2008, 02:46 PM
The Dolphins released Marty Booker today. I'd like to see us pick him back up at a low price, assuming his feelings aren't still hurt about being traded in the first place (I recall him making comments to the degree that the coaches and FO not giving a **** about improving the offense).

Bighead734
02-11-2008, 03:38 PM
I think someone on the interior of the offensive line, like Alan Faneca would be a big addition. I think then adding a possible bookend tackle in the draft like Chris Williams, Sam Baker or Jeff Otah makes a lot of sense.

A veteran WR like Booker would be a nice addition, but I think we can find guys to catch the ball as long as the QB can get them the ball. Greg Olsen also makes this less of a need.

Angelo usually doesn't make big splashes, but I think the best thing the Bears can do is to resign Briggs. Cut Ruben Brown, Archuleta and possibly Mushin or Fred Miller to make room for his new contract and signing bonus.

BeerBaron
02-11-2008, 05:34 PM
I think someone on the interior of the offensive line, like Alan Faneca would be a big addition. I think then adding a possible bookend tackle in the draft like Chris Williams, Sam Baker or Jeff Otah makes a lot of sense.

A veteran WR like Booker would be a nice addition, but I think we can find guys to catch the ball as long as the QB can get them the ball. Greg Olsen also makes this less of a need.

Angelo usually doesn't make big splashes, but I think the best thing the Bears can do is to resign Briggs. Cut Ruben Brown, Archuleta and possibly Mushin or Fred Miller to make room for his new contract and signing bonus.

DEFINITELY fred miller. guys a sieve.

i think faneca would just become another quick fix for a year or 2 like reuben brown was and then be too old...id rather see money put in someone younger who can be around for more than 2 years.

and bookers too similar to muhammad at this stage in thier careers i feel. id rather just keep muhammad since hes been in the offense longer and more lately than booker....

im all about younger talent

pellepelle_10
02-12-2008, 02:03 AM
I think someone on the interior of the offensive line, like Alan Faneca would be a big addition. I think then adding a possible bookend tackle in the draft like Chris Williams, Sam Baker or Jeff Otah makes a lot of sense.

A veteran WR like Booker would be a nice addition, but I think we can find guys to catch the ball as long as the QB can get them the ball. Greg Olsen also makes this less of a need.

Angelo usually doesn't make big splashes, but I think the best thing the Bears can do is to resign Briggs. Cut Ruben Brown, Archuleta and possibly Mushin or Fred Miller to make room for his new contract and signing bonus.

Damnit!!!! BrING MARY BOOKER BACK!!! lol..Let Moose go and bring Booker back. Boy that would bring tears of joy.

regoob2
02-12-2008, 08:47 AM
What do you guys think about bringing in Mike Wahle at Guard? He's a lot younger than the majority of our OL and he'll be a lot cheaper than Fancea.

BeerBaron
02-12-2008, 11:39 AM
What do you guys think about bringing in Mike Wahle at Guard? He's a lot younger than the majority of our OL and he'll be a lot cheaper than Fancea.

a lot younger? your view of "a lot" seems a little off to me....

i want young guys who can anchor the thing for years to come. old, overpriced veterans.....no thanks. we still need to get rid of those that we have

and booker...sure he would be cheaper than muhammad, but is he really that much better? plus hes been away from our team/franchise/system for quite some time now...

Hurricane Ditka
02-12-2008, 12:11 PM
Damnit!!!! BrING MARY BOOKER BACK!!! lol..Let Moose go and bring Booker back. Boy that would bring tears of joy.Would you keep crying when our team doesn't get any better.

regoob2
02-12-2008, 12:51 PM
a lot younger? your view of "a lot" seems a little off to me....

i want young guys who can anchor the thing for years to come. old, overpriced veterans.....no thanks. we still need to get rid of those that we have

and booker...sure he would be cheaper than muhammad, but is he really that much better? plus hes been away from our team/franchise/system for quite some time now...
He's only 30. I'm not saying sign him to a 7 year contract but he's a solid Guard and if Ruben Brown retires than a 30 year old Terrance Metcalf is gonna fill in? No thanks. I'd rather have a proven vet who would come in a play well right away. If we draft an O-lineman who says that he'll pan out. That's the good thing about vet they're less likely to bust and it would give us more options come draft day. If we don't get an O-lineman i'm still all for us drafting at least 1 if not 2 early in the draft.

bearfan
02-12-2008, 03:38 PM
He's only 30. I'm not saying sign him to a 7 year contract but he's a solid Guard and if Ruben Brown retires than a 30 year old Terrance Metcalf is gonna fill in? No thanks. I'd rather have a proven vet who would come in a play well right away. If we draft an O-lineman who says that he'll pan out. That's the good thing about vet they're less likely to bust and it would give us more options come draft day. If we don't get an O-lineman i'm still all for us drafting at least 1 if not 2 early in the draft.

The nice thing about drafting a guy though is that you coach him up to be a solid to good player from day one. You also have him in the prime of his career, instead of on the downslope. The strategy of nabbing vets worked for us once, but I wouldnt take that road again. I like how the Packers have built their offense, through the draft, and their OL is good, and will stay good because they are young. Draft is the way to go.

BeerBaron
02-12-2008, 05:39 PM
The nice thing about drafting a guy though is that you coach him up to be a solid to good player from day one. You also have him in the prime of his career, instead of on the downslope. The strategy of nabbing vets worked for us once, but I wouldnt take that road again. I like how the Packers have built their offense, through the draft, and their OL is good, and will stay good because they are young. Draft is the way to go.

exactly, we're seeing the result of grabbing vets for one big run now.

our big run didnt end up with a championship and now we're stuck with them playing lousy at the tail end of their careers (miller, brown...)

look at the teams who are perennial contenders. they have a few key, superstar veterans and then just always influx some young talent in around them.

thats the kind of team i would like to see built here

regoob2
02-12-2008, 06:46 PM
So you think we should rebuild?

Smokey Joe
02-12-2008, 07:13 PM
Apparently Booker's first preference is to return to Chicago.

regoob2
02-12-2008, 07:15 PM
Apparently Booker's first preference is to return to Chicago.
Where did you hear that?

bearsfan_51
02-12-2008, 07:24 PM
Apparently Booker's first preference is to return to Chicago.
Yay!! I'll be there to greet him with candy and flowers. Sign Marty!!

Smokey Joe
02-12-2008, 07:30 PM
http://blogs.chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/huddleup/2008/02/booker-back-to.html

Booker, cut by the Miami Dolphins, has drawn interest from a number of teams. The Bears were not among the initial group which contacted Booker within 24 hours of his release, but Booker reportedly has made it clear that his first preference would be a return to Chicago.

regoob2
02-12-2008, 08:04 PM
If Booker wants to come back for a discount i'd be all for it, he'd be a good replacement for Moose.

bearfan
02-12-2008, 08:11 PM
So you think we should rebuild?

I personally think that we need to rebuild the offense. We are halfway there is how I see it, the defense is good, not many older players, a lot of youth, but the offense is ancient talent, or hopeful talent w/ the occasional good players (Olsen, Berrian). I think what needs to be rebuilt from the ground up is the OL, then get a decent RB to push Benson, then move to QB and finish up w/ WR

DaBear89
02-12-2008, 09:39 PM
i would think right at this moment WR would be b4 QB

bearfan
02-12-2008, 09:45 PM
i would think right at this moment WR would be b4 QB

I would have to disagree, a superstar WR wouldnt be able to be a difference maker unless he had a QB capable of letting him be that difference maker. I mean, say we dont get berrian back, but we get Booker as everyone here has really liked the idea of that. WRs look like: Moose, Booker, Bradley, Hester, Hass, possibly a rookie. That is good enough IMO for a QB to do enough in Chicago to where he wont be blasted. I mean, if you give us someone like Randy Moss, or Chad Johnson (refrain from bad mouthing, I am throwing his name in there just b/c), but we have someone like Orton or Grossman back at QB. I would take and build the QB before I take a superstar reciever, b/c it is the QB who gets the ball into the WRs hands.

DaBear89
02-13-2008, 12:29 AM
i'm sorry but i don't think i would be happy with that WR corps. Moose you have to expect more drop off, Booker is where Moose was about 2-4 yrs ago, about to drop off, Bradley is... well who knows whats up with him and the coaches, Hester is good but still unpolished and slightly unproven(as a WR), Hass is completely unproven and as good as a guy like devin thomas would be he's still unproven. i think if we could pull off a trade for CJ we should. and still sign Wilford/Booker, cut Moose. The you have CJ, Wilford/Booker, Bradley, Hester. now u can look at a QB and see if he can play. of course all of this means nothing if fred miller isn't gone and Clady/Williams/Otah aren't on the roster

bearsfan_51
02-13-2008, 12:31 AM
I honestly question if the people that want Ernest Wilford have ever seen him play. I would take Booker over Wilford every day of the week and twice on Sunday. Hell, I'd take Justin Gage over Wilford.

BeerBaron
02-13-2008, 12:59 AM
I honestly question if the people that want Ernest Wilford have ever seen him play. I would take Booker over Wilford every day of the week and twice on Sunday. Hell, I'd take Justin Gage over Wilford.

well thats your opinion....

I would have to disagree, a superstar WR wouldnt be able to be a difference maker unless he had a QB capable of letting him be that difference maker. I mean, say we dont get berrian back, but we get Booker as everyone here has really liked the idea of that. WRs look like: Moose, Booker, Bradley, Hester, Hass, possibly a rookie. That is good enough IMO for a QB to do enough in Chicago to where he wont be blasted. I mean, if you give us someone like Randy Moss, or Chad Johnson (refrain from bad mouthing, I am throwing his name in there just b/c), but we have someone like Orton or Grossman back at QB. I would take and build the QB before I take a superstar reciever, b/c it is the QB who gets the ball into the WRs hands.

let me introduce you to kyle orton, career winning percentage of 66%, hasnt lost to the packers....


look, ive conceded the running back argument to you guys, so lets fix that and lets see what KO can do.

and our WR corps is somewhat scary bad....hester is a wildcard at WR because no one can be sure what we're going to get out of him there, but outside of him, there snothing to be excited about...

bearsfan_51
02-13-2008, 01:26 AM
I think the general consensus on Wilford is that he's pretty much a turd. When the Jaguars, who have a pretty awful receiving core, have shown little interest in bringing him back, that's pretty telling.

bearfan
02-13-2008, 06:19 AM
well thats your opinion....



let me introduce you to kyle orton, career winning percentage of 66%, hasnt lost to the packers....


look, ive conceded the running back argument to you guys, so lets fix that and lets see what KO can do.

and our WR corps is somewhat scary bad....hester is a wildcard at WR because no one can be sure what we're going to get out of him there, but outside of him, there snothing to be excited about...

I love KO, dont get me wrong, I think he should have a fair chance to start next year, but if he doesnt preform, then QB is a need again. I wouldnt mind grabbing a QB in round 2 or 3 as an insurance pick to KO (if he starts), even though that KO is what Bears football is: Smart, minimal mistakes, run the football. I guess when I was posting that I was talking in general, b/c I do like KO a lot.

BeerBaron
02-13-2008, 08:37 AM
I love KO, dont get me wrong, I think he should have a fair chance to start next year, but if he doesnt preform, then QB is a need again. I wouldnt mind grabbing a QB in round 2 or 3 as an insurance pick to KO (if he starts), even though that KO is what Bears football is: Smart, minimal mistakes, run the football. I guess when I was posting that I was talking in general, b/c I do like KO a lot.

right right, no i agree there. a QB in round 2 or 3 who can sit behind him as a long term insurance policy. i agree there.

the guy wins 2/3 of his starts and even did so last year when there wasnt much of a healthy team left around him. (an in the minny loss, he looked more rusty and cold that just plain bad, and who wouldn't after sitting for 2 years?) he needs a chance just to go in as the starting QB and see what happens from there

Splat
02-13-2008, 11:11 PM
Marty Booker: Open to Return to Bears (http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=rotowire-artyookerpentoeturnt&prov=rotowire&type=fantasy)

Sorry if all ready posted didn't want to start a thread just in case.

