PDA

View Full Version : The New Official Draft Thread


Pages : [1] 2 3

Hurricane Ditka
11-19-2007, 02:23 AM
To quote Rob Schneider in the Waterboy "Oh No! We suck again!"

It's that time again. Week 11 is in the books, and our season is all but over.

Smokey Joe
11-19-2007, 07:05 AM
I think right now, with how bad our defense has gotten due to lack of safety, Kenny Phillips should be the pick. Take OLine with our second pick, someone like Chris Williams in the second would be a steal.

bearsfan_51
11-19-2007, 11:53 AM
Cripes...we have so many needs I don't even know where to start.

It's really a matter of picking the positions of most concern. Do we resign Grossman for another trial year as the starter? Can Griese hold the fort for one more year? Who is the bigger sore spot, Fred Miller or Archuleta?

Truth be told I would hold off on safety, it's a bit of a luxury pick that quite frankly we can't afford to make right now. The offensive line is always going to take precedence over the secondary (or at least it should) so I would still go OT assuming the value is there. We don't need a RT, we need a LT that can move Tait back where he is going to be much more effective.

We also need to fire Ron Turner. Cripes. I've been mildly sticking up for the guy because it's not like we have the best talent to work with, but our "gameplans" if you can even call them that, are so counter-intuitive it just doesn't make sense anymore. How many times are we going to run the end-around to Hester before we realize that it doesn't ******* work!?!?!

k0ng
11-19-2007, 01:06 PM
O-Line is by far the biggest need on this team. 4th and 1 and Kreutz and Garza are both on their ass as soon as the ball is snapped. Then I would go Safety and RB as our next biggest areas of concern. D. Manning looks like he's starting to get it to. I do have some faith in Benson, but we need that Thomas Jones type to compliment him. Wolfe isn't it either. As far as QB, if Grossman has time, he can make any throw. So I would stick with him for another year. Especially if Ryan and Woodson are gone by the time we pick in the 1st round(I don't think Brohm is going to be good). With Dixon being hurt, maybe we could grab him with one of our 5ths or something.

The Defense just looks worn out. They just need an offseason to get healthy. It also seems that alot of teams have us figured out when it comes to Xs and Os. A new stud safety, add a new DT in the 3rd or 4th, get tommie, dusty and urlacher healthy, and this Defense will be a championship defense once again.

I think we need to draft two lineman in the first three rounds and sign one in FA. I'd lock up Briggs and Berrian also.

pellepelle_10
11-20-2007, 12:38 AM
Cripes...we have so many needs I don't even know where to start.

It's really a matter of picking the positions of most concern. Do we resign Grossman for another trial year as the starter? Can Griese hold the fort for one more year? Who is the bigger sore spot, Fred Miller or Archuleta?

Truth be told I would hold off on safety, it's a bit of a luxury pick that quite frankly we can't afford to make right now. The offensive line is always going to take precedence over the secondary (or at least it should) so I would still go OT assuming the value is there. We don't need a RT, we need a LT that can move Tait back where he is going to be much more effective.

We also need to fire Ron Turner. Cripes. I've been mildly sticking up for the guy because it's not like we have the best talent to work with, but our "gameplans" if you can even call them that, are so counter-intuitive it just doesn't make sense anymore. How many times are we going to run the end-around to Hester before we realize that it doesn't ******* work!?!?!

Looking at Fred Miller's play I'd say OT is a SERIOUS SERIOUS NEED. On the other hand our defensive backs been getting worked like a rib. I know Angelo drafts defense well so we may be able to hold back a couple rnds on Safety however there are also going to be some guys in FA to address at least 1 offensive line position so it could go either way. All in all I think you hit the nail on the head when you said there are a plethera of positions to address. Both Safety positions are of high consideration.

On another note. CB looked great for once. The guy finally ran with some damn fire. This is the RB I was hoping for so if he can keep this solid effort I'll stop ripping him up. He's not yet out of the bag though. He has a lot more to prove IMO. I could care less if he exceeds the mediocrity of 1000yds. He needs to act like he wants to succeed at the NFL level. I'm tired of his btching. Start putting up like this week and earn your keep.

Hurricane Ditka
11-20-2007, 12:06 PM
Bottom line, we can't afford to overpay the offensive line through free agency again. We did that last time and now three years later we're sitting here with the oldest and arguably worst offensive line in the league.

bearsfan_51
11-20-2007, 05:50 PM
Bottom line, we can't afford to overpay the offensive line through free agency again. We did that last time and now three years later we're sitting here with the oldest and arguably worst offensive line in the league.

Our offensive line isn't even close to the worst.

toonsterwu
11-20-2007, 07:39 PM
I think the best situation right now is for Grossman to play decent enough down the stretch that both sides agree to a one year deal and allow us to go with QB in say, the 3rd round, thus allowing us to address OL in the first and potentially safety in the 2nd. I'd spin Orton off for a depth pick (which I think we can get) unless Orton's going to get a chance (I think we can probably get a 5th for him). I'd spin Alex Brown off (right now, I think a 4th is best case scenario). Focus on OL/S/QB and either WR/Rb in day 1, and in day 2 add a WR/RB (whichever one not addressed), another end (can't say Ogunleye being here that much longer, maybe 2 years max, and Bazuin is an unknown), some more safety depth.

bearsfan_51
11-20-2007, 08:21 PM
You think we can get a 5th for Orton? Keep in mind he's only got a year left on his deal.

Smokey Joe
11-20-2007, 09:08 PM
One week Grossman is a garbage QB and the nest week he is the answer???

toonsterwu
11-20-2007, 09:16 PM
I don't think Grossman is the answer, but look at the options for next year. I'm not particularly enthused about going with Griese, and they don't seem willing to give Orton a chance. I'm not particularly enthused about the top 3 QB's. I think that there are a couple QB's in the 2nd-4th stanzas that have as much upside as the top 3 QB's. I'm not talking about a long term deal for Grossman, just a one year deal for both parties to reestablish value. Of course, both sides would have to agree, so maybe Rex finds a better opportunity.

As for Orton and a 5th, I think there's a slim chance. That's probably as high as I could see, though.

bearsfan_51
11-20-2007, 09:28 PM
One week Grossman is a garbage QB and the nest week he is the answer???
The answer for what? This team isn't winning the Superbowl next year.

Moses
11-20-2007, 10:20 PM
I think the best situation right now is for Grossman to play decent enough down the stretch that both sides agree to a one year deal and allow us to go with QB in say, the 3rd round, thus allowing us to address OL in the first and potentially safety in the 2nd. I'd spin Orton off for a depth pick (which I think we can get) unless Orton's going to get a chance (I think we can probably get a 5th for him). I'd spin Alex Brown off (right now, I think a 4th is best case scenario). Focus on OL/S/QB and either WR/Rb in day 1, and in day 2 add a WR/RB (whichever one not addressed), another end (can't say Ogunleye being here that much longer, maybe 2 years max, and Bazuin is an unknown), some more safety depth.

Why would anybody give a pick for Orton?

Smokey Joe
11-21-2007, 11:25 AM
Just wait and see... Orton will dominate once given the chance.

bearsfan_51
11-21-2007, 11:29 AM
Why would anybody give a pick for Orton?

Why would anybody give a pick for AJ Feeley?

DaBears9654
11-21-2007, 11:50 AM
Why would anybody give a pick for AJ Feeley?
I don't know; I wouldn't. IMO, Philly got rid of the wrong backup QB this pre-season and Holcomb is better.

I almost forgot, if the Bears want one of the big 3, they'd better either finish with a worse record than other quarterback-needy teams like Atlanta or trade up. Preferably option 2.

toonsterwu
11-22-2007, 10:05 PM
To answer Moses comment - I think some team might take a chance on Orton with one year left if they can get it on the cheap. Maybe 5th is high. I did acknowledge that. But I could see something like that happen. The QB options in the middle of day 2 aren't all that awe inspiring in terms of tools.

Just a possibility, though.

Random musing: If we end up in the mid-first, we may end up in no man's land. Depending on the positioning of the pick, it could be a reach of some sorts there (whether it be positioning, value, etceteras), and that wouldn't excite me (I mean, I'd be fine if we traded down to the mid-first to accumulate more picks, but to pick someone there, I'm a bit wary, particularly considering where our needs are). If that happens, I'd much rather try to deal further down and just stock up on picks.