NEtimehester
02-13-2008, 11:21 PM
Marty Booker: Open to Return to Bears (http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=rotowire-artyookerpentoeturnt&prov=rotowire&type=fantasy)

Sorry if all ready posted didn't want to start a thread just in case.

I would love to have booker again. If we can keep berrian and sign booker our receiver core would be solid. That would probably require us to sign Mr. Drop Touchdowns Muhammed. Berrian, Booker, Hester sounds good on paper. That is wishful thinking though.

Bookers production has dropped off the last few years, but lets face it, the dolphins are a terrible team. You cant blame booker for that.

Smokey Joe
02-17-2008, 12:20 PM
I just wanted to give props to 51 about Chilo Rachel... you said he was a 2nd rounder, and I said he was a 3rd at the earliest. Right now, it is looking like he is a sure fire 2nd rounder. I'm not saying I want him, but just giving credit where it's due.

bearsfan_51
02-17-2008, 12:35 PM
I just wanted to give props to 51 about Chilo Rachel... you said he was a 2nd rounder, and I said he was a 3rd at the earliest. Right now, it is looking like he is a sure fire 2nd rounder. I'm not saying I want him, but just giving credit where it's due.
Muchos gracias. Some of it is due to a weak guard class, but I think his athleticism will allow him to play on the left side. Combined with his strength and physicality and that's a pretty solid prospect.

awfullyquiet
02-18-2008, 10:42 PM
I would have to disagree, a superstar WR wouldnt be able to be a difference maker unless he had a QB capable of letting him be that difference maker. I mean, say we dont get berrian back, but we get Booker as everyone here has really liked the idea of that. WRs look like: Moose, Booker, Bradley, Hester, Hass, possibly a rookie. That is good enough IMO for a QB to do enough in Chicago to where he wont be blasted. I mean, if you give us someone like Randy Moss, or Chad Johnson (refrain from bad mouthing, I am throwing his name in there just b/c), but we have someone like Orton or Grossman back at QB. I would take and build the QB before I take a superstar reciever, b/c it is the QB who gets the ball into the WRs hands.

not true.

steve smith had delhomme tossing him the rock for years. he became pretty good that way. andre johnson too. he had david carr. he still looked great and yes, made lots of plays that almost won the texans games. almost. almost.

regoob2
02-18-2008, 10:45 PM
^Look at Calvin Johnson in college. Reggie Ball = turd.

Geo
02-21-2008, 10:40 AM
From today's press conference at the Combine:

http://myespn.go.com/blogs/hashmarks/0-5-443/Lovie-has-left-the-building--Jauron-coming-up-next.html

Chicago Bears coach Lovie Smith just said he thinks Devin Hester has the potential to become a "No. 1" receiver in the league. It was the most significant thing Smith said during a 20-minute visit with the media.

Smith said he's still optimistic the Bears can find a way to keep Bernard Berrian, Mike Brown and Lance Briggs, but his body language didn't indicate he had much hope.

"My glass is half full," he said. "I'm an optimistic person."

Smith was asked about the status of seven different players, including starting running back Cedric Benson.

"He didn't have a good season," Smith said of Benson. "There are some reasons why, injuries...I still think he's a good football player. I think he can be productive in this league."

Smith was evasive when asked whether Benson would begin the season as the starter. He mentioned that Garrett Wolfe and Adrian Peterson were both in the mix. Smith also said that safety Adam Archuleta would be back with the team next season, which can't be great news for Bears fans.

Smith was sporting a white goatee that made him look like Dr. Harry Edwards, who you'll remember from his days with Bill Walsh and the 49ers.

http://www.sjsu.edu/150TH/images/alumni/edwards.jpg

DaBear89
02-21-2008, 10:46 AM
^yeah i was just reading that too. Lovie is kinda getting on my nerves. It seems he's too nice to take a stance and almost challenge his players. I know that's how he functions but I just can't help to think how Benson would be reacting to everything if he had say...Mike Ditka as his HC.

BeerBaron
02-21-2008, 11:58 AM
aye, lovie is a little too passive imo as well...

though teh archuleta thing isnt that bad as we said before since hes still a freak, he can play good special teams, and he would be a decent mentor to young players because of his experience. also hes cheap, vet minimum or close to it right?

just as long as he isnt starting, lol

bearsfan_51
02-21-2008, 02:48 PM
Man the FA market looks barren. Two of the best 5 players are from our own friggin team. That said, here's my top 10 list of guys I would want to look at (this is assuming that Briggs and Berrian are walking). This is also throwing price out of the equation.

1) Alan Faneca, Guard, Pittsburgh Steelers
2) Michael Turner, Runningback, San Diego Chargers
3) Jacob Bell, Guard, Tennessee Titans
4) Sean Locklear, Offensive Tackle, Seattle Seahawks
5) D.J Hackett, Wide Receiver, Seattle Seahawks
6) Bryant Johnson, Wide Receiver, Arizona Cardinals
7) Gibril Wilson, Safety, New York Giants
8) Rex Hadnot, Guard, Miami Dolphins
9) Rod Coleman, Defensive Tackle, Atlanta Falcons
10) Brandon Chillar, Outside Linebacker, St. Louis Rams

Geo
02-21-2008, 02:52 PM
... where's Sexy Rexy?

bearsfan_51
02-21-2008, 02:54 PM
... where's Sexy Rexy?
Oh shoot...forgot about him. I actually would like us to resign Rex and cut Griese.

Geo
02-21-2008, 03:22 PM
http://www.suntimes.com/sports/football/bears/806462,combine022108.article

Big news from Angelo, including that the Bears won't franchise Berrian. Everyone give this a read.

toonsterwu
02-21-2008, 06:03 PM
Huge risk on the Bears part. My guess is that the two sides are fairly close and Angelo didn't want to burn bridges with the franchising, per his history and beliefs. That said, tis a huge risk, imo.

k0ng
02-21-2008, 06:31 PM
Nothing in that article that we didn't already know. Except maybe the Mike Brown part. The Bears are trying to resign people. I think toonster hit the nail on the head. If they were really worried about losing Berrian and they are not close in terms of a contract, they would have hit him with the tag.

DaBear89
02-21-2008, 09:01 PM
what do you guys think of this offseason:

FA:
OG A. Faneca

Draft:
1. OT C. Williams
2. WR D. Thomas
3a. RB T. Choice
3b. QB BPA
4. S T. Zbikowski
5. OG K. Brown
6. BPA
7. BPA

also this is assuming BB and Briggs are gone

BeerBaron
02-21-2008, 09:48 PM
what do you guys think of this offseason:

FA:
OG A. Faneca

Draft:
1. OT C. Williams
2. WR D. Thomas
3a. RB T. Choice
3b. QB BPA
4. S T. Zbikowski
5. OG K. Brown
6. BPA
7. BPA

also this is assuming BB and Briggs are gone

id kill for the first 2 picks to go that way. then 3rd a RB ok, not necessarily choice but it could be. and then QB, ok

throw in a fresh legged punter with one of those last 2 picks too and id be pretty freaking satisfied

also, good to know they want brown back. ive always liked him...he makes a bob sanders-esque difference on this defense, too bad he hasnt had the chance to since like 2001.....

DaBears0530
02-21-2008, 10:11 PM
what do all you think of chad Henne ?? good fit or bad fit for the bears?

BeerBaron
02-21-2008, 10:15 PM
what do all you think of chad Henne ?? good fit or bad fit for the bears?

not if he has to go in the first 2 rounds. i dont really want any QB there anymore...

im starting to catch onto the idea of resigning rex to a short deal, letting him compete with/backup KO and use our high picks to build some offense around them for now.

maybe take a QB in 3 or later. in fact, we probably should......but i dont think im too crazy about one early early anymore.

i was actually thinking about dennis dixon after reading another thread. i mean, i dont think that anyone can argue that he was by far the most valueable player to his team in all of college football last year. we could take him and with KO/rex in front of him, we could try and develop him into a QB and if that doesnt work out, we could shift him over to WR and see what he can do there.

and he probably wouldnt take that high of a pick either. prolly no earlier than the 5th, 4th at most if hes healthy enough to work out and show himself off

bearsfan_51
02-21-2008, 10:27 PM
what do all you think of chad Henne ?? good fit or bad fit for the bears?
I like Henne and think he's a good fit. I'd take him at 44.

VoteLynnSwan
02-21-2008, 10:31 PM
id kill for the first 2 picks to go that way. then 3rd a RB ok, not necessarily choice but it could be. and then QB, ok

throw in a fresh legged punter with one of those last 2 picks too and id be pretty freaking satisfied

also, good to know they want brown back. ive always liked him...he makes a bob sanders-esque difference on this defense, too bad he hasnt had the chance to since like 2001.....

no reason to draft a punter if you have a decent one already... you could always pick up someone as an UDFA, especially if you're just looking for some competition in camp. We really can't afford to carry 3 kickers though.

VoteLynnSwan
02-21-2008, 10:32 PM
not if he has to go in the first 2 rounds. i dont really want any QB there anymore...

im starting to catch onto the idea of resigning rex to a short deal, letting him compete with/backup KO and use our high picks to build some offense around them for now.

maybe take a QB in 3 or later. in fact, we probably should......but i dont think im too crazy about one early early anymore.

i was actually thinking about dennis dixon after reading another thread. i mean, i dont think that anyone can argue that he was by far the most valueable player to his team in all of college football last year. we could take him and with KO/rex in front of him, we could try and develop him into a QB and if that doesnt work out, we could shift him over to WR and see what he can do there.

and he probably wouldnt take that high of a pick either. prolly no earlier than the 5th, 4th at most if hes healthy enough to work out and show himself off

Dennis Dixon would be great in my mind, but i don't think that's what the Bears would be going for at all from the QB position.

BeerBaron
02-21-2008, 10:40 PM
no reason to draft a punter if you have a decent one already... you could always pick up someone as an UDFA, especially if you're just looking for some competition in camp. We really can't afford to carry 3 kickers though.

we wouldnt have to because id assume that wed be cutting maynard in that situation...

anyway, im just not sold on henne. he had a good bowl game and senior bowl and suddenly he goes from a mid round pick kinda guy to people giving him to us in the first freaking round!? no way....

2nd, thatd be more acceptable, but eh. depends on who else is available. i like him less than flacco and woodson

bearsfan_51
02-21-2008, 10:41 PM
we wouldnt have to because id assume that wed be cutting maynard in that situation...

anyway, im just not sold on henne. he had a good bowl game and senior bowl and suddenly he goes from a mid round pick kinda guy to people giving him to us in the first freaking round!? no way....

2nd, thatd be more acceptable, but eh. depends on who else is available. i like him less than flacco and woodson
Henne was only a mid-round pick by people that were severly de-valuing him. His value is back to where it should have been all along.

BeerBaron
02-21-2008, 10:45 PM
Henne was only a mid-round pick by people that were severly de-valuing him. His value is back to where it should have been all along.

"Weaknesses:
Accuracy is inconsistent...Struggles under pressure and needs time to throw...Will stare down his targets...Height is just average...Not very mobile and isn't a threat to run...May need to have his mechanics tweaked...His footwork is shaky...Sloppy with his fundamentals..Holds the ball too long...is streaky and prone to mistakes."

sound like anyone else we've had at QB recently?

throw the word inconsistent in there a few more times and we've got another rex on our hands

awfullyquiet
02-21-2008, 11:14 PM
"Weaknesses:
Accuracy is inconsistent...Struggles under pressure and needs time to throw...Will stare down his targets...Height is just average...Not very mobile and isn't a threat to run...May need to have his mechanics tweaked...His footwork is shaky...Sloppy with his fundamentals..Holds the ball too long...is streaky and prone to mistakes."

sound like anyone else we've had at QB recently?

throw the word inconsistent in there a few more times and we've got another rex on our hands

isn't henne like 6'2?
isn't grossman 6'1?

didn't BF51 get all pissy and call grossman a midget one day?
chad henne is 1 inch taller. so. 'big difference'

just calling you out on that one.
i still think henne is a POS. essentially a worse eli with less tools.

BeerBaron
02-21-2008, 11:54 PM
isn't henne like 6'2?
isn't grossman 6'1?

didn't BF51 get all pissy and call grossman a midget one day?
chad henne is 1 inch taller. so. 'big difference'

just calling you out on that one.
i still think henne is a POS. essentially a worse eli with less tools.

calling me out? i was comparing him to grossman, and 1 inch isnt a big difference......

but yeah, i agree with teh sentiment that i wouldn't want henne. coming from big 10 country, i saw enough of him to know that i wouldnt really want him....

i was actually surprised earlier this year during the college season when they asked who had the better pro prospect, henne or hart? and they went with henne.....im like, henne a pro?

apparently i was mistaken....but i still wouldnt want him

bearsfan_51
02-22-2008, 12:31 AM
Grossman is 6'1 going on 5'7

Geo
02-22-2008, 01:00 AM
You can't measure the heart of a champion.

http://biriblog.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/rex_bears_1.jpg

Sexy Rexy has the balls to call the media ignorant to their faces (:heart: ), no other guy can do that.

bearfan
02-22-2008, 06:34 AM
There is now way that he is 6'1. I went to TC a few years ago, and he signed one of my cards, and was not 6'1. I was probably 5'6 at the time, and he didnt seem that big to me. I would guess more around 5'10 or 5'11

awfullyquiet
02-22-2008, 08:28 AM
is chad henne really 6'2?

or does grossman wear heels.

awfullyquiet
02-22-2008, 08:39 AM
calling me out? i was comparing him to grossman, and 1 inch isnt a big difference......

but yeah, i agree with teh sentiment that i wouldn't want henne. coming from big 10 country, i saw enough of him to know that i wouldnt really want him....

i was actually surprised earlier this year during the college season when they asked who had the better pro prospect, henne or hart? and they went with henne.....im like, henne a pro?

apparently i was mistaken....but i still wouldnt want him

it was directed to BF, but i quoted you.

sorry.

toonsterwu
02-22-2008, 09:26 AM
btw, if Deshaun Foster will come in on the minimum (probably not, but if) I'd take a look. I wouldn't bank my running game on just adding Deshaun, but I'd take a look.

toonsterwu
02-22-2008, 09:43 AM
oh, one other comment ... my personal wide receiver hope would be to grab jerome simpson in the 4th ... although i'm okay with gambling on him in the late 3rd (if he's even there).

BeerBaron
02-22-2008, 10:04 AM
oh, one other comment ... my personal wide receiver hope would be to grab jerome simpson in the 4th ... although i'm okay with gambling on him in the late 3rd (if he's even there).

dont know much about simpson but like i said in the big board thread a guy i would take a look at there is adrian arrington. (hes one michigan guy i wouldnt mind)

k0ng
02-22-2008, 10:05 AM
btw, if Deshaun Foster will come in on the minimum (probably not, but if) I'd take a look. I wouldn't bank my running game on just adding Deshaun, but I'd take a look.

The guy is talented, but too injury prone. I don't think it would be worth the gamble. We'd be right back where we started a few games into the season.

Btw, what do you guys think about Adarius Bowman in the 3rd? Assuming we resign berrian, I think they would compliment one another well.

toonsterwu
02-22-2008, 10:07 AM
Comes down to how Bowman works out for me. If he can put up decent numbers, then sure. In this day and age, I want my WR's to have some quickness and speed to them. The big possession types just don't cut it anymore.

On Simpson - Gotta love those huge mitts of his and the fact that he's shown some consistency with them. Add in supposed sub 4.5 speed and some quicks, it's an intriguing package. In many ways, similar to Arrington, although I get the feeling Simpson has better long speed.

On Foster - Just to be clear, I was simply talking about the veteran's minimum (which I doubt Foster would accept). And I wouldn't add Foster and call it a day at RB.

BeerBaron
02-22-2008, 10:08 AM
The guy is talented, but too injury prone. I don't think it would be worth the gamble. We'd be right back where we started a few games into the season.

Btw, what do you guys think about Adarius Bowman in the 3rd? Assuming we resign berrian, I think they would compliment one another well.

depends on his injury i guess but he would certainly bring some excellent size and athleticism to the corps. i wouldn't be against it but i wouldnt want to end up reaching for him if hes still hurt or something

is he actually running drills and what not now? i dont recall the severity of his injury but i know it was a knee and if he cant work out, its going to hurt him real bad in terms of stock

BeerBaron
02-22-2008, 10:10 AM
Comes down to how Bowman works out for me. If he can put up decent numbers, then sure. In this day and age, I want my WR's to have some quickness and speed to them. The big possession types just don't cut it anymore.

On Simpson - Gotta love those huge mitts of his and the fact that he's shown some consistency with them. Add in supposed sub 4.5 speed and some quicks, it's an intriguing package. In many ways, similar to Arrington, although I get the feeling Simpson has better long speed.

On Foster - Just to be clear, I was simply talking about the veteran's minimum (which I doubt Foster would accept). And I wouldn't add Foster and call it a day at RB.

on the foster front, im not sure we can afford to add a guy who we cant then "call it a day at RB" with. i seriously doubt we are going to let go of any of the guys we have due to the recent high investments in benson and wolfe and the fact that when not forced to start, peterson is a special teams terror.

so if we add someone, i think itll have to be one guy who potentially brings the whole package so we dont end up with 5 RBs on the roster

toonsterwu
02-22-2008, 03:33 PM
Not that I necessarily put too much stock into draftdaddy, but it was interesting to read that their "source" says we are shopping Benson.

bearsfan_51
02-22-2008, 03:44 PM
Not that I necessarily put too much stock into draftdaddy, but it was interesting to read that their "source" says we are shopping Benson.

Ha! With his salary? For what, a Charleston Chew?

dabears10
02-22-2008, 04:44 PM
Ha! With his salary? For what, a Charleston Chew?

If it's frozen, I take it.

BeerBaron
02-22-2008, 04:47 PM
make it 2 and tootsie roll and ill call it a deal

Smokey Joe
02-22-2008, 07:51 PM
Clayton reports Grossman is close to signing a 2 year deal... yet another year with the revolving QB situation.

bearsfan_51
02-22-2008, 08:00 PM
Clayton reports Grossman is close to signing a 2 year deal... yet another year with the revolving QB situation.
2 years is a good #, exactly what I had hoped for. Hopefully it's somewhere between 6-10 million.

And I'd rather have a revolving situation than one stuck on Orton. This gives us better options and hopefully will make for a good competition.

Hopefully it also means no Flacco.

BeerBaron
02-22-2008, 08:14 PM
2 years is a good #, exactly what I had hoped for. Hopefully it's somewhere between 6-10 million.

And I'd rather have a revolving situation than one stuck on Orton. This gives us better options and hopefully will make for a good competition.

Hopefully it also means no Flacco.

maybe having it stuck on orton will at least give us some consistancy. perhaps all we need is to just have 1 guy stick with it.

its worked that way in the past. orton as a rookie started 15 games and we made the playoffs. grossman started all 16 and we go to the superbowl.

last year shift back to the bears of the past 20 or so years, go through an array of QBs and...we were terrible.

now theres obviously more to it than just that but assuming a healthy defense gets back onto the field and we upgrade the rest of the offense through FA and the draft...well you dont have to go far from 7-9 to make the playoffs.

especially when youve got a coach who just seems to have the packers number...beat last years division champs twice again and win some of the closer games that we lost this year, and we're in good shape

DaBear89
02-23-2008, 01:28 AM
a lot of our games were close actually. Bears.com made a huge point right after the season how we may be 7-9 but we were close late in the game almost every week. it was kinda weird, like they thought we would demand every1's head after the season. really, teams should realize that fans can stomach a losing season, it's going through a losing season and acting as if it's ok and do nothing that upsets us.

toonsterwu
02-23-2008, 03:20 AM
2 years is a good #, exactly what I had hoped for. Hopefully it's somewhere between 6-10 million.

And I'd rather have a revolving situation than one stuck on Orton. This gives us better options and hopefully will make for a good competition.

Hopefully it also means no Flacco.

Depending on the number, I think we'll get a better idea. 2 years might actually scream Flacco, because, well, most anticipate a 2 year developmental time for Flacco. I think the structure, numbers of the contract will give some hints in regards to our draft plans for the QB position.

BeerBaron
02-23-2008, 10:33 AM
a lot of our games were close actually. Bears.com made a huge point right after the season how we may be 7-9 but we were close late in the game almost every week. it was kinda weird, like they thought we would demand every1's head after the season. really, teams should realize that fans can stomach a losing season, it's going through a losing season and acting as if it's ok and do nothing that upsets us.

i agree totally with the close games. swing the chargers, seahawks, giants and both viking games our way and suddenly we're 12-4 and i recall all of those games being winnable...

now given the crappiness of our run game and injuries to defense, i know we werent even close to a 12-4 team but we would have def. been a serious playoff contender at that point

bearsfan_51
02-23-2008, 10:48 AM
You could swing the Eagles, Packers, Broncos, and Raiders game and we're 3-13. I think we were actually worse than our record last year.

BeerBaron
02-23-2008, 10:58 AM
You could swing the Eagles, Packers, Broncos, and Raiders game and we're 3-13. I think we were actually worse than our record last year.

well lets swap em all out for eachother and we're 8-8....

im jsut saying, it backs up my earlier point that if just had consistancy at QB, the same guy starting every week, we may have been better off....

awfullyquiet
02-28-2008, 08:38 AM
Ty Law released.

Pick him up and have him play safety? He's got the size, the ball skills to play FS in the lovie-2.

He's a veteran leadership, and yes, is 34, but has gas left in the tank (for maybe 2 more years...) and would at least bring stability to the safety position.

I like it because. best case we have ok depth at FS, can continue to develop danieal manning, backup plan to mike brown. worst case, ty law can't transition to safety. do i think that's likely? not really.

k0ng
02-28-2008, 10:07 AM
Berrian looking for way more than we offered supposedly.

http://www.suntimes.com/sports/football/bears/816974,CST-SPT-bear28.article

If he is looking for that kind of contract...let his ass walk.

Geo
02-28-2008, 11:08 AM
5 years/ $25M offer with $8M guaranteed was the Bears' final offer? It's a solid deal, but obviously not enough to stop him from reaching the open market and likely getting a better deal. If not, then the Bears are a strong option, I suppose.

k0ng
02-28-2008, 11:32 AM
5 years/ $25M offer with $8M guaranteed was the Bears' final offer? It's a solid deal, but obviously not enough to stop him from reaching the open market and likely getting a better deal. If not, then the Bears are a strong option, I suppose.

No, it's not the final offer. Don't know if it states that in this article, but it was an aggressive offer with the Bears open to further negotiations.

BeerBaron
02-28-2008, 11:53 AM
christ...if we dont get berrian back, i hate to think what we end up doing at WR.

id rather pay a little more for a somewhat proven commodity in our offense like berrian then let him go due to price and pay less to someone less proven like a bryant johnson.

if that doesnt work out, i wouldnt be too terribly against giving a shot to bradely and hester as starters. would be a huge step down, but theres a ton of potential there. maybe work in davis and a mid round rookie as 3 and 4.....

but, sadly, i think if its not berrian we'll overpay for someone whos not actually any better than what we have anyway i think

SFbear
02-28-2008, 12:13 PM
christ...if we dont get berrian back, i hate to think what we end up doing at WR.


Everybody get ready for some exciting WR screens to Devin Hester.

Gay Ork Wang
02-28-2008, 12:17 PM
Everybody get ready for some exciting WR screens to Devin Hester.
Yeah, cause they worked awesome this year

Geo
02-28-2008, 12:17 PM
I wouldn't expect Alan Faneca in a Bears uni either, it seems the Jets or the 49ers are more likely candidates.