Hurricane Ditka
11-22-2007, 10:07 PM
Looking at the remainder of our schedule it's conceivable that we pick in the top 10.

BUSTKUNTLAWL
11-22-2007, 11:08 PM
We're at the point where we have so many needs that where ever we pick we must get good value.

If we're mid 1st and there is no OT's or QBs worth the grade we need to take our #3 need whatever the hell that may be. Maybe a safety, god forbid. I will be utterly disappointed if we do not land a QB or big time OT in the first round of the draft.

Bearsfan51 - who has a worse OL than the 5 scrubs (Kreutz included - he has played like a dog - no need to give him a pass.) that are running out there every sunday for us? Just curious.. I have yet to see a worse line this year.

bearsfan_51
11-22-2007, 11:12 PM
We're at the point where we have so many needs that where ever we pick we must get good value.

If we're mid 1st and there is no OT's or QBs worth the grade we need to take our #3 need whatever the hell that may be. Maybe a safety, god forbid. I will be utterly disappointed if we do not land a QB or big time OT in the first round of the draft.

Bearsfan51 - who has a worse OL than the 5 scrubs (Kreutz included - he has played like a dog - no need to give him a pass.) that are running out there every sunday for us? Just curious.. I have yet to see a worse line this year.

I don't think there's a worse offensive line than the Lions. They're almost so bad that no offensive line would be an improvement as they wouldn't have a false start every other play. Just Jon Kitna, someone to snap the ball, and 9 receivers.

The Niners O-line is pretty pathetic too.

BUSTKUNTLAWL
11-23-2007, 05:54 PM
I don't think there's a worse offensive line than the Lions. They're almost so bad that no offensive line would be an improvement as they wouldn't have a false start every other play. Just Jon Kitna, someone to snap the ball, and 9 receivers.

The Niners O-line is pretty pathetic too.

Very true about the Niners OL.. Not sure how you compare the OL's since they both are pretty brutal.

There is no doubt that this OL is one of the worst in football right now though.

blkwdw13
11-24-2007, 04:19 PM
If the Bears are in position to draft McFadden but Jake Long is already gone can they pass on taking him to go in another direction or does he have to much value to pass.

bearsfan_51
11-24-2007, 04:56 PM
If the Bears are inpositionto draft McFadden but Long is already gone can they pass on taking him to go in another direction or does he have to much value to pass.
Please speak English.

Moses
11-24-2007, 05:10 PM
Barring a terrible off-season, McFadden will be long gone by the Bears pick.

blkwdw13
11-24-2007, 05:41 PM
Please speak English.

Don't be a prick.

bearsfan_51
11-25-2007, 12:48 AM
Don't be a prick.
It's kinda what I do.


But honestly, I had no idea what you said. No I don't see how we pass on McFadden, but we aren't going to lose nearly enough. In fact, we could lose every game from here on out and still be too high for McFadden.

Smokey Joe
11-25-2007, 01:15 AM
I want Woodson with our most likely 9th overall pick...

bearfan
11-25-2007, 01:25 AM
I want Woodson with our most likely 9th overall pick...

Woodson didnt have 7TDs to win him a game today did he? I think not! AINGE FTW! ;)

Smokey Joe
11-25-2007, 01:39 AM
Woodson had 6 TD's and would have won the game if Kentucky had a defense.

bearfan
11-25-2007, 11:05 AM
Woodson had 6 TD's and would have won the game if Kentucky had a defense.

I didnt watch the game, I just looked at the stats. I like them both, I just have been real high on Ainge, so I was just having fun with that post

awfullyquiet
11-27-2007, 03:52 PM
Well.

Grossman will be a value. Seriously, if we can get away (yes, get away) with playing with him one more year, which i believe we can, we can focus this year on getting an O-Line that'll actually block. We'll be able to resign him for less, or ship him away for more.

Okwo and Williams will be the logical next step as the future of bears linebackers, probably never will be as effective as briggs, but they won't totally screw the bears with their playing skills. One of them, or both of them, might end up seeing some time next year.

Cutting moose might be a top priority too. Whatever happened to all those receivers that we had with sure hands? Didn't he have like 10 drops in the past 4 weeks? The value isn't there for us though. Shame.

Race for the Heisman
12-01-2007, 07:34 PM
So I've been thinking about the draft since the season is coming to a close, and I think I'd really like something like this:

1) Ryan Clady
2) Joe Flacco
3a) Craig Steltz
3b) Kirk Barton
4) De'Cody Fagg
5) Owen Schmitt
6) Andre Callender
7) Jamario O'Neal

At a certain point I have trouble lining up pick values with player values but I don't like any of the Big 3 enough to spend a first on one of them and assuming the guy will sit anyway Joe Flacco would be a fine choice in my eyes, I think he's a bit of a late-riser like Kevin Kolb. Of all the safeties I've watched all year, both Steltz and Silva (BC) have really impressed me, along with Anderson Russell, but he's a junior. Barton I think could be a good right tackle, I've like Fagg when I've seen him, Schmitt might not be there but he's a great H-back and if we actually get some creativity in our offense he can fill in as third tight end, third running back, fullback, and he'd probably be a good special teamer. I actually liked Garrett Wolfe coming out of college, I thought maybe he could carve himself a niche like Darren Sproles but third round was probably to high for him and he's always going to be second to Hester on return duty. With that said, Callender offers the same thing but he's more solid and he's got good hands out of the backfield. In the seventh, I wasn't really sure where to go but O'Neal was a guy who had great tools (4.4-4.5 40, 210 lbs) but not everything clicked mentally. At the very worst he's a good special teams guy, at best he develops into a serviceable safety, although we took several DBs late last year, so maybe I should reconsider that pick. Also, do we have any picks I'm forgetting (maybe another 5th or something? Thoughts?

dabears10
12-01-2007, 08:59 PM
I don't think Callender would be worth a pick. He does not add anything to the team. I haven't done my research on Joe Flacco, but have heard his name thrown around. I think a DT would be a good selection there.

I also want to know if Trevor Laws is around in the 3rd Round, I think it would be a great fit for us.

evershot
12-10-2007, 06:46 AM
1) Ryan Clady: I'll wait to see how he does in his bowl game, but I'm worried about his inexperience.

2) Joe Flacco: For a division 1-AA QB to be drafted in the first day he needs some freakishly good athleticism, e.g. McNair. At best Flacco is 5th round draft pick.

3a) Craig Steltz: I'm worried about his ability to play the pass. The bowl game will be a good test for him. However, at this point I would pass on Steltz until I see him at the combine. LSU has too much talent to objectively judge Steltz on his own merit.

3b) Kirk Barton: I like Barton but this move doesn't make sense unless they want to move him to guard. John Tait and St. Clair can both still play RT and I would hope the Bears address the LT situation early in the first or second round.

Everybody else is debatable.

Bearsfan123
12-19-2007, 09:11 AM
1-Brohm QB
2-Carl Nicks OT-I dont know about him, so im waiting on a scouting report.
3a-Jonathan Hefney DB
3b- Barry Richardson OL


Whatcha think? This was a mock I saw in the mock draft forums after I critiqued it a bit. (The guy had us getting a RB and LB in the third)

BeerBaron
12-27-2007, 02:30 PM
What i would like to see the bears do is found in my sig but i think ill go into an explanation on each position and you guys let me know what you think:

QB: I think Orton might have bought himself a year to compete as starter, but griese and grossman have got to go. Bringing in another vet like chad pennington might not be a bad thing either and i would like the bears to look for a QB in rounds 2-3 to let sit for a year and see what happens. In my sig, I have them going with Flacco in round 3.

RB: It's too early to give up on Benson and I don't think either peterson or wolfe is good enough to be a full time change of pace back. I wouldn't mind someone else big who can also contribute on special teams or as a fullback. someone like jacob hester or owen schmidt maybe. I dont see this being addressed any earlier than round 4 though.

WR: Muhammad is becoming ancient and Berrian, if around, is no more than a #2 at best. Hester needs to continue his development at WR but hes too valueable as a returner to ever go further than the #3 IMO. Help is definitally needed but i dont think with all the needs the bears have that this gets addressed in the first three rounds.

TE: Set with Olsen.

O-line: Tackle is a huge concern and Fred Miller has to go. I want them to bring in someone like Otah in round 1 (or possibly Clady) and put them in right away at RT while developing them long term to take over for tait at the all important LT spot. Depth at G and C is also important but Tackle must be addressed first and foremost.

D-line: End seems pretty set but someone needs to be brought in long term to play next to harris at DT. With the lack of depth at S in the draft, I think DT becomes the bears 2nd biggest need and I have them addressing it in round 2.

LB: It'll be sad to see Briggs go but having Jamar Williams and last years 3rd rounder Okwo behind him, it doesnt seem like it becomes a big area of need.

CB: Fairly set I believe assuming everyone stays healthy. Depth couldnt hurt though, but no earlier that the latest rounds.

S: Perhaps a big area of need depending on how things shake out with Mike Brown and how Dan Manning is viewed to have progressed. Sadly, it seems like this draft is very weak at safety and with bigger needs at QB and OT, I don't see the bears going that way with thier first rounder in Kenny Phillips.

K: Set with Gould.

P: I think its time for Maynard to go before his downhill climb continues. Bring in some youth and the bears special teams could be set for quite a while.

bearsfan_51
02-08-2008, 12:42 PM
I saw this mock on another draft site and was rather pleased with it, thought I'd run it past the masses.

1st round- Chris Williams, OT, Vanderbilt
2nd round- Andre Woodson, QB, Kentucky
3rd round- Trevor Laws, DT, Notre Dame
3rd round- Tashard Choice, RB, Georgia Tech
4th round- Andre Caldwell, WR, Florida


That seems a bit too optomistic, but I would LOVE that draft.

dabears10
02-08-2008, 01:40 PM
I saw this mock on another draft site and was rather pleased with it, thought I'd run it past the masses.

1st round- Chris Williams, OT, Vanderbilt
2nd round- Andre Woodson, QB, Kentucky
3rd round- Trevor Laws, DT, Notre Dame
3rd round- Tashard Choice, RB, Georgia Tech
4th round- Andre Caldwell, WR, Florida


That seems a bit too optomistic, but I would LOVE that draft.

That is the best case scenario I believe. I would be ecstatic.

BeerBaron
02-08-2008, 01:50 PM
I saw this mock on another draft site and was rather pleased with it, thought I'd run it past the masses.

1st round- Chris Williams, OT, Vanderbilt
2nd round- Andre Woodson, QB, Kentucky
3rd round- Trevor Laws, DT, Notre Dame
3rd round- Tashard Choice, RB, Georgia Tech
4th round- Andre Caldwell, WR, Florida


That seems a bit too optomistic, but I would LOVE that draft.

thats really not bad at all. id be pleased, though id like to see what other RB's are available there than choice. if just for comparison reasons

bearsfan_51
02-08-2008, 01:52 PM
thats really not bad at all. id be pleased, though id like to see what other RB's are available there than choice. if just for comparison reasons
Kevin Smith and Jamaal Charles were both available as well. I'd be fine with either, though I am a fan of Choice.

dabears10
02-08-2008, 01:55 PM
thats really not bad at all. id be pleased, though id like to see what other RB's are available there than choice. if just for comparison reasons

Would you just prefer a different style than Choice or you just don't like Choice as a player?

I think he is very comparable to Thomas Jones. Patient at the line sees holes well, blocks well and catches the ball out of the backfield. Not really a home run threat but does well to pick up that 4 yards thats available.

I'd much rather a Choice, Peterson, Wolfe backfield than say a Slaton, Peterson Wolfe backfield.

BeerBaron
02-08-2008, 01:56 PM
Kevin Smith and Jamaal Charles were both available as well. I'd be fine with either, though I am a fan of Choice.

smith seems pretty good all around while charles would be a nice burner. i suupose id be alright with any too.

i think id put charles at the top of those 3 still

BeerBaron
02-08-2008, 01:58 PM
Would you just prefer a different style than Choice or you just don't like Choice as a player?

I think he is very comparable to Thomas Jones. Patient at the line sees holes well, blocks well and catches the ball out of the backfield. Not really a home run threat but does well to pick up that 4 yards thats available.

I'd much rather a Choice, Peterson, Wolfe backfield than say a Slaton, Peterson Wolfe backfield.

oh yeah, no, i wouldnt touch slaton before the 5th rould probably. which means we wouldnt be getting slaton.

also, i think your forgetting that, until someone beats him completely out, benson is still going to be part of that backfield

dabears10
02-08-2008, 02:00 PM
oh yeah, no, i wouldnt touch slaton before the 5th rould probably. which means we wouldnt be getting slaton.

also, i think your forgetting that, until someone beats him completely out, benson is still going to be part of that backfield

Well I'm looking a few years down the line when A) he gets cut or B) his contract is up. I'm don with the guy unless he proves he is worthy of anyones respect.

Gay Ork Wang
02-08-2008, 02:05 PM
Clady < Williams?

BeerBaron
02-08-2008, 02:15 PM
Clady < Williams?

i think thats assuming clady is already gone as he is in most mocks.

SFbear
02-08-2008, 05:53 PM
Scout.com says that Jerry has booked a private workout with Joe Flacco.



*sigh* Don't know how I feel about it. He just seems like Orton deluxe edition.

BeerBaron
02-08-2008, 06:19 PM
Scout.com says that Jerry has booked a private workout with Joe Flacco.



*sigh* Don't know how I feel about it. He just seems like Orton deluxe edition.

KO isnt that bad....hes 12-6 as a starter. id take winning 2/3 of your games

i know a QB really needs to be taken somewhere in the first 3 rounds but i want to see what KO can do this year

Smokey Joe
02-08-2008, 06:36 PM
1st round- Chris Williams, OT, Vanderbilt
Good pick. He actually has potential to be a franchise LT.

2nd round- Andre Woodson, QB, Kentucky
Yuck. I know I was once on the bandwagon, but he is just a horrible fit for us. He needs to go to some team with a good QB situation and just sit for 3 years. That place is not here.

3rd round- Trevor Laws, DT, Notre Dame
Not loving it, not hating it. I have a feeling we might keep Walker around if we can restructure his contract. And if we do, that's 4 DT's, 4 DE's and Brown. And as it has been discussed, Brown most likely isn't going anywhere so that'd be 5 DE's (Idonije can coun't as DT). No way we carry more then 9 DLinemen.

3rd round- Tashard Choice, RB, Georgia Tech
I like him as well, and this is a good spot for him. However, we did spend a 3rd rounder on a RB last year and I could really see us signing some cheap FA like Brown or maybe someone a little more expensive like Fargas.

4th round- Andre Caldwell, WR, Florida
Very, and I mean very, wishful thinking that he'd be here.


That'd be an okay draft, depending on what we do in free agency, IMO. That draft is severely lacking safety as well.

Smokey Joe
02-08-2008, 06:38 PM
Scout.com says that Jerry has booked a private workout with Joe Flacco.



*sigh* Don't know how I feel about it. He just seems like Orton deluxe edition.
Flacco is bigger and more mobile then Orton. And his Arm is bigger. Plus, he has more potential. Overall, Flacco is just better... and I am an Orton fan.

BeerBaron
02-08-2008, 06:48 PM
Flacco is bigger and more mobile then Orton. And his Arm is bigger. Plus, he has more potential. Overall, Flacco is just better... and I am an Orton fan.

right, if hes a better orton, then thats only a good thing (points back to 66% winning percentage)

pellepelle_10
02-08-2008, 07:05 PM
I saw this mock on another draft site and was rather pleased with it, thought I'd run it past the masses.

1st round- Chris Williams, OT, Vanderbilt
2nd round- Andre Woodson, QB, Kentucky
3rd round- Trevor Laws, DT, Notre Dame
3rd round- Tashard Choice, RB, Georgia Tech
4th round- Andre Caldwell, WR, Florida


That seems a bit too optomistic, but I would LOVE that draft.

This draft addresses quite a lot of needs but my only question here would be Safety which is in dire need of help. This has been our achilles heel for defense and as much as I love Angelo's late rnd selections I'd have to say we'd need to hit this position sooner than 5th. Other than that its not a bad draft at all.