BeerBaron
02-28-2008, 12:23 PM
ah hell, while i admit i didnt really want another vet like faneca again, i shudder to think of what our alternatives are.....

probably one of the colts guys who will be terrible outside of their nitch they found in that offense....

bearsfan_51
02-28-2008, 12:44 PM
Actually when I heard that Faneca is expecting about 25 million in guaranteed money I backed off too. That's just too much money for a 32 year old guard.

Even though the draft is stocked with runningbacks, I'm reconsidering my opinion on signing Michael Turner. He's supposedly looking for a contract around 5 years 20 million. If that's the case, in this market, that's a steal. It would allow us to focus exclusively on the line and getting a new quarterback with our first three picks as well. Maybe sign Bryant Johnson and D.J Hackett to give us one reliable receiver option and let Hester,Bradley, Davis, draft pick compete for more time.

Just a thought.

Geo
02-28-2008, 12:50 PM
The strong runningback class should drop Turner's asking price.

I'm also surprised Hackett's name doesn't get mentioned more with free agency approaching.

bearsfan_51
02-28-2008, 12:52 PM
I think Hackett to Washington is a given if they can budget it. Zorn has the Seattle connection and they desperately need a WCO receiver.

Geo
02-28-2008, 01:05 PM
How about Tampa? They have so much cap space this offseason, they actually need to spend a good amount to get above the floor.

toonsterwu
02-28-2008, 01:54 PM
I have scary images of us pursuing Brandon Lloyd after we lose Berrian, which is looking more and more likely. The whole Ron Turner and Illinois connection. Scary.

I still want us to pursue Burner Turner. Makes too much sense. But I get the sinking feeling that we'll try desperately to resign our guys, miss out, and then miss out on the top guys that sign early in FA.

Furthermore, I have a sinking feeling we'll give Benson a full twirl. Not a half twirl, where he has to legitimately compete. But a full twirl, where he's the number 1 entering the camp, and someone has to beat him out.

I'm still hoping for Berrian/Jacob Bell (well, i'd still take max starks if we got aggressive)/gibril wilson/michael turner.

i have a sinking feeling that a possible positive scenario might be Brandon Lloyd/Julius Jones (although I'm not that against it)/Justin Smiley/Madieu Williams (or no safety).

Geo
02-28-2008, 02:10 PM
I'm not going to lie, the idea of spending money on Bradon Lloyd and Julius Jones makes me want to vomit.

Jones looked good as a rookie, but he got worse after that for whatever the reasons invovled. He had no vision last year (how on Earth a back loses vision, I don't know) and was absolutely terrible. Just awful. Maybe a change of scenery will help him, but I'd rather have Sadly Not Adrian Peterson and then play Garrett Wolfe on third downs as much as possible.

I don't think it would be the worst thing if the Bears gave it everything they had with Benson this season. If it doesn't work out with a revamped offensive line, then you can safely go on to cut your losses and get a back next year. You can find a good runningback every year, especially someone who can run tough on Soldier Field in the months of November and December.

But if they sign Michael Turner, with Peterson (pass pro) and Wolfe (receiving), the position is good to go for the next few years.

DaBears0530
02-28-2008, 02:40 PM
apparently we offered berrian 25 mil over 5 yrs. he declined it... He wants 25 mill over the first 3 seasons..

BeerBaron
02-28-2008, 02:50 PM
boy, im gonna have to say no to brandon lloyd as well....

also, i dont like the idea of going for a FA S either. we might still get a game or two out of mike brown (or, i hope, many many more) and our backups got some play last year and we've been very very good at drafting strong defensive talent late.

maybe if we fill some other needs via FA, like sign turner, we could free up some draft picks and go that way early on too.

but as for gibril wilson or a madaeu williams.....eh

toonsterwu
02-28-2008, 03:32 PM
just to be clear folks, i don't want brandon lloyd either. but it does seem like a possible avenue with the ties that bind.

i'm not comfortable going into the year at safety with mike brown, adam archuleta, kevin payne, danieal manning, remaining guys that i'm too lazy to think about, and perhaps a rookie or two. that seems awfully risky. i like payne. i like manning. but adding a solid vet in there would be nice. not sure i see it happening, but it would be nice.

Geo
02-28-2008, 03:37 PM
In that scenario of wanting a vet, sign Mike Doss imo. He's a good strong safety.

Although I think the Bears are more inclined to draft another safety first.

Gay Ork Wang
02-28-2008, 03:42 PM
How does the Thomas Kelly signing impact the Harris Signing?
im seriously worried about that now

BeerBaron
02-28-2008, 04:04 PM
i already figured harris would be setting some new ground when he signs...i think this just gives us a floor to look at if he wants to top it

and also, i agree that the bears would probably most likely draft a S before signing one. like i said earlier, JA and crew have been damn good at finding defensive talent late. if we fill one of our offensive (4 words starting with "o" in a row?) needs via FA, i could see going S in the first 3 rounds and maybe finding a guy who can contribute sooner as opposed to later...

bearsfan_51
02-28-2008, 04:43 PM
I wouldn't be suprised if we do nothing with safety quite frankly. Give Danieal Manning another year, let Mike Brown try and stay healthy and keep Brandon McGowan and Kevin Payne as options if he can't.

I wouldn't love that, but I could see it.


I'm indifferent to Brandon Lloyd if it's at the vet minimum. Is he worse than Mike Hass? Meh...whatever.

I actually wouldn't be against Julius Jones either if we miss out on Turner. It's not going to cost much at all, and he would be a good compliment/ push in the ass to Benson just like his brother was.

And yes, Jacob Bell has been my ideal target for about a month now. Cheaper and probably better longterm than Faneca.

BeerBaron
02-28-2008, 06:00 PM
assuming brown stays healthy (sigh....yeah right, but i can dream right?) he and manning might not be that bad of combo.

i know a lot of people dislike manning and his lack of physicality and whatnot....but idk, i think he was alright

MidwayMonster31
02-28-2008, 06:15 PM
assuming brown stays healthy (sigh....yeah right, but i can dream right?) he and manning might not be that bad of combo.

i know a lot of people dislike manning and his lack of physicality and whatnot....but idk, i think he was alrightUnfortunately, I don't think we can rely on Brown to be healthy. Manning didn't really make any progress last year, but going into his 3rd year, he can improve. McGowan didn't show much last year and he's an RFA, so we might bring him back. Kevin Payne did show some decent things, until he got hurt, so the Bears might actually be ok with safety depth after one free agent.

bearsfan_51
02-28-2008, 06:24 PM
McGowan was already tendered. He'll be brought back. You've got to look at it this way, what positions will be able to contribute in a core way (ie: not just special teams) next year. Assuming that we want our first 5 picks (4 rounds) to do so, and that's not realistic, we've got to at least consider where.

We've got our two Quarterbacks for next year, but our future QB will still likely come from those first four picks. That's one.

Even if Benson is the starter, we've got no real #2. AP should be stuck on special teams, and Wolfe is a great pass-catching option but likely little more. That's two.

Clearly we've got a gaping hole at OT. Even if St. Clair starts the season whomever we draft will start sooner than later. That's three.

Guard is a bit more iffy. We could let Metcalf and Beekman compete for the other spot, but Metcalf was a pretty big dud last year, and Beekman didn't even see the field. I think it's more than likely we take two offensive lineman in the first five picks. That's four.


So then the last spot. Certainly receiver is going to get some consideration. I think even if we sign a Bryant Johnson we're going to need some more depth. Defensive tackle gets thrown around a lot, as we are now a little thin there (though I think if we switch Isreal Idonije there full-time we'll be fine). And safety is an issue, but really I think Manning/McGowan/Payne might be enough youth depth there for at least one more year depending on how they pan out.

It's an interesting situation, and we'll likely sign a FA or two so we're not relying on so many rookies so soon, but I don't think it's out of the question either.

Geo
02-28-2008, 06:26 PM
Runningback Derrick Ward could be a very good option, at value. He can produce in all three phases (running, receiving, blocking), but the question is if he can stay healthy. I'll take a chance on him though, I like him a good deal myself.

Also, I've always thought Mewelde Moore could do more if he got the touches.

bearsfan_51
02-28-2008, 06:29 PM
Isn't Moore on his 3rd team already? I usually take the 3 strikes and you're out rule to free agency.

BeerBaron
02-28-2008, 06:34 PM
Isn't Moore on his 3rd team already? I usually take the 3 strikes and you're out rule to free agency.

no, i believe moore is just now leaving his first team, the vikings. i think youve got him confused with someone else....

anyway, i think if we dont go turner.....or maybe julius jones....none of the other FA backs really impress me all that much. guys like ward or moore still strike me too much as guys who would need to split the load (especially moore). i suppoes you could say that works with benson, but who knows if we get benson to work.....

Geo
02-28-2008, 06:35 PM
The Vikings drafted Moore in 2004.

Mike Tice should have given him the ball more imo, and then Childess came and turned him into a third-down back.

sweetness34
02-28-2008, 07:33 PM
Lloyd is one of those guys who if he'd keep his mouth shut he'd actually be a decent WR. Maybe reuniting him with his college coach would help with that. Idk, if he comes cheap I wouldn't mind it if we lose Berrian. But we still need to address WR at some point.

My big board is still Williams/Otah/Mendenhall...Clady will be a top 10 pick so that eliminates him.

toonsterwu
02-28-2008, 08:04 PM
I wouldn't be so quick to write Clady in the top 10. He needs a good workout. I'm a huge fan ... but my guess right now is that it's about 50/50 split as to whether or not Otah or Clady is the number 2. Enough people are giving Otah the benefit of the doubt due to him still recovering from the ankle. He'll need a good workout too. It's entirely possible only Jake Long goes top 10.

toonsterwu
02-28-2008, 08:10 PM
I'm not that big on Moore. He's not really an ideal number 1. Stopgap, sure. But I don't see him consistently running b/w the tackles with effectiveness, and I feel like we need someone that can legitimately push Benson. Now, if I knew Benson would be solid, then Moore makes a lot of sense as he could complement him well while being more of a regular player than Garrett Wolfe.

In all honesty, if we're going after Moore, I'd rather go after Alvin Pearman. They are basically similar players, except Alvin was logjammed in Jacksonville and Seattle. While the UVA factor comes in for me, the bigger reason is that Pearman should be an easy get. All in all, I'd prefer to get a better back than either.

DaBears0530
02-28-2008, 08:45 PM
according to reports Griese will be traded or released by tuesday. Good move !

BeerBaron
02-28-2008, 08:50 PM
I'm not that big on Moore. He's not really an ideal number 1. Stopgap, sure. But I don't see him consistently running b/w the tackles with effectiveness, and I feel like we need someone that can legitimately push Benson. Now, if I knew Benson would be solid, then Moore makes a lot of sense as he could complement him well while being more of a regular player than Garrett Wolfe.

yeah, i would prefer someone who can be an everydown back to push benson. i think i said it earlier, idk.

but i dont really feel that moore or ward or anyone like that is it...

i like to think of it as if that benson just didnt exist, would the guy we get be able to be a full time, load carrying back in the nfl. its not AP or wolfe, though those guys certainly have roles in which they will be useful.

and i dont see a moore, or ward or guys like that working like that. those guys too would need a compliment. even julius jones is probably pushing it...hes always had marion with him and hes certainly a better compliment than a non-caring benson.

BeerBaron
02-28-2008, 08:52 PM
according to reports Griese will be traded or released by tuesday. Good move !

aye, i knew it woudl be coming as soon as they extended orton. hes due a roster bonus and is making a good deal of money to essentially be the #3 guy.

plus, itll make room for a rookie. i hope its not a rookie drafted real real high, but i dont disagree that we really need one....

DaBears0530
02-28-2008, 09:47 PM
if chad henne is there with our 2nd round pick i say we take him..