DaBears9654
02-09-2008, 07:48 PM
2nd round- Andre Woodson, QB, Kentucky
I know he disappointed in the Senior Bowl, but did it really do that much damage to his stock? I kind of have my doubts. But, I guess we'll be finding out 4/26 & 27.

BeerBaron
02-09-2008, 09:00 PM
I know he disappointed in the Senior Bowl, but did it really do that much damage to his stock? I kind of have my doubts. But, I guess we'll be finding out 4/26 & 27.

ive seen him go as low as in the third...

i really liked him the times i saw him play this year like the LSU game. he was on target with passes, moving around quite well, etc.

the more people talk down on him, the more i like it becaues itmeans he'll be available later and later....lol

all the better for me

regoob2
02-11-2008, 09:01 AM
What do you guys think about a WR in round 2? If a guy like Devin Thomas or Hardy are still there I would definetly like to give our qb some else to throw too.

BeerBaron
02-11-2008, 10:04 AM
What do you guys think about a WR in round 2? If a guy like Devin Thomas or Hardy are still there I would definetly like to give our qb some else to throw too.

oh absolutely id go for thomas. hands down.

Bighead734
02-11-2008, 03:34 PM
I know he disappointed in the Senior Bowl, but did it really do that much damage to his stock? I kind of have my doubts. But, I guess we'll be finding out 4/26 & 27.

I watched about 3 games from Woodson this year, and I was not impressed whatsoever. He does have a nice arm, but he just puts the ball in bad places and takes so dang long to get rid of the ball.

If I were an NFL team, I wouldn't take him until the 3rd round. I'd take Chad Henne over Woodson, both have strong arms, but Henne makes better decisions.

BeerBaron
02-11-2008, 05:30 PM
I watched about 3 games from Woodson this year, and I was not impressed whatsoever. He does have a nice arm, but he just puts the ball in bad places and takes so dang long to get rid of the ball.

If I were an NFL team, I wouldn't take him until the 3rd round. I'd take Chad Henne over Woodson, both have strong arms, but Henne makes better decisions.

i havent liked henne...reminds me of a little less jumpy rex....not good

i liked woodson. i saw the lsu game, the louisville game and the bowl game and liked him in each. he seems calm, and accurate. i think with at east a year of sitting to work on a better release and learn an nfl system, he could be the best QB of the draft class

regoob2
02-15-2008, 08:59 AM
With Mcfaddens stock cooling off if he's there at 14 do we take him??

Gay Ork Wang
02-15-2008, 09:58 AM
I dunno, he seems like a Bust or Hit, it rather take Mendenhall

bearsfan_51
02-15-2008, 10:05 AM
With Mcfaddens stock cooling off if he's there at 14 do we take him??

Hahaha.....oh the draft season.

One person puts McFadden out of his top 20 and all of the sudden he's free-falling. McFadden won't hit 14, so don't worry about it.

Bearsfan123
02-18-2008, 12:26 AM
Mini Mock 1

1st 14th- Kenny Phillips S- I dont think Chris Williams or Jeff Otah rise high enough, Clady will be gone and even with our penchant to trade down I see JA thinking about what happened to our D when Mike Brown has gone out the last 2 years.

2nd- Trade up- 45th overall pick and Alex Brown for 35th overall pick- Gosder Cherilous OT- JA feels the pressure to bring in a starter and makes a move to get a solid RT prospect.

3rdA- Josh Johnson QB- We get a guy to sit for a couple years while we determine if KO can be that guy.

3rdB-Chris Johnson RB- I thought G here but the top 3 will most likely be gone. The good RB depth allows us to pick up a good player here in Johnson.

4th-Frank Okam DT- I think he has a free fall on draft day. Giving us a chance to pick him up here.

5th-Owen Schmitt FB- Maybe i'm too hopeful that he lasts this long. A great lead blocker is hard to find. I think he turns into a dominant blocker on the next level.

6th- Durant Brooks P

7th-Chester Adams G

BeerBaron
02-18-2008, 10:31 AM
Mini Mock 1

1st 14th- Kenny Phillips S- I dont think Chris Williams or Jeff Otah rise high enough, Clady will be gone and even with our penchant to trade down I see JA thinking about what happened to our D when Mike Brown has gone out the last 2 years.

2nd- Trade up- 45th overall pick and Alex Brown for 35th overall pick- Gosder Cherilous OT- JA feels the pressure to bring in a starter and makes a move to get a solid RT prospect.

3rdA- Josh Johnson QB- We get a guy to sit for a couple years while we determine if KO can be that guy.

3rdB-Chris Johnson RB- I thought G here but the top 3 will most likely be gone. The good RB depth allows us to pick up a good player here in Johnson.

4th-Frank Okam DT- I think he has a free fall on draft day. Giving us a chance to pick him up here.

5th-Owen Schmitt FB- Maybe i'm too hopeful that he lasts this long. A great lead blocker is hard to find. I think he turns into a dominant blocker on the next level.

6th- Durant Brooks P

7th-Chester Adams G

i suppose i would accept that draft just because we would be getting immediate starters at need positions in S and RT.

and i suppose id be happy with JJ but isnt he more of a WC offense type of guy? strikes me as such anyway...

now, chris johnson...didnt we JUST take a grossly undersized back late in the third last year? if we wait until that point to go RB, id rather go with someone like forte or kevin smith or even a tashard choice. someone who at least has the potential to be an every down back if need be.

now okam...i had him in mind as a good 34 NT when i first saw/read/heard about him, but i hear his motor is terrible and plays too high....etc. since its the 4th round and hes a big body to put next to harris, id accept it. but im just not sure about him...

schmidt i was in favor of up until just a few weeks ago. but wouldn't it be wiser to either get some more oline depth or maybe even a WR to develop? a good blocking FB would be real nice but if the oline isn't improved and neither is RB, it just seems kind of a waste. Id love him on special teams though...hed be one hell of a wedge buster.

punter...brooks...love it. if hes there. but i think maynard is on the downward slope and only gonna tail off further. didnt he only have like a 41 avr this year? yeah...we can do better. and if we get someone like brooks, we could have one nasty special teams unit in he, gould and hester for years and years.

developmental late round lineman in the 7th, good.

bearfan
02-18-2008, 11:21 AM
I like the Okam pick, as a 4th round pick I think it fits. Someone who has all this potential, but doesnt utilize it, I think our coaches could make something work w/ him. Another player who has fallen this year is that Tommy Blake. Thats another guy who I wouldnt mind if we take a 3rd or 4th round project pick on.

BeerBaron
02-18-2008, 11:44 AM
I like the Okam pick, as a 4th round pick I think it fits. Someone who has all this potential, but doesnt utilize it, I think our coaches could make something work w/ him. Another player who has fallen this year is that Tommy Blake. Thats another guy who I wouldnt mind if we take a 3rd or 4th round project pick on.

unless we were to fill all of our OT, QB, RB, WR and S needs via the first 3 rounds and free agency, i think id hold off on blake for a while. if hes still around starting in the 4th round though, he might be worth a look there. we certainly have enough other DE depth that he wont be missed too much if his depression/anxiety problems return

BeerBaron
02-22-2008, 10:40 AM
http://www.nfldraftcountdown.com/forum/showthread.php?t=18529

wtf!?!?!?

cmon guys, let him know how we feel. lets show the whole board never to give us something like that again

bearsfan_51
02-23-2008, 11:00 AM
I just saw that Otah had a real slow 40 time. Obviously that's not a huge deal for a lineman, but it could dip his stock too low for us at #14.

regoob2
02-23-2008, 09:05 PM
I wasn't sure who I would prefer between Otah and Williams, but after today I'd take Williams. He has really quick feet.

Smokey Joe
02-23-2008, 09:37 PM
I just saw that Otah had a real slow 40 time. Obviously that's not a huge deal for a lineman, but it could dip his stock too low for us at #14.
Oh puh-lease. Scouts aren't idiots and actually think a mid 5 40 for a lineman, especially someone Otah's size, is really gonna make a difference. What they were watching today from the linemen were footwork and technique mainly. Otah would not see his stock soar if he ran a 5.2, however, he won't see it drop a bit even though he ran a 5.5-5.6...