DaBear89
02-28-2008, 10:08 PM
eh, i don't like Henne in the 2nd. i have him rate at a late 2/early 3 so its a decent sized reach for a spot that we prolly wont need this year. I wold rather take a WR/OT/RB depending on what happened in the 1st.

i'm glad people kinda agree with me on JJ now. i said it a while back and every1 kinda just said they wanted better. imo theres not much better than him besides turner (which is now a real possibility b/c his asking price is pretty low, his agent knos that this draft class could make hard for a deal if they wanted a bookoo load of $$) but every1 else is prolly more costly and equal inconsistency or injury prone.

if we get Turner, a draft of Williams, WR, QB/S/OL, would be really nice

BeerBaron
02-28-2008, 10:17 PM
if chad henne is there with our 2nd round pick i say we take him..

easy, no. look at the weaknesses scott lists for him on his player page. hes basically an inch taller rex...no freaking way

and to teh other dabear (yeah that threw me off for a second, lol) i dont disagree with turner. i was just thinking, he played his college ball in illinois i was thinking maybe we could get him to take a home town discount....or not. he seems fairly cheap anyway, and we would be able to use our draft picks elsewhere. maybe to build a line in front of him or get some receivers to take pressure off of him...

bearsfan_51
02-28-2008, 10:22 PM
I love me some Chad Henne.

bearfan
02-28-2008, 10:24 PM
Jo-osh John-son *dum dum dumdum dum

BeerBaron
02-28-2008, 10:24 PM
I love me some Chad Henne after the third round.

fixed that statement to have it make some sense

BeerBaron
02-28-2008, 10:25 PM
Jo-osh John-son *dum dum dumdum dum

i think thatd be more acceptable than henne though i really believe tampa is going to be all over him

TitleTown088
02-28-2008, 10:32 PM
What do you guys expect from the Bears Offense next year as of now?

bearfan
02-28-2008, 10:39 PM
What do you guys expect from the Bears Offense next year as of now?

Right now? probably not much. After FA, and draft? A bit more. We hopefully will upgrade the OL at Tackle, and at Guard (I like the Jacob Bell idea 51), and we will hopefully have a strong 2 back system next year (Benson/Turner?/draft pick?). I think the biggest question mark is if the coaches go with the smarter QB that wont make as many mistakes, or the QB that has potential to light it up. And if we dont do anything w/ WR, then I think we'll have some problems (Hester and Bradley....I like them both, but not at 1 and 2 right now)

TitleTown088
02-28-2008, 10:54 PM
Jacob Bell will be wearing Green and Gold. You cannot have him.

BUSTKUNTLAWL
02-28-2008, 10:56 PM
I don't understand what JA had in mind with this offseason.. This team is looking uglier and uglier by the minute.

I am really concerned about this team - and my expectations for the next year or so are really low.

I am very curious to see what JA tries to do in FA.. Hopefully something.

BeerBaron
02-28-2008, 11:02 PM
i admit it looks bad right now, but with the right moves we could have a respectable offense assembled...

lets see, grab a WR, grab a RB, grab at least one guard and one tackle...maybe add some depth at various spots on D.

it seems daunting but i think it can be done

bearsfan_51
02-28-2008, 11:06 PM
We



are



rebuilding.






And cheap.

Cunningham
02-28-2008, 11:36 PM
from an outsider's prospective i could see the bears as super bowl contenders within the next two to three seasons. they'd be smart to focus on getting younger in the trenches this year, chris williams probably being the favorite in the first round, and then getting henne or flacco in the second. that would allow them to focus on drafting or signing an elite receiver a year from now or possibly a running back if benson continues to unimpress. it's better to rebuild inside out, starting with the trenches.

their defense will be in good shape if they manage to lock up tommy harris. i didn't follow chicago closely last season but i'd imagine injuries played a large role in the defense's regression. safety is a position that has been a liability as of late and that will need to be addressed as well.

as far as next year is concerned, the offense will most likely be brutal but i expect the defense to make a rebound.

DaBear89
02-28-2008, 11:42 PM
the way we know angelo to work, i'm seeing next season as a repeat of 05. just with a lil' more polished Orton at the helm. but maily a great D. ugly offense but hester can help some more hopefully. yeah, pretty much 05 but an equaled out offense(running regressed, passing progressed)

BeerBaron
02-28-2008, 11:49 PM
the way we know angelo to work, i'm seeing next season as a repeat of 05. just with a lil' more polished Orton at the helm. but maily a great D. ugly offense but hester can help some more hopefully. yeah, pretty much 05 but an equaled out offense(running regressed, passing progressed)

problem is though that unless we start using a whole lot of 2 TE sets, im not sure the passing game really has improved....though i am a fan of orton having his shot finally.

and as for the D....i think it will be solid but not quite as great as the playoff years....though im excited for jamar williams. everything ive read says that coaching staff loves him, so i guess we'll see...

Geo
02-28-2008, 11:57 PM
The absolute primary goal/concern for the Bears this offseason is to improve the offensive line. That can be done through free agency as well as the Draft.

If they can pick up an experienced receiver that makes sense, that would help offset the loss of Berrian for the immediate future.

BeerBaron
02-28-2008, 11:59 PM
aye, i think the vikes are all over berrian right now. i dont think theres a damn chance we get him back now....

DaBear89
02-29-2008, 12:15 AM
the passing game may not have progressed from last year to this coming year, but from 05 to this year i would say it could only be better. you won't have a rookie 4th round draft pick as our starting QB, you have 2 TEs who are pretty good at catching (neither of which had any real impact in 05), Moose was the only guy with more than 350 rec yds(750). i think even w/o the 2 TE sets we got a TE on the field at all times who is an option, and i gotta believe a better overall receiving corps than we had back than.

bearsfan_51
02-29-2008, 12:25 AM
Scout.com's Adam Caplan reports free agent OLB Demorrio Williams has set up visits with the Bucs, Chiefs, and Chicago Bears.

Williams struggled to fend off rookie Stephen Nicholas last year, but his combination of skills and athleticism is highly intriguing. The Bucs, Chiefs, and Bears all run Cover 2 variations. Williams plays the weak side.




That's interesting...

DaBear89
02-29-2008, 12:29 AM
prolly would be a dirt cheap backup...really not needed but won't hurt either

BeerBaron
02-29-2008, 12:32 AM
prolly would be a dirt cheap backup...really not needed but won't hurt either

yeah, ditto for me too. i think we should probably be more concerned elsewhere though...

bearsfan_51
02-29-2008, 12:34 AM
I dunno. I would actually prefer Williams over Jamar Williams. But I've gone on record as not being a fan of Jamar as a starter.

Demorrio has been a tackling machine whenever I've seen him play.

BeerBaron
02-29-2008, 12:36 AM
i cant say i know all that much about the guy but teh coaching staff really seems to like jamar....

plus im always a little biased towards the guy we drafted. i think it feels good to be able to say that most of defensive starters were drafted by us.

Smokey Joe
02-29-2008, 12:45 AM
It's not bad enough that we are gonna lose Berrian, but we're gonna lose him to the Vikings.

BeerBaron
02-29-2008, 12:53 AM
It's not bad enough that we are gonna lose Berrian, but we're gonna lose him to the Vikings.

at least they wont be able to use him against with tavaris at QB....unless he suddenly learns to block for the good AP

bearsfan_51
02-29-2008, 12:54 AM
Tavaris actually has a good deep ball. That's about all he's got.


Since I live in Minneapolis I may actually get some Vikes tickets if they sign Berrian. I don't think I'd ever go so far as to buy a Vikings jersey, but I must admit I'll probably still cheer for him when not playing the Bears.

Smokey Joe
02-29-2008, 12:57 AM
at least they wont be able to use him against with tavaris at QB....unless he suddenly learns to block for the good AP
I believe Tavaris is a lot better then people give him credit for, and with a receiver duo of Berrian and Rice and perhaps the addition of a pass catching threat at TE, (with the continued development of Jackson) the Vikings can have a top 10, if not higher, offense next year.

BeerBaron
02-29-2008, 12:58 AM
I believe Tavaris is a lot better then people give him credit for, and with a receiver duo of Berrian and Rice and perhaps the addition of a pass catching threat at TE, (with the continued development of Jackson) the Vikings can have a top 10, if not higher, offense next year.

did you hear about that whole rosenfels trade they tried to swing? they wanted to send their 3rd rounder for him, but the texans would only take a 2nd...

wonder what kind of message that says to him?

SFbear
02-29-2008, 01:15 AM
http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/football/bears/cs-080228-brian-urlacher-chicago-bears,1,7287260.story


Looks like we've been busy trying to work out a new deal with Urlacher.

bearsfan_51
02-29-2008, 01:19 AM
http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/football/bears/cs-080228-brian-urlacher-chicago-bears,1,7287260.story


Looks like we've been busy trying to work out a new deal with Urlacher.

Eh....Brian has done a lot for this team, but he's going to be 30, still has 4 years left on his contract, and appears to have some medical concerns.


I'd be fine with a token 1 year extension just to give him 6-7 million dollars in new money. If that makes him happy and is a sign of respect, so be it. If it's much more than that though, I just don't see the point.

I would like to see Brian retire a Bear though, regardless of the money. He's going to make the HOF, and I hate to see HOF'ers end their careers in foreign cities. Singletary, Payton, Hampton all retired Bears. Richard Dent should have as well.

toonsterwu
02-29-2008, 01:19 AM
The Smiley deal doesn't do us any favors to land a FA OG. It's looking more and more like a much cheaper veteran option at best, and OL early and often.

I'm not a fan of Henne. Reminds me a mix of Rex and Kyle.

I don't see the point of spending assets to get Demorrio Williams. I'd much rather let Jamar or Michael have a shot. I'm not big on Demorrio. I am a fan of Jamar with his size and athleticism being quite intriguing, and he should have a decent football head on his shoulders to be able to learn a bit of all three LB spots.

SFbear
02-29-2008, 01:22 AM
Eh....Brian has done a lot for this team, but he's going to be 30, still has 4 years left on his contract, and appears to have some medical concerns.


I'd be fine with a token 1 year extension just to give him 6-7 million dollars in new money. If that makes him happy and is a sign of respect, so be it. If it's much more than that though, I just don't see the point.

I would like to see Brian retire a Bear though, regardless of the money. He's going to make the HOF, and I hate to see HOF'ers end their careers in foreign cities. Singletary, Payton, Hampton all retired Bears. Richard Dent should have as well.


Our offseason strategy seems to be to spend more money on older players already under contract. Alex Brown, Desmond Clark, Urlacher...Lets do John Tait next...sigh.

bearsfan_51
02-29-2008, 01:26 AM
I mean...to some extent I'm fine with the extensions. The Orton deal makes perfect sense in context.

Des Clark is still going to be a good complimentary tight end 2 years from now. Same with Alex Brown, and I've always felt Brown was overrated.

Angelo has recently said that they haven't taken character into account enough with their team building. If they want to give some small extensions to quality team players I'm fine with that. I think a strategy like that can help just as much in terms of rebuilding (ie: having some players around to show the right way to win), as simply getting rid of everyone over 30.

It also sends a small message in light of Briggs and Berrian leaving that the Bears are willing to extend reasonable contracts to important players, even if they are cheap.

Gay Ork Wang
02-29-2008, 07:38 AM
Olivea? What about that guy?

DaBear89
02-29-2008, 07:48 AM
after looking at this (http://walterfootball.com/free2008G.php) i was wonderin if anyone knows about Rex Hadnot, G from MIA, he's only 26 but ive just never heard of him

BeerBaron
02-29-2008, 10:03 AM
Olivea? What about that guy?

eh no thanks. he got benched there midway thorugh last season i believe and im reasonably sure hes fairly undersized, somelike like 6'3

as for the extentions, ive understood and made peace with them all so far. if we throw some more money urlachers way to keep him happy, im fine with that.

life BF said, hes a future HoFer and i would love to see him play out his entire career here. normally im all for letting guys go after their contract is up once their 30 (or speeding it up a little in the case of guys that suck) but man, id let urlacher have a lifetime contract with reasonable money if i were them. keep him around for as long as we can.

BeerBaron
02-29-2008, 10:06 AM
after looking at this (http://walterfootball.com/free2008G.php) i was wonderin if anyone knows about Rex Hadnot, G from MIA, he's only 26 but ive just never heard of him

out of that list i would still be holding out some hope for bell. looks like hell be the best combinations of age, talent and signability.

somehow that probably means the bears wont even give him a look, but he might be the best bet

bearsfan_51
02-29-2008, 11:15 AM
Bucs signed John Gilmore to a 2 year deal. That should make Toony happy as he wanted him off the team anyway.

I liked Gilmore, but we're not going to give our 3rd TE any money. Hopefully he finds a role on the Bucs.

awfullyquiet
02-29-2008, 11:24 AM
I swore i posted this somewhere. But couldn't find it.

Ty Law. Free Safety. Chicago Bears.

Tell me i'm stupid.

5'11, 210. Ball Hawking skills. Veteran. At the least would provide decent depth. at best would be a decent addition for 2 years. he is 34, but released from the chiefs why? because they want youngins.

BeerBaron
02-29-2008, 11:31 AM
I swore i posted this somewhere. But couldn't find it.

Ty Law. Free Safety. Chicago Bears.

Tell me i'm stupid.

5'11, 210. Ball Hawking skills. Veteran. At the least would provide decent depth. at best would be a decent addition for 2 years. he is 34, but released from the chiefs why? because they want youngins.

old. hes old. we're shifting away from old guys like miller and reuben brown on offense, and we dont need to infuse one or two year stop gaps onto our defense. idmuch rather hope to god that mike brown stays healty and pair him with dan manning for a year. plus our backups we already have got some more experience last year, i just dont think we need to bring in an aging safety

bearsfan_51
02-29-2008, 11:37 AM
I swore i posted this somewhere. But couldn't find it.

Ty Law. Free Safety. Chicago Bears.

Tell me i'm stupid.

5'11, 210. Ball Hawking skills. Veteran. At the least would provide decent depth. at best would be a decent addition for 2 years. he is 34, but released from the chiefs why? because they want youngins.
We should want youngins too. Not to mention that he's neither fast enough, nor hard hitting enough to really give us what we need.

awfullyquiet
02-29-2008, 11:39 AM
old. hes old. we're shifting away from old guys like miller and reuben brown on offense, and we dont need to infuse one or two year stop gaps onto our defense. idmuch rather hope to god that mike brown stays healty and pair him with dan manning for a year. plus our backups we already have got some more experience last year, i just dont think we need to bring in an aging safety

If we're shifting away from old guys? why are we keeping mike brown?

Ty Law still has continued to perform at his age.

I'm not talking about starting necessarly. But having him at least compete for the starting job and giving us depth.

toonsterwu
02-29-2008, 11:42 AM
It's not that I hated Gilmore, it's that, well, I didn't see the need to keep him around. Particularly at that cost.

Btw, I'd take Olivea over Jacob Bell. I would. Olivea was benched at RT. I'd take Olivea at guard. Granted, it's mroe projection than anything, but Olivea always seemed a better fit in the interior. Olivea would also give us some more size inside.

I'd be curious on Hadnot too, but he had a big year and was supposedly expecting big money.

bearsfan_51
02-29-2008, 11:43 AM
Yeah I agree with all three aformentioned players. Hadnot probably is limited to non-pulling guard though.

BeerBaron
02-29-2008, 11:54 AM
If we're shifting away from old guys? why are we keeping mike brown?

Ty Law still has continued to perform at his age.

I'm not talking about starting necessarly. But having him at least compete for the starting job and giving us depth.

brown is 3 or 4 years younger i believe and hes a guy we've had a ton of success with when healthy. it hasnt been often, but even if he cant get through a season again, i have trust in our young (and cheap) backups who got some playing experience last year.

i just dont think law is what we need

bearsfan_51
02-29-2008, 12:01 PM
A bit of a side-note, but who thought that John Gilmore would have been the first of our free agents to sign elsewhere? I mean really...

I'm happy for him though. I'm sure the money's not too much, but simply being pursued early on has to make a backup tight end feel a little special.

Geo
02-29-2008, 12:04 PM
Ayanbedejo's next, lol.

bearsfan_51
02-29-2008, 12:14 PM
He can go for all I care. Good special teams player but he's over 30 and is overestimating his value. If we sign Demorrio Williams I think he could be a similar special teams guy and offer us a lot more at the linebacker position.

BeerBaron
02-29-2008, 12:30 PM
He can go for all I care. Good special teams player but he's over 30 and is overestimating his value. If we sign Demorrio Williams I think he could be a similar special teams guy and offer us a lot more at the linebacker position.

id still prefer not to blow much money on a guy we dont truly need....if we sign him fine, but i really really REALLY think the front office needs to get off their asses and start doing....something. sign somebody for christ sakes....

bearsfan_51
02-29-2008, 12:44 PM
Signing somebody for the sake of signing someone is the dumbest possible thing the Bears could do.

I'm fine with "staying sober" as Jerry calls it, and maybe picking off a player or two that falls through the cracks. (Or taking advantage of the often-underlooking RFA market).

BUSTKUNTLAWL
02-29-2008, 01:34 PM
Over/Under on 2011 before our next playoff appearance?

bearsfan_51
02-29-2008, 02:00 PM
Over/Under on 2011 before our next playoff appearance?

Not sure if that's a joke or not but I'll say under. 3 years of not making the playoffs? In the NFC? I don't see it.

bearsfan_51
02-29-2008, 02:02 PM
Dolphins have apparently agreed to terms with Ernest Wilford. Thank god.

Geo
02-29-2008, 02:05 PM
Better than bringing back Meshawn.

BeerBaron
02-29-2008, 02:15 PM
Signing somebody for the sake of signing someone is the dumbest possible thing the Bears could do.

I'm fine with "staying sober" as Jerry calls it, and maybe picking off a player or two that falls through the cracks. (Or taking advantage of the often-underlooking RFA market).

no, thats true, i dont want them just grabbing any old player. but line up some visits, bring some guys in to talk to, throw some numbers around, something!

outside of demario i havent seen the bears name listed with anyone. at least line something up with turner, line something up with bryant johnson, give a phone call at least to faneca or bell....

Smokey Joe
02-29-2008, 02:30 PM
Schefter is reporting Berrian to the Vikings will be a done deal by tonight.

Smokey Joe
02-29-2008, 02:36 PM
I am beginning to think that the next couple years will be rebuilding years, not push for the playoff year. This might be the best thing we could do for the future of the franchise, but watching the bears suck for a year or two, if not more, would suck huge ass.

BeerBaron
02-29-2008, 02:45 PM
I am beginning to think that the next couple years will be rebuilding years, not push for the playoff year. This might be the best thing we could do for the future of the franchise, but watching the bears suck for a year or two, if not more, would suck huge ass.

yeah, im gonna say we hope against that....

i mean, we should at least be competative, no 06 raider years or anything like that....

most of our defense is locked up and loaded with talent. plenty of DE depth, urlacher and hillenmeyer at LB, a pretty decent crop of corners.....

i think that will be enough to keep us in most games. but the offense most likely needs to be rebuilt....i would like to just see us go with all young guys wherever possible there and see what we have in them all. id rather suck with young developing players for a year or two than suck with aging vets who we have to spend extra years drafting and developing replacements.

i think i said somewhere before that we could undergo a titans like transition over the next 2 years or so. they stayed competitive for the most part during that time and infused some young talent into the team. because they stayed competitive, fisher got to keep his job and now, depending on the development of VY, they could be a contender for years to come.

i think we could undergo something similar, keep the coaching staff in place with strong defensive play while staying competitive, and bring some youth and talent to the offense

bearsfan_51
02-29-2008, 02:46 PM
The only downside is that if we are rebuilding, signing young key players like Berrian and Briggs would seem to be part of the gameplan.

I understand not paying too much, and in a way I appreciate Angelo's willingness to take some heat for what he believes in, but we're not going to get any better if we can't even resign the players we draft.

BeerBaron
02-29-2008, 02:48 PM
The only downside is that if we are rebuilding, signing young key players like Berrian and Briggs would seem to be part of the gameplan.

I understand not paying too much, and in a way I appreciate Angelo's willingness to take some heat for what he believes in, but we're not going to get any better if we can't even resign the players we draft.

berrian ill agree with just because we struggle offensively, but i think briggs wont be too hard to replace given the past success of finding and developing young, talented defenders

its just that in the future, when we churn those goes out, we need to extend them sooner and get them there longer term. that was botched a bit with briggs...worked out a little better for guys like vasher, tillman, etc...

toonsterwu
02-29-2008, 02:55 PM
I wouldn't mind pursuing Javon Walker ... but that won't happen.

Geo
02-29-2008, 02:58 PM
I'd be too scared off by the knee/injury history, myself.

Smokey Joe
02-29-2008, 02:58 PM
The only downside is that if we are rebuilding, signing young key players like Berrian and Briggs would seem to be part of the gameplan.

I understand not paying too much, and in a way I appreciate Angelo's willingness to take some heat for what he believes in, but we're not going to get any better if we can't even resign the players we draft.
I agree with Berrian (at the very least he should have been franchised and perhaps even traded instead of let go for nothing).

Briggs, maybe, but JA and Lovie drafted both Jamar and Okwo in the 4th and 3rd rounds in the previous 2 years and both are WILL linebackers.

Right now, I see the money not spent this offseason going to Tommie and Hester.

bearsfan_51
02-29-2008, 03:00 PM
I wouldn't mind pursuing Javon Walker ... but that won't happen.

I just don't like the guy's attitude. He doesn't seem like a player that really even cares about winning as long as he's getting paid. We don't need that. I mean, an incentive-laden contract on a team where he'll get a chance to play? Sure. But I think the Cowboys rumors show that there will be a team that is willing to give him more than that.

Smokey Joe
02-29-2008, 03:02 PM
I'd rather not see glass legs get overpayed to come to chicago and then start bitching about crap half way through the season.

BeerBaron
02-29-2008, 03:13 PM
aye, agreed on the walker front. i wouldnt touch him...

btw, check this out:

http://www.chicagobears.com/news/NewsStory.asp?story_id=4425

trying to trade griese. i doubt we find any suitors....everyone knows hell be cut before his roster bonus is due, so anyone who wants him can just wait

Gay Ork Wang
02-29-2008, 03:16 PM
i hope we can get a 6-7th rounder

awfullyquiet
02-29-2008, 03:25 PM
Schefter is reporting Berrian to the Vikings will be a done deal by tonight.

Boners.

I don't care if JA is being prudent in not indulging in the FA frenzy. But, not feeding our developing talent is going to kill us.

I'm really contemplating if we're just going on the re-build. Because, i think letting go of BB is nuts. I just can't, in any way, feel comfortable with hester being #2 and bradley being #1.

Smokey Joe
02-29-2008, 03:44 PM
Word on the street is that the Bears are scheduling a visit w/ Bryant Johnson. I like Johnson, but he will hardly make up for the pending loss of Berrian.

bearsfan_51
02-29-2008, 03:49 PM
I don't think that's the point. Johnson would be at least one person that has proven ability to start. That's about all I would expect from him. If he could develop into a reliable starter, that would allow Hester/Bradley to battle it out for playing time.

BeerBaron
02-29-2008, 03:51 PM
Word on the street is that the Bears are scheduling a visit w/ Bryant Johnson. I like Johnson, but he will hardly make up for the pending loss of Berrian.

ah, i think we all saw this coming though. personally, id rather just pocket the money and go with hester and bradley than bring in johnson.

i just dont think johnson is actually that much better. plus the other two (plus rasheed davis if you want to count him) have already been in the offense for a while.

we'll probably end up with johnson though. just saying it now

SFbear
02-29-2008, 03:54 PM
We have lined up a visit with Bryant Johnson

Bears working on visit with WR Johnson
Mike Mulligan checked in this afternoon with some info for us.

The Bears are working to line up a visit with free-agent wide receiver Bryant Johnson. He could be at Halas Hall by early next week.

In other news, wide receiver Bernard Berrian visited Minnesota and is now on his way back to the West Coast where he will visit the Oakland Raiders. They made defensive tackle Tommy Kelly the highest-paid player at his position Thursday despite the fact that he is coming off a torn ACL.