If Otah drops for some reason, it's because of questions about his ability to actually play LT in the NFL.

bearsfan_51
02-23-2008, 09:39 PM
Oh puh-lease. Scouts aren't idiots and actually think a mid 5 40 for a lineman, especially someone Otah's size, is really gonna make a difference. What they were watching today from the linemen were footwork and technique mainly. Otah would not see his stock soar if he ran a 5.2, however, he won't see it drop a bit even though he ran a 5.5-5.6...

If Otah drops for some reason, it's because of questions about his ability to actually play LT in the NFL.
I'm getting the notion that you're dissagreeing with everything I say just for the hell of it.

I said myself that it's not that big of a deal, and am now arguing against the backlash against him, but to say that it doesn't matter at all is silly. Everything matters at this point. Williams looked much more athletic and fluid than Otah today.

Smokey Joe
02-23-2008, 09:47 PM
I'm getting the notion that you're dissagreeing with everything I say just for the hell of it.

I said myself that it's not that big of a deal, and am now arguing against the backlash against him, but to say that it doesn't matter at all is silly. Everything matters at this point. Williams looked much more athletic and fluid than Otah today.
I'm kinda touchy when it comes to the big uglies... and 40 times for linemen do not matter unless they are really slow, or really fast. A .3 difference in straightline speed is not gonna make someone jump ahead of Otah. If he was projected as a LG and he ran a 5.5/6, yeah, that could and probably would cause his stock to dip. But he's a big fat massive tackle, and big massive tackles usually don't need to be very speedy.

I didn't watch most of the stuff today, but if Otah's stock falls, it's because he showed bad technique and footwork, not because of his 40 time.

BeerBaron
02-23-2008, 10:09 PM
well for our sake, i still would be happy with either otah or williams.

otah would certainly go to RT right away, while williams would compete for LT at first.

either could project long term to LT, with williams having the lead in that department.

if i had to choose today, i would take williams. not because he ran better in the 40, but for his LT potential. i dont think otah really hurt himself or anything...

Smokey Joe
02-23-2008, 10:18 PM
I would choose Williams as well, and not because of today, but because I would have chosen him all along.

MidwayMonster31
02-24-2008, 01:17 AM
I agree with Smokey Joe about Williams. I'm much more concerned about Otah's quickness, than his straight-line speed. Plus Williams has a huge edge in experience and a slight edge in skill, so it would make more sense to draft Williams.

bearsfan_51
02-24-2008, 01:45 AM
The biggest concern I have about Williams is that he's a finesse player.

I think best case scenario he's D'Brick. Worse case scenario he's probably Alex Barron.

toonsterwu
02-24-2008, 02:53 AM
There's been rumors that Chris Williams is our preferred OT from the group after Jake Long, but that Mendenhall may push him. This leads me to wonder what we are doing in Fa, if anything at all.

BeerBaron
02-24-2008, 08:29 AM
The biggest concern I have about Williams is that he's a finesse player.

I think best case scenario he's D'Brick. Worse case scenario he's probably Alex Barron.

well thats....i would be ok with either of those guys. they seem decent.

so what kind of lineman do we actually like? i read that we wont go otah because hes a huge mauler and thats not our type. and then you say your concerned with williams because hes a finesse layer......

most teams prefer one or the other, which is it?

DaBears0530
02-24-2008, 09:08 AM
i heard a rumor that the bears are trying to extend kyle ortons contract. so would that lead us to not drafting a QB?

BeerBaron
02-24-2008, 09:15 AM
i heard a rumor that the bears are trying to extend kyle ortons contract. so would that lead us to not drafting a QB?

i dont think so just because griese is still around and could be released due to his large contract.

though if we are planning to take 4 into camp, including one drafted rookie, it could drive back the round in which we would take one in.....

and does it piss anyone else off how john clayton on espn is going around saying he doesnt think griese will be released and will be the most valueable backup and blah blah blah.

shut up cryptkeeper (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zi7XtBv94pE)

DaBears9654
02-24-2008, 10:38 AM
Good find, BeerBaron.

regoob2
02-24-2008, 10:51 AM
I hope we look at Erik Ainge. He's still one of my favorite QBs in this draft and his stock is low. I hope we can pick him up in the mid rounds.

bearfan
02-24-2008, 12:01 PM
I am officially on the Josh Johnson bandwagon. I saw that he ran around a 4.4 40, and that he has been looking pretty good in the drills as well. A QB to me that has some decent QB skills, that also has the ability to escape, and possibly make something happen, would probably be the 1st Bear QB to excite me ever.

Josh Johnson for #2nd round draft pick 2008

BeerBaron
02-24-2008, 12:03 PM
I hope we look at Erik Ainge. He's still one of my favorite QBs in this draft and his stock is low. I hope we can pick him up in the mid rounds.

i dont think i would really be against anyone after the fourth round if the values right. at that point it would be pretty easy to get someone who can just sit and learn for a while.

also, since it would be a late round pick, if our current groups of QBs dont work out again, we could draft someone high next year without having to fear wasting a high pick of a QB this year

BeerBaron
02-24-2008, 12:06 PM
I am officially on the Josh Johnson bandwagon. I saw that he ran around a 4.4 40, and that he has been looking pretty good in the drills as well. A QB to me that has some decent QB skills, that also has the ability to escape, and possibly make something happen, would probably be the 1st Bear QB to excite me ever.

Josh Johnson for #2nd round draft pick 2008

2nd? hmm....i dont know....that seems a bit high for as uncertain of a quantity he is.

i think id rather see us go OT in 1 and then RB/WR in 2. maybe if someone like johnson or another QB is still around late in the 2nd or early in teh 3rd, we could throw our pair of 3rd rounders at someone to snag him. id be more for that, especially since JA has done well getting defensive layers in the later rounds and our needs at DT and S could probably be filled well there

bearsfan_51
02-24-2008, 12:10 PM
Well we can say goodbye to Devin Thomas at 44. After that 40 time he's a late 1st rounder.

Never really thought we'd take a WR in the first two rounds anyway though.

bearfan
02-24-2008, 12:23 PM
2nd? hmm....i dont know....that seems a bit high for as uncertain of a quantity he is.

i think id rather see us go OT in 1 and then RB/WR in 2. maybe if someone like johnson or another QB is still around late in the 2nd or early in teh 3rd, we could throw our pair of 3rd rounders at someone to snag him. id be more for that, especially since JA has done well getting defensive layers in the later rounds and our needs at DT and S could probably be filled well there

I wasnt sure what round he would be slotted for since he is said to be having a good combine so far. I would rather do what you suggested.

regoob2
02-24-2008, 12:25 PM
Devin Thomas with that size running a 4.32 yah I doubt he'll be there. I would like to see a WR in round 2 unless we grab a FA.

BeerBaron
02-24-2008, 12:33 PM
Devin Thomas with that size running a 4.32 yah I doubt he'll be there. I would like to see a WR in round 2 unless we grab a FA.

hes been my favorite receiver all the long and now, yeah, hes a first rounder. i dont think we have a shot at him...

bearfan
02-24-2008, 12:42 PM
I wouldnt mind drafting someone like Hardy in round 2. 6'5 ran a 4.47 forty, depending on his vertical jump something like our 2nd or 3rd getting him. Mario Urrita from Louisville was 6'5 as well, but ran a 4.5 something 40. I am now kinda wanting a big guy at WR.

So my dream mock (w/ realistic scenario)
1: Chris Williams OT
2: James Hardy WR
3: Josh Johnson QB
3: RB or S

Smokey Joe
02-24-2008, 12:43 PM
I've had Devin Thomas in the first round long before his 40 fyi ;)

BeerBaron
02-24-2008, 12:46 PM
I've had Devin Thomas in the first round long before his 40 fyi ;)

yeah but i was really really hoping against it...one of those situation where id like to be wrong....but no

Gay Ork Wang
02-24-2008, 12:51 PM
well it seems like Bowman is falling and falling and falling...

How is Monk doin?

BeerBaron
02-24-2008, 01:10 PM
i dont know about monk but i hear that fagg is done...blew out his knee, youch

bearfan
02-24-2008, 01:57 PM
With all these RBs running some pretty good times, I think that there will be a good crop to choose from in the 3rd round if that is where we choose to get one.

pellepelle_10
02-24-2008, 02:24 PM
There's been rumors that Chris Williams is our preferred OT from the group after Jake Long, but that Mendenhall may push him. This leads me to wonder what we are doing in Fa, if anything at all.

I think with the performances of Mendenhall and Stewart during this combine they've shown why they deserve to be in the top tier of backs. If Angelo passes up on either of these guys it will be a damn shame given their size and ability to perform so well here. both 225+ lb backs with 4.4-4.3 40's?? Benching 26+ and the game performance is just crazy. This should be a no brainer.

Hurricane Ditka
02-24-2008, 02:32 PM
I think with the performances of Mendenhall and Stewart during this combine they've shown why they deserve to be in the top tier of backs. If Angelo passes up on either of these guys it will be a damn shame given their size and ability to perform so well here. both 225+ lb backs with 4.4-4.3 40's?? Benching 26+ and the game performance is just crazy. This should be a no brainer.

Except we need help on the offensive line a lot more than we need a running back.

pellepelle_10
02-24-2008, 02:50 PM
We "NEED" starters in both positions. Which is a higher talent would be the more appropriate question. Also which positions have the most Depth. Last time I checked the OT class is the deepest its been n a long time. I'd go with the latter because McFadden, Stewart, and Mendenhall clearly separated themselves from the pack. I can name a good 6 - 7 OT's that have fluctuated depending on which analyst you speak to.

regoob2
02-24-2008, 03:33 PM
I really want a new RB but we need OL. Good OLs make good RBs and its very rarely the other way around. And for Monk he's garbage.

bearsfan_51
02-24-2008, 03:39 PM
I'm actually starting to agree with pelle.

The combination of size and speed that Mendenhall and Stewart showed today was phenomenal. Both have the talent to be top 10 backs (far superior to what Benson and Caddy showed in their combines).

While I agree that the line can make the back, there are also backs that quite frankly can make the line.

After the combine I'd take Mendenhall over Otah. I still prefer Williams, even though I question his toughness a bit, but Otah looks like someone that may not be able to play even RT right away, and may never have the athleticism to play LT.

Gay Ork Wang
02-24-2008, 03:41 PM
That would prolly be my board: Clady-Williams-Mendenhall-Otah

BeerBaron
02-24-2008, 04:41 PM
That would prolly be my board: Clady-Williams-Mendenhall-Otah

eh, im no so high on clady. ive never really been just because i dont like that his legs are like toothpicks compared to the rest of him.....idk

id just prefer williams as an OT.

either of the RB's would be decent i suppose, but we would HAVE to get a tackle in round 2 then. hell, if otah really hurt himself, which i dont think he did that badly, but still, he could be there for our 2nd rounder. maybe anyway......

but, and correct me if im wrong here, our first two picks HAVE to go OT and RB in one order or the other. they HAVE to now

regoob2
02-24-2008, 04:56 PM
I don't think RB is a first day need. I would like to see us bring in another RB to push Benson but I think we need to address OL in round 1 and then the talent falls off hard and I don't love the value that will most likely be there. I think we have decent depth at RB and we have bigger needs to address.

BeerBaron
02-24-2008, 05:22 PM
I don't think RB is a first day need. I would like to see us bring in another RB to push Benson but I think we need to address OL in round 1 and then the talent falls off hard and I don't love the value that will most likely be there. I think we have decent depth at RB and we have bigger needs to address.

i saw you said that we should go there on the first day and i was somewhat offended. i was gonna be like "you expect some 6th round pick or a FA PoS like foster to knock off benson who has a huge investment in him?"

then i remembered that its only 2 rounds now.....yeah....so we could possibly go there in the 3rd......

i still think best OT in 1 and best RB in 2

bearsfan_51
02-24-2008, 06:00 PM
I don't think they have to. They probably will if we do nothing in FA, but I could see a scenario where we go OT and QB with the first two picks. I'd have no problem with that.

Smokey Joe
02-24-2008, 06:15 PM
I see the RB competition being a second day mid-late pick and a cheap FA like Chris Brown being signed.

bearfan
02-24-2008, 06:38 PM
I see the RB competition being a second day mid-late pick and a cheap FA like Chris Brown being signed.

I wouldnt mind that, Chris Brown is a good RB when not injured, and if he is sharing time, hopefully that would decrease his risk of being injured. Maybe a 2nd day pick like Justin Forsett ;). I think JF will be a good player if paired w/ a complimentary player.

bearsfan_51
02-24-2008, 06:39 PM
Smokey just needed to fufill his Chris Brown and Joe Flacco quota for the week.

BeerBaron
02-24-2008, 09:00 PM
chris brown, ha! and a late round pick....yeah. lets go with 5 running backs into the season. cause that makes sense.

it should be no more than 4. the 3 we have plus one more at most

Smokey Joe
02-24-2008, 09:50 PM
chris brown, ha! and a late round pick....yeah. lets go with 5 running backs into the season. cause that makes sense.

it should be no more than 4. the 3 we have plus one more at most
Did I ever say 5 runningbacks? No, I did not. I just said competition. And Competition means bringing in some quality guys to compete.

Some people are actually thinking that when JA said competition that he meant a first round RB or spending the cap on Turner. But both of those are completely false, IMO.

I am willing to bet money that JA will bring in competition by signing someone cheap like Chris Brown and drafting a late round guy. They just spent a 3rd last year on Wolfe and this team obviously has far bigger holes at other positions besides RB right now.

It would be completely idiotic to focus on RB over OLine, QB, DLine, WR, S, and perhaps even LB. And for all we know, with a better OLine and passing game, Benson might not be so terrible.

bearsfan_51
02-24-2008, 10:17 PM
I don't see how you can even say that it's completely false when we are interviewing 1st and 2nd round runningbacks. Just because you don't think we should do something doesn't mean you can categorically deny it with no actual facts.

And Benson has no heart. Your assumption that Benson can be a solid starter is based on little other than where he was drafted.

It's idiotic to ignore any position we are not set at. That includes basically everything other than TE, DE, and CB.

sweetness34
02-25-2008, 03:40 AM
Lets just take Mendenhall and call it a day...;)

I think Benson can be a solid starter, but he needs an OL to do it. He's not one of those backs who can create for himself as he doesn't have great vision and 51 is right, he doesn't have any heart. A guy his size should just bulldoze defenders (like he did in 2006 behind TJ), but this year he ran like a school girl.

At times I thought he looked good, and at others I thought my grandma could hit the hole harder. But again, some of the blame needs to be placed on our crappy offensive line, our lack of a passing game, and our knucklehead offensive coordinator too because Peterson didn't do much either when he replaced Cedric, yes it was a bit of an improvement but not by much and that shows me there might be more of a problem than just the RB's we have.

pellepelle_10
02-25-2008, 04:41 AM
I'm actually starting to agree with pelle.

The combination of size and speed that Mendenhall and Stewart showed today was phenomenal. Both have the talent to be top 10 backs (far superior to what Benson and Caddy showed in their combines).

While I agree that the line can make the back, there are also backs that quite frankly can make the line.

After the combine I'd take Mendenhall over Otah. I still prefer Williams, even though I question his toughness a bit, but Otah looks like someone that may not be able to play even RT right away, and may never have the athleticism to play LT.

I know this has been a hard fought battle and many don't see it my way but I'm sticking to my guns. Both are a need but IMO the ability to get one of these top 3 backs and a top end O-Lineman in the 2nd benefits far more than a rnd 1 lineman and low tier rb in the 2nd or 3rd. The OT class is large enough for us to still get someone of high caliber in the 2nd. I can't say the same about RB. If anyone looks at the rankings of the O-Line its all over the place from 2nd - 10th. As far as Rb's are concerned the top 3 doesn't change. There is a reason for this.

toonsterwu
02-25-2008, 04:44 AM
There's been a lot of talk on Mendenhall/Williams for us. All that said, I can see a scenario where all three RB's are gone by the 9th pick.

As for Otah, there were reports on an ankle injury, so I'll take a wait and see approach to his pro day.

pellepelle_10
02-25-2008, 04:47 AM
Lets just take Mendenhall and call it a day...;)

I think Benson can be a solid starter, but he needs an OL to do it. He's not one of those backs who can create for himself as he doesn't have great vision and 51 is right, he doesn't have any heart. A guy his size should just bulldoze defenders (like he did in 2006 behind TJ), but this year he ran like a school girl.