NFL insiders speculate the reason Oakland has been throwing around such big money—the Raiders also re-signed running back Justin Fargas and are in the mix for right tackle Kwame Harris—is because players are so reluctant to visit, let alone sign with Al Davis' team.

Agent Drew Rosenhaus is hoping to use the Raiders' situation to up the ante in Minnesota or here with Berrian. One veteran agent—not Rosenhaus—suggested the premium the Raiders have to pay is at least $1 million per year for middle of the road free agents.

Posted by Brad Biggs on February 29, 2008 03:14 PM |

Gay Ork Wang
02-29-2008, 03:55 PM
Well its better than starting Hester and Bradley. Hester should prolly play another year slot try to pull a lil welker. Bradley showed flashes, he seemed pretty good and seems to find some openings.

Apparently noone talked to briggs yet

Smokey Joe
02-29-2008, 04:02 PM
Well, we were a bit premature in saying Berrian to vikings is a done deal. Berrian is now on his way to visit Oakland.

In other news, Briggs is getting little interest as of now and teams have not contacted him about meetings yet. It looks as if he overvalued himself.

EDIT: Damn, I am slow with this news.

bearfan
02-29-2008, 04:04 PM
I think the biggest mistake this offseason so far was cutting Moose. Sure he may have been old, but I think the FO should have made sure that they could resign Berrian before letting Moose go. Now we are stuck w. Bradley, Hester, Davis, (possibly Johnson) at WR....downgrade. I think w/ Moose we would have had at least a decent player, even if he is aging.

I think we need to make a splash by at least this weekend, I hope that JA isnt sitting back and seeing what happens, I hope that he agressivly goes after some younger OL.

toonsterwu
02-29-2008, 04:06 PM
I'm fine with BJ. I've always been intrigued with him. He's a poor WCO fit (when they had Dennis Green). Then there was Fitz and Boldin, and he dropped back. He has the tools to be that big downfield target that the Turner's like.

Geo
02-29-2008, 04:07 PM
I like the Bears bringing in Johnson for a visit. Not sure if he can be a #1 outside the looming shadows of Boldin and Fitzgerald, but I would watch every bit of game film where he did start.

The Bears know first-hand what he can do, I recall him doing some good things in that notable MNF game of 06, including catching a touchdown. Usually a team will remember when an opposing player does well against them, although more division rivals because they see them more often.

I'd take a chance on signing Johnson, especially if he's not drawing interest from around the league.

bearsfan_51
02-29-2008, 04:14 PM
I'm fine with BJ. I've always been intrigued with him. He's a poor WCO fit (when they had Dennis Green). Then there was Fitz and Boldin, and he dropped back. He has the tools to be that big downfield target that the Turner's like.

I'm not sure he's much of a downfield threat as I think his speed has always been a bit overstated. Perhaps it has more to do with how the Cardinals used him, but his YPC is low, even for a guy of his size.

That said, we've got a fair amount of downfield threats on the team already.

pellepelle_10
02-29-2008, 04:24 PM
I'm fine with BJ. I've always been intrigued with him. He's a poor WCO fit (when they had Dennis Green). Then there was Fitz and Boldin, and he dropped back. He has the tools to be that big downfield target that the Turner's like.

I think BJ can easily emerge as a top WR in the league if given the chance. It's hard to judge him because he's been sitting behind one of the NFL's bese WR duo's. I will say when he has had his chance to showcase his talent he hasn't let anyone down. I think if he has the chance to become an everydown WR he will do just fine. I love his size and matching him with a speedy Bradley who "hopefully" can stay healthy we should be fine at WR. Keep in mind we have a VERY good TE group who can easily take the pressure off the offense so I'm honestly not worried. Also I think if we made a push at WR in the 2nd or 3rd we can still bring in someone to make some impact. I don't want Berrian to go personally but what do you do?

pellepelle_10
02-29-2008, 04:25 PM
I'm not sure he's much of a downfield threat as I think his speed has always been a bit overstated. Perhaps it has more to do with how the Cardinals used him, but his YPC is low, even for a guy of his size.

That said, we've got a fair amount of downfield threats on the team already.

agreed and I don't think he'll need to be a downfield threat. Bradley is capable of being BETTER and yes I do mean BETTER than Berrian. The big question is can he stay healthy. If so then I think we should be fine. I think BJ would serve as a good possession WR and as you stated thats really all we need.

BeerBaron
02-29-2008, 04:26 PM
well i think a number of downfield threats isnt all that much of a bad thing considering we have 2 good, pass catching TE's we can work the middle with. if we stick to speed on the outside opponents might have a tough time matching up the right personel...

BeerBaron
02-29-2008, 04:28 PM
as for johnson specifically, hes got decent size at 6'3 213, and he went to penn state. (maybe thats more important to me than anyone, lol)

anyway, like i said, if hes looking for too much money, id be fine with using who we have as speed on the outside with our TE's working the middle

toonsterwu
02-29-2008, 04:28 PM
I'm not sure he's much of a downfield threat as I think his speed has always been a bit overstated. Perhaps it has more to do with how the Cardinals used him, but his YPC is low, even for a guy of his size.

That said, we've got a fair amount of downfield threats on the team already.

I wasn't really implying speed there, but rather, just a big target to throw downfield to. The Turner's like that. Doesn't ahve to have great speed. Irvin, Harper, Westbrook (granted, all Norv examples, but their offenses are fairly similar).

pellepelle_10
02-29-2008, 04:30 PM
well i think a number of downfield threats isnt all that much of a bad thing considering we have 2 good, pass catching TE's we can work the middle with. if we stick to speed on the outside opponents might have a tough time matching up the right personel...

Agreed. I've stated several times that I think our WR core is better than people give it. There are a lot of players that haven't had any opportunity to showcase what they can do. Bradley can easily surpass Berrians production with just staying healthy. Hester needs time to adapt as he's shown some upside. I do think we can use a good possession WR and BJ I feel can fit this role very well. ON the other end we have 2 very solid TE's that can catch and stretch the field so its not like the receiving core is depleted. I'm hoping Mike Haas has more time to show what he can do. The guy has always had great hands and could easily become a Joe Jurevicious type WR.

Smokey Joe
03-01-2008, 08:19 AM
This is a pretty interesting article: http://www.suntimes.com/sports/football/bears/820629,CST-SPT-bear01.article

It puts chances of signing both Berrian and Briggs back at 50/50. It talks about how there might be no teams interested in Briggs now and that Berrian is not getting the money he wants from Minnesota.

bearsfan_51
03-01-2008, 08:22 AM
They are just assuming that Berrian didn't get more from the Vikings because he left without signing anything, which is a ridiculous assumption. Just because he is visiting Oakland doesn't mean it's between us and Minnesota, it likely means it's between Minnesota and Oakland.

It is nice to think that we'll get at least one of them back though.

bearsfan_51
03-01-2008, 08:23 AM
I'm hoping Mike Haas has more time to show what he can do. The guy has always had great hands and could easily become a Joe Jurevicious type WR.
Sorry but I'd bet my house you're just saying that because they are both white. Jurevicious is much faster than Hass.

Smokey Joe
03-01-2008, 08:24 AM
They are just assuming that Berrian didn't get more from the Vikings because he left without signing anything, which is a ridiculous assumption. Just because he is visiting Oakland doesn't mean it's between us and Minnesota, it likely means it's between Minnesota and Oakland.

It is nice to think that we'll get at least one of them back though.
I really think the visit to Oakland is just to raise his price. Oakland has to pay more to get good players because quite frankly, they suck. However, I really doubt Berrian wants to sign there. If he does... then he is crazy.

bearsfan_51
03-01-2008, 08:26 AM
Eh....I don't see why he'd be any more crazy than to go to Minnesota or come back here. Of the three I like Jamarcus Russell's chances of making Berrian special than any of the retards we've got at quarterback.

619
03-01-2008, 08:44 AM
I really think the visit to Oakland is just to raise his price. Oakland has to pay more to get good players because quite frankly, they suck. However, I really doubt Berrian wants to sign there. If he does... then he is crazy.

The Raiders already signed one bay area player, why not two? :)

Smokey Joe
03-01-2008, 10:53 AM
I was thinking about it, and man it would be nice if we could somehow keep Berrian and get Johnson as well. That'd be our best 1-2 combo at receiver in a long time, IMO.

Meta4
03-01-2008, 10:59 AM
If I were J.Angelo I would stay away from this crop of FA receivers. B.Johnson is average at best and would have the same impact as a mid level draft pick. Boldin and Fitz have both spent time on the sideline with injuries and Johnson was less than spectacular when filling in for them. Hes a #3 at best. Why waste the money even if he comes chaep?

regoob2
03-01-2008, 11:26 AM
If I were J.Angelo I would stay away from this crop of FA receivers. B.Johnson is average at best and would have the same impact as a mid level draft pick. Boldin and Fitz have both spent time on the sideline with injuries and Johnson was less than spectacular when filling in for them. Hes a #3 at best. Why waste the money even if he comes chaep?
Probably cause your wrong. Johnson played well as a #3 and he's big strong and is also pretty quick. He's more of a #2 and would've complimented Berrian very well if he stayed. (Still can but I doubt it) It's pretty hard to shine playing behind those guys.

bearsfan_51
03-01-2008, 11:33 AM
No I don't think he's entirely wrong. Johnson isn't nearly as quick as people think he is. He's a big body and does well with the underneath stuff, but it is a little telling that when one of the two has been injured, which is rather frequent actually, he's far from risen to the occasion.

I'd take him as a sure hands guy, but if we sign Berrian that's all I want to do.

regoob2
03-01-2008, 11:37 AM
Bryant Johnson can go up and get the ball with strength which I love and he does have quick feet and has very good size. I was saying he was wrong cause he said a mid round rook would have the same impact and thats not true. Johnson would be our #1 if we dont bring back Berrian and would be #2 if we do.

Meta4
03-01-2008, 11:46 AM
Probably cause your wrong. Johnson played well as a #3 and he's big strong and is also pretty quick. He's more of a #2 and would've complimented Berrian very well if he stayed. (Still can but I doubt it) It's pretty hard to shine playing behind those guys.

Hes had his chance to step out of the shadows and didnt. Arizona runs a VERY pass happy offense and gives their receivers plenty of chances to make plays. Boldin and Fitz have been injured quite a bit the past two years and Johnson showed that hes a #3 at best. The fact that berrian probably wont be back means he would step in and be your #2. Do you feel comfortable with him as your #2?? If I were a bears fan I wouldnt. Ive watched this guy play week in and week out considering I live here in AZ and trust me hes nothing special. Yes he can make some tough catches but that doesnt justify him being anything above a number 3 receiver.


P.S. Bearsfan 51....I just have to say that ive been coming to this site for a few years now and even though I HATE the bears I have to say I really enjoy your posts. You seem to have a good knowledge of the game.

regoob2
03-01-2008, 11:54 AM
So you'd prefer Bradley as our #1 and Hester #2. ya that sounds good.

BeerBaron
03-01-2008, 12:01 PM
So you'd prefer Bradley as our #1 and Hester #2. ya that sounds good.

it sounds better than paying good money for someone like johnson who may not actually be better than either of them.

no, its not ideal to have those guys going in, but if we can land a guy whos a real 1 or 2 WR, then id rather not bother and see what we have in them. throw in rasheed davis and maybe a mid round rookie and we would at the very least have some good speed outside to go with our TE's in the middle.

plus it looks like buffalo is bringing in johnson for a visit now too. like i said earlier, we need to get off our asses and start talking to some of these guys. even if we dont sign them right then and there DO SOMETHING!!!!

otherwise we are going to be going in with bradely and hester as 1 and 2

regoob2
03-01-2008, 12:06 PM
If we don't bring in some receivers were staring at a top 5 pick. Our O is gonna get a lot worse and keep the D on the field even longer in 08.

bearsfan_51
03-01-2008, 12:15 PM
That's ridiculous. Receivers are probably the least important position on our whole team. We need to fix the running game and the defense to win, receivers come last.