At times I thought he looked good, and at others I thought my grandma could hit the hole harder. But again, some of the blame needs to be placed on our crappy offensive line, our lack of a passing game, and our knucklehead offensive coordinator too because Peterson didn't do much either when he replaced Cedric, yes it was a bit of an improvement but not by much and that shows me there might be more of a problem than just the RB's we have.

Its not like he can't and there's no denying he couldn't run over guys every play. The problem is he plays like he doesn't give a rats ass. I repeat it over and over again the guy states like he doesn't have to prove anything to anyone when infact he hasn't proven anything. He has his head in his ass. As soon as he understands that nobody is going to hear this nonsense and he'd either shut up and perform or leave he'll hopefully get it. I for one don't care if he does because if he does end up proving it he'll be the type to want to get a f-n pat on the back for it. No thanks. Get us someone who puts in the work and goes about his business. It'll never end hearing Bensons mouth..if its not him bitching about not needing to prove anything it'll be when he can get another pay raise. (ala the holdout after crying like a little B when nobody wanted his ass) I'm keeping my fingers crossed for Mendenhall or Stewart. Lets go Angelo!!!

pellepelle_10
02-25-2008, 04:48 AM
There's been a lot of talk on Mendenhall/Williams for us. All that said, I can see a scenario where all three RB's are gone by the 9th pick.

As for Otah, there were reports on an ankle injury, so I'll take a wait and see approach to his pro day.

Who do you think will take the RB's in the top 9? I'm just curious toons.

toonsterwu
02-25-2008, 05:56 AM
Well, McFadden somewhere in the top 5.

If there are no trades, I'd watch the Jets (lead back) and New England seriously (both Mendenhall/Stewart complement Maroney). Then Cincinnati, with the Rudi Johnson issues.

Now, I'm not saying it will happen, but that is one scenario.

There's chatter of the Seahawks making a push up for a RB. I don't know if they'd push to the top 10, as expectations had been for one back to be around in the teens. But if they were willing to go all out (which is understandable considering the athleticism Stewart and Mendenhall showed, which is rare for big backs), they could make their way into the top 10 by forking over a first/2nd and a future 1st.

Anyhow, just scenarios.

pellepelle_10
02-25-2008, 06:43 AM
Well, McFadden somewhere in the top 5.

If there are no trades, I'd watch the Jets (lead back) and New England seriously (both Mendenhall/Stewart complement Maroney). Then Cincinnati, with the Rudi Johnson issues.

Now, I'm not saying it will happen, but that is one scenario.

There's chatter of the Seahawks making a push up for a RB. I don't know if they'd push to the top 10, as expectations had been for one back to be around in the teens. But if they were willing to go all out (which is understandable considering the athleticism Stewart and Mendenhall showed, which is rare for big backs), they could make their way into the top 10 by forking over a first/2nd and a future 1st.

Anyhow, just scenarios.

Stewart/Mendenhall complement for Maroney?! How do you figure? They're the same style of back. (bruiser backs) Felix Jones/Slaton yes...these guys...I'd beg to differ.

Jets could be a possibility but they have far more issues than RB IMO. Cincy may have issue with Rudi but their backup was more than suitable..Kenny Watson easily would have had a 1200 yd season if he played more. New England is suffering with age at LB and anything is possible with them. Seattle on the other hand I could see push to get a top end rb as Dallas could as well. As for the other mentioned teams I find it really hard they go this route. Who knows if one of them don't push for a FA. That also could be a possibility. *shrugs*

dabears10
02-25-2008, 10:06 AM
Stewart/Mendenhall complement for Maroney?! How do you figure? They're the same style of back. (bruiser backs) Felix Jones/Slaton yes...these guys...I'd beg to differ.

Actually Maroney is not a bruiser back. He doesn't fear contact but is not a guy who will bull you over. The reason he and Marion Barber worked so well was because he was the big play guy with speed, while Barber would hunt linebackers down to hit them. I'm sure BF51 could elaborate more being at Minnesota. Or maybe he was there to late, idk.

pellepelle_10
02-25-2008, 01:06 PM
Actually Maroney is not a bruiser back. He doesn't fear contact but is not a guy who will bull you over. The reason he and Marion Barber worked so well was because he was the big play guy with speed, while Barber would hunt linebackers down to hit them. I'm sure BF51 could elaborate more being at Minnesota. Or maybe he was there to late, idk.

Maroney is a bruiser and he gave our team headaches as he pouded down our linebackers throats into the endzone. The guy takes hits and is very hard to bring down. Maroney is fast but he will run you over just like any other Steven Jackson, Frank Gore. I wish I had clips but this guy takes hits and delivers like the best of them.

bearsfan_51
02-25-2008, 02:31 PM
Dabears is correct. Maroney was the flash to Barber's thunder.

That's not to say that Maroney couldn't deliver contact. Glen Mason's offense required runningbacks that could deliver contact (Amir Pinnix was the same way except he sucked at everything else). I think that either player would compliment Maroney well, particularly Stewart.

BeerBaron
02-25-2008, 03:13 PM
even a two back system with similar backs wouldnt necessarily be a bad thing...

unless theyre both awful, lol....lets hope we dont end up with 2 cedric bensons

VoteLynnSwan
02-25-2008, 06:53 PM
i don't understand the Patriots' desire to pursue another runningback... it's not as if they run the ball anyway.

One could make the argument that perhaps they are not happy with Maroney, and that's why they didn't run the ball... but if they're not happy with him, i'd glady take him off their hands.

That being said, i really really want to see Mendenhall in a Bears uniform, it would be amazing to see a hometown guy with so much talent end up on the bears, but the issue still remains that how do you justify spending such a high pick on the one position that has proven time and time again can be found anywhere in the draft.

It's a tough decision, i don't really think we could go wrong potentially with spending the 1st on the best QB, RB, WR, OT, or Safety.

regoob2
02-25-2008, 07:15 PM
S**t if there not happy with Maroney send him our way I love this guy. We have a ton of wholes on this team.

I had this discussion on another site. You guys think were closer to the playoffs or being a top 5 pick?

pellepelle_10
02-25-2008, 07:59 PM
i don't understand the Patriots' desire to pursue another runningback... it's not as if they run the ball anyway.

One could make the argument that perhaps they are not happy with Maroney, and that's why they didn't run the ball... but if they're not happy with him, i'd glady take him off their hands.

That being said, i really really want to see Mendenhall in a Bears uniform, it would be amazing to see a hometown guy with so much talent end up on the bears, but the issue still remains that how do you justify spending such a high pick on the one position that has proven time and time again can be found anywhere in the draft.

It's a tough decision, i don't really think we could go wrong potentially with spending the 1st on the best QB, RB, WR, OT, or Safety.

I agree with many. Maroney simply didn't get the carries as he could easily be a 1200+ yd runningback. New England simply evaded from giving the guy carries. He did well when they decided to give him more than 10 carries. I agree that I'd have NO PROBLEM with him being the Bears starter.

On another note LynnSwann I agree 100%. Mendenhall would be great as would Stewart. They'd both fit our offensive system perfectly as we've been looking for a pure RB for quite sometime. Ron Turner should know what he's getting with Mendenhall or could at least get a good insite on his abilities.

bearfan
02-25-2008, 08:18 PM
S**t if there not happy with Maroney send him our way I love this guy. We have a ton of wholes on this team.

I had this discussion on another site. You guys think were closer to the playoffs or being a top 5 pick?


I think closer to playoffs, but I think that if we dont capitalize on our defense soon (by complimenting it w/ a good to respectable offense) that we will be closer to a Top 5. We have some holes, but I think we have maybe a 2-3 year window that we can still be torwards the top. JA just needs to get himself a QB (maybe Rex finally shows that he is the man), fix up the OL and WRs, and really just add some good depth players, and hope to God that Benson is who we thought he was when we drafted him.