Meta4
03-01-2008, 12:17 PM
Trust me if you guys are gonna have a top 5 pick next year it will not depend on whether or not b.johnson is on the team. The point is you guys dont have a #1 receiver. Why just bring in a body and hope he can become the player that nobody else sees him becoming. Hes not a 1 hes not a 2 so why bring him in to compete for the number 1 when you already know hes not a number 1. Work through the draft and find a mid level receiver who you can groom to become a #1. Its been proven that some of the best receivers come later in the draft.

regoob2
03-01-2008, 12:37 PM
In whole right now we probably have one of the worst offenses in the league. Even if we rebuild the OL and bring in a rb what is gonna keep our teams from putting 8 or 9 defenders in the box. Bradley and Hester are both #4 guys for a reason. If we actually wanna compete we have to bring in multiple guys in FA cause we don't have enough picks. Meta you've probably seen more of him than me so I'll take your word on it. But we have to something cause right now we are looking bad.

bearsfan_51
03-01-2008, 12:39 PM
Haha....Bradley and Hester are both #4 guys (there is no such thing by the way) because Berrian is a very good receiver and we stuck with Moose too long.

Hester and Bradley are much faster than Berrian and Moose, so if your only concern is keeping safties out of the box, that should do it.

regoob2
03-01-2008, 12:46 PM
BF51, When Berrian Moose and Davis were on the field then what would you call Hester and Bradley?? Exactly.

DaBear89
03-01-2008, 12:50 PM
at the end of the season i believe both of them were on the field quite often

bearsfan_51
03-01-2008, 12:57 PM
There's no such thing as a "#4 guy" because we probably run a 4-receiver set about 5-6 times a year.

They were backups last year. This year they aren't. They are young guys. It's not that complicated.

Geo
03-01-2008, 01:23 PM
Maybe too much is being made of wide receiver, I agree.

First off, the Bears have to go two-TE set as the base. The sky is the limit for Greg Olsen, I really believe, he needs to get as many touches as possible. Dez Clark has been and remains the most consistent and sure-handed receiver on the Bears roster, Berrian and Moose or not, so Clark needs to be there too. Plus having both helps the running game, a staple of Bears football. And you can slide these guys out to the slot on some plays, taking advantage of a team putting a linebacker on them.

Add the great speed of Hester, plus the good size and overall ability of Bradley, that's two starting receivers outside. Rashied Davies is still with the team? He's got some experience. Obviously they should probably draft a guy to start developing, I like Adrian Arrington a great deal myself (don't think the Colts will take him though). If they can sign a guy to help their starting situation immediately, that obviously helps.

Also, sort of a related note: I'd like to see Garrett Wolfe see as much action on third downs as possible. Take advantage of his receiving ability, passing the ball short gives Rexy more accurate passes and see what Wolfe can do in YAC. He showed some great glimpses last year, honestly I'm warming up to him now. I wasn't crazy about him as a prospect/draft pick.

bearsfan_51
03-01-2008, 01:28 PM
I agree with everything you said except the Rexy part. I think Orton will have to really stumble to lose the job.


Which of course he probably will.

BeerBaron
03-01-2008, 01:30 PM
keep safeties out of the box you say?

well, why dont we just use our two stud TE's to stretch the field down the middle and use burners like hester and bradley on the outside. i dont know how many times ive said that now.

bradley and hester may not be the most polished receivers at the moment, but they do have some raw speed which will make opposing defenses think twice about leaving their corners on an island by themselves. so they have to slide over some safety help. then we can use out TE's to attack where the safeties once were. so they leave the safeties there and cover the lesser of two evils in teh TE's.

needless to say, as long as we have a QB who can, at the very least, heave a pass or two in the general direction of one of the aforementioned guys, they will keep their safeties out of the box.

ideal? no not really. will it work all the time? probably not. but it sounds one hell of a lot better than bringing in some random receiver who caught some passes on a different team, in a totally different kind of offense, and forcing him onto the field because we invested a bunch of cash in the guy.

lets say we sign johnson for a little less taht what the jags gave porter. thats still a pretty sizable investment and even if hes terrible and doesnt catch onto the offense at all, that investment will keep him on the field.

its a terrible football strategy, but football is also a business and thats a problem that comes along with that. its similar to the investment that makes us unable to totally abandon benson.

in short, im not totally against bringing it receiver help via FA since our receivers are hardly ideal. but theres talent there and bringing that out is all in how theyre used.

BeerBaron
03-01-2008, 01:31 PM
I agree with everything you said except the Rexy part. I think Orton will have to really stumble to lose the job.


Which of course he probably will.

i agree with the first part of that in taht orton is almost certainly option 1a.

but cmon, can you really be worse than rex is on one of his bad days? (which is far more often than his good days....you dont get to play buffalo or detroit every week)

bearsfan_51
03-01-2008, 01:31 PM
I think that we shoud offer Johnson or Hackett slightly less than what Porter got.

5-25 with 8 mil to sign is probably as good as they are going to get from anyone. We already had that money budgeted for Berrian and while neither player is as good as Berrian, that offer to him was a joke anyway.

Then again I think Jerry Porter sucks and he got 10, so ya never know.

awfullyquiet
03-01-2008, 01:40 PM
Haha....Bradley and Hester are both #4 guys (there is no such thing by the way) because Berrian is a very good receiver and we stuck with Moose too long.

Hester and Bradley are much faster than Berrian and Moose, so if your only concern is keeping safties out of the box, that should do it.

1) Receivers aren't important in our run first offense. But. As long as we can get opposing teams to respect the pass, we can begin to run them and run the clock, which is how we play football. (I'm agreeing with you)

2) Hester is faster than Berrian, Bradley is faster than Moose. Bradley is NOT faster than Berrian. Bradley may be more elusive, more slippery, but straight line get behind the corners and safeties ability, Berrian is worth his weight. In order to even begin to have a passing threat, we need to constantly slide olsen and clark out into the slot or outside. Hass and Rideau need to contribute seriously. And i've never ever ever ever ever ever ever thought Davis was anything special, more than a slot type guy.

3) I would still be terribly excited if we picked up Stallworth for a bunch of years. I've been a big fan of his and would be excited to see him, bradley and hester line up 3 wide or, Berrian, Stallworth, and Bradley too. Mmm... But the bears aren't looking at him. Sadly. If Berrian can't make a deal here in chicago (which i don't think they can). I would like to see the bears make a bigger deal for stallworth than they would for Berrian.

Gay Ork Wang
03-01-2008, 01:47 PM
Geo u made one big mistake:


SEX REX DOESNT DO DUMP OFF THROWS!!!

bearsfan_51
03-01-2008, 01:50 PM
Hester + Bradley is faster than Berrian + Moose. That's what I was saying.

Smokey Joe
03-01-2008, 02:32 PM
51, you forgot something, it's tough to have a running game when you have no decent wide receivers and you have two big holes on the OLine. It is looking more and more like St. Clair will be our starting LG and a draftee will be our RT. I do not think that line would be a whole lot better then last years.

Geo
03-01-2008, 02:57 PM
As long as it's better than last year, so backs have the chance to average more than 3.4 yards per carry - which both Benson and Sadly Not AP did, Wolfe averaged 2.7 ypc. 8 total rushing touchdowns as a team is a surprising number, in the disappointing direction. I know Benson is easy to blame because he's not producing anywhere close to the 4th overall pick of any Draft, but I think the OL is key regardless of Benson.

I know I saw it with the Colts last year: the first half of the season or so, the run-blocking was fantastic and it was clicking beautifully - the Colts were averaging around 141 rushing yards per game, their highest mark in two decades; then mainly thanks to injuries to the tackles, it went to hell (including getting dominated by the freaking Raiders) and the Colts' running game nosedived the remainder of the season.

From everything I saw of the Bears offense, the OL was the biggest problem. I just didn't think the backs, Benson or otherwise, had much to work with. What's your guys thoughts on this, you're obviously more invested with the team and have seen more than I have.

Geo u made one big mistake:

SEX REX DOESNT DO DUMP OFF THROWS!!!
Excellent point, Renji. Forget that John Shoop noise.

Gay Ork Wang
03-01-2008, 03:04 PM
As long as it's better than last year, so backs have the chance to average more than 3.4 yards per carry - which both Benson and Sadly Not AP did, Wolfe averaged 2.7 ypc. 8 total rushing touchdowns as a team is a surprising number, in the disappointing direction. I know Benson is easy to blame because he's not producing anywhere close to the 4th overall pick of any Draft, but I think the OL is key regardless of Benson.

I know I saw it with the Colts last year: the first half of the season or so, the run-blocking was fantastic and it was clicking beautifully - the Colts were averaging around 141 rushing yards per game, their highest mark in two decades; then mainly thanks to injuries to the tackles, it went to hell (including getting dominated by the freaking Raiders) and the Colts' running game nosedived the remainder of the season.

From everything I saw of the Bears offense, the OL was the biggest problem. I just didn't think the backs, Benson or otherwise, had much to work with. What's your guys thoughts on this, you're obviously more invested with the team and have seen more than I have.


Excellent point, Renji. Forget that John Shoop noise.
I really think the OL was the reason. We definitely cant expect Benson to be a Portis or LT, but he can be an above average runner. He needs some competition and some holes and i think our rushing attack could look way better than this year.

So give benson a good OL and then see how he does. Then decide what to do with him

bearsfan_51
03-01-2008, 03:07 PM
51, you forgot something, it's tough to have a running game when you have no decent wide receivers and you have two big holes on the OLine. It is looking more and more like St. Clair will be our starting LG and a draftee will be our RT. I do not think that line would be a whole lot better then last years.

I don't see how losing Berrian and Moose affects our running game in the slightest way. I love Berrian, but Hester is just as scary of a deep threat to safties as Berrian was, and Bradley is unquestionable faster than Moose, who should have been cut last year.

I've been trumpeting the "speed receivers help your running game more than ones that can block" for a long time now, so there's no argument there. I suppose if they are both utterly incapable of catching the ball that will be a problem for teams respecting our ability to pass, but I think both players have proven that they can get open and catch the ball.

As for your O-line proposition, you can't blame St. Clair because he wasn't a starter last year. St. Clair was infinitely better than Brown and Metcalf at LG, and in the two games he started we actually won. I don't think that he will actually be the starter, but if he is, it will still be an improvement over last year along with that addition of Otah at RT or Williams at LT.


Rome isn't going to be built in a day. If you are saying that we have issues I agree, but what is the FO going to do short of spending all of our cap room in one offseason to fix them all?

Geo
03-01-2008, 03:12 PM
If the Bears draft a back come April, even Mendenhall in the 1st, or sign a back now, that could nonetheless be a very good move in trying to improve the team, the offense particularly, and the running game most especially.

Let's be real: they know their weaknesses better than anyone else, they see guys like Benson and Bradley practice every day. They are moving on from Fred Miller and Ruben Brown, they know what's what.

BeerBaron
03-01-2008, 03:38 PM
i personally have no problem if we have to go into the season with st. clair at LG. are better options around? yeah, but if we dont get any of them, i dont really have a huge issue with that.

but i do think we have to get our hands on a starting quality RT. i would be willing to say that is the most important need we have to fill right now.

and even if we dont address RB in a significant way, improvement along the oline will still help below average backs look a little better. plus, with hester and bradley out there stretching the field and 2 good TEs working the middle, i dont think we have to worry too much about teams stacking the box against the running game.

in fact, i think the would be pass catchers of the team have less to do with the success of our run game than a competent QB.

and in terms of competency, KO is 1000x better than rex.....he may not be a stud but he can get a pass our two out well enough to keep the safeties back...

....and also have his passes not end up in the hands of said safeties....

Gay Ork Wang
03-01-2008, 03:54 PM
If the Bears draft a back come April, even Mendenhall in the 1st, or sign a back now, that could nonetheless be a very good move in trying to improve the team, the offense particularly, and the running game most especially.

Let's be real: they know their weaknesses better than anyone else, they see guys like Benson and Bradley practice every day. They are moving on from Fred Miller and Ruben Brown, they know what's what.
Well the question is: why didnt they saw it comin earlier??

yay Post 1000