BeerBaron
02-25-2008, 08:30 PM
I think closer to playoffs, but I think that if we dont capitalize on our defense soon (by complimenting it w/ a good to respectable offense) that we will be closer to a Top 5. We have some holes, but I think we have maybe a 2-3 year window that we can still be torwards the top. JA just needs to get himself a QB (maybe Rex finally shows that he is the man), fix up the OL and WRs, and really just add some good depth players, and hope to God that Benson is who we thought he was when we drafted him.

aye, when healthy, our defense is still top 5 in the league imo. i think theyre plenty good enough to at east keep all of our games close...all we need is some upgrades to offense.

it doesnt even have to be spectacular, just efficient. dont turn it over, dont make bad plays. there were games last year that i think if we just went 3 and out and punted more that making bad plays, we could have won.....

DaBear89
02-25-2008, 10:45 PM
quick which scenario would you rather have:
1. Sign M. Turner in FA. Draft Williams/Otah in the 1st and Hardy in the 2nd.

OR

2. Sign A. Faneca, draft Mendenhall/Stewart in 1st and Carl Nicks/Oneil Cousins/Anthony Collins in the 2nd
?

bearsfan_51
02-25-2008, 10:50 PM
Doesn't look like either will happen. Our big FA signing will probably be Bryant Johnson.

Sigh...ah well.

BeerBaron
02-25-2008, 10:57 PM
out of those 2 i suppose the first scenario though i doubt hardy lasts that long.

toonsterwu
02-26-2008, 01:10 AM
I'm actually intrigued with signing Bryant Johnson. I've always been a bit fascinated with his ability, wondering if utilized in a different system (he wasn't really a WCO receiver) if he could do better. He's actually a type of WR that fits Ron Turner in many respects (although Bradley does too).

Provided we don't overpay ridiculously for Johnson, I'd be fine if we added him. Considering it's looking as if Berrian staying is 50/50, adding Bryant allows us to not be forced to ante up ridiculously for Berrian. I like Berrian, but by no means is he a stud WR yet. If we have a Johnson/Bradley/Hester/rookie, that'll be livable. If Berrian comes back, all the better (a grouping of Berrian/Johnson/Bradley/Hester sounds very intriguing).

I do believe we have to start considering two OL guys in the first 4 picks. There's two many teams out there that are going to look at Faneca. I'd try to be aggressive in filling other areas through FA (RB/S/WR), and try to get a tackle/guard combination in the first 4 picks. I think we've got to assume that a QB will be picked in the first 3 rounds, and in all likelihood, the first two, so if we need to go OL twice, we need to clear other areas of concern.

toonsterwu
02-26-2008, 01:19 AM
Stewart/Mendenhall complement for Maroney?! How do you figure? They're the same style of back. (bruiser backs) Felix Jones/Slaton yes...these guys...I'd beg to differ.

Jets could be a possibility but they have far more issues than RB IMO. Cincy may have issue with Rudi but their backup was more than suitable..Kenny Watson easily would have had a 1200 yd season if he played more. New England is suffering with age at LB and anything is possible with them. Seattle on the other hand I could see push to get a top end rb as Dallas could as well. As for the other mentioned teams I find it really hard they go this route. Who knows if one of them don't push for a FA. That also could be a possibility. *shrugs*

I don't think anyone would say that Maroney, a one-cut back, is a bruiser.

Now, a case can be made that Stewart is a one-cut back as well (system), but he's shown the power to complement Maroney. In some ways, Maroney is more similar to Thomas Jones, a cut guy that can pound the ball if need be.

As for the Jets, nominally, I'd think they'd lean against a RB due to their connections to the Patriots. That said, the PAtriots aren't big on drafting OL early, and the Jets followed their board in the first draft. It can be said that this is a make or break year for Clemens, and they need a consistent running game. Jones by himself might not be enough, and Washington is a slasher. So adding a back fairly high might be a strong consideration, particularly if the value merits it.

Kenny Watson's running on 30. They are reportedly wanting Rudi to bulk up, but not making a guarantee he'll be there. They also want some quickness, soemthing they've tried to address with Irons/Perry. A big back with quickness definitely could be something on the radar. Keep in mind that most reports are pushing them towards a 3-4. They don't have any other offensive needs (unless they deal Chad), and defensively, within the context of the 3-4, they actually have a NT (Peko) and a 3-4 DE (Fanene) while having bodies to rotate (John Thornton/Bryan Robinson). Certainly, they could use more talent up front, but a case can be made that the 2-gap responsibilities can be found with say, a Dre' Moore in round 2. There are other options in the 3rd/4th as well, and that, with Geathers as one edge rusher, Ahmad Brooks inside, their LB needs might not be so high and they can find a rush backer later. To that extent, they may give themselves the opportunity to go RB earlier (Rudi isn't young either, and only 2 years left on his deal). I mean, a draft of say, Stewart or Mendenhall in the first, Moore in the 2nd, and Crable in the 3rd would likely address their defensive front 7 issues while giving them a stud young back. It's debatable if there is a DL fit in the first that would be of value when they pick (Merling does make a lot of sense, though). Would they go with a LB like Rivers? Seems debatable. That does leave the possibility of going Harvey, but again, they could find someone like a Crable or Avril later that might be just as good a fit.

Just scenarios.

toonsterwu
02-26-2008, 01:40 AM
To regoob's question - are we closer to the playoffs or a top 5 spot ...

We're in no man's land basically. Thing is, with so many veterans that we have tied down, rebuilding right now, when there is a core in place, seems foolhardy, particularly when considering the parity in the NFL. For all our QB issues, one thing we haven't had is long term OL consistency over a period of years. Age and change have consistently been occurring the past decade.

That said, let's be honest and look at ourselves and what we are asking of this offseason. We need 2 OL pieces, QB consistency, a passing game which means a WR stepping forward, a running game, potentially a DT, potentially some concerns at LB, and concerns at safety. That's the realities of the situation. All of it is possible, but let's not be too ecstatic about anything. I think a lot of us are looking at best case scenarios, as we should be at this time of year, when discussing our chances to compete next year, and that potential does exist, as we have money and we have the picks. It's far from a guarantee.

Let's look ahead with what we have right now. In a few years, at least 2 OL pieces will have to be changed again (Kreutz/Tait) if not 3 or 4 (depending on the guard situation - I mean, if we bring in a Faneca, that might have to be changed, and Garza could always be upgraded). Urlacher will be on the end, and the DL will be aging. The secondary likely may have one guy shedded. Most importantly, we might be breaking in a new QB/in the early years of a young QB.

This leads me to my last comment. The 2007 draft was ridiculously cocky. I hated the draft at the time, and I still hate it. For all of Angelo's drafting prowess, the fact that the OL was never addressed has lefty us in a bind. While one draft can never really cripple an organization, the culmination of drafts can. Angelo's had some good drafts, but the drafts haven't meshed to a certain extent and some guys haven't panned out, as with all drafts. That blame goes on Angelo and the coaching staff.

I mean, the 2006 draft was well received in the Super Bowl year, but as with all drafts, time is the true measure of it's effectiveness. Right now, we see

a) Manning -like him, but definitively a lot of questions.
b) Hester - I hope he succeeds, but the way the Bears are talking him up worries me as I have this eerie feeling he'll be our number 1 WR.
c) Dvoracek - Shame he wasn't healthy, as he would've been huge.
d) Williams - Huge fan, but what? More q's than answers.
e) Anderson - Mr. I don't play the run.
f) Runnels - Hi, I am a FB. FB's don't exist in the NFL anymore.
g) Reed - another late round stiff OL guy.

I mean, let's look back at 05.

a) Benson - let's not go there. My motto, which bf may remember as I think he was around, and same with sweetness, was ABC.
b) Bradley - Like him, but doghouse.
c) Orton - Heck, he's been more successful than some of our other picks.
d) Currie - The speed guy supposedly. Nice knowing ya.
e) Harris - Doing good ... in Carolina.
f) Wilson - I mean, if we replaced him, would anyone notice?

I mean, looking at Angelo's first draft until now, the only productive players (more than bench guys) I see are

02 - Columbo, Brown
03 - Grossman, Tillman, Briggs, Johnson, Scott, Wade, Gage
04 - Harris, Johnson, Berrian, Vasher

The reality is, Angelo's drafting helped get us to push forward (03/04), but our decline last year can also be traced back to Angelo's drafting as well. To that extent, our predicament is that we have to forward for at least one year, before fully reassessing things. I am a big fan of the DB's he took late last year, though, and that is one position he tends to do well with it seems. So, I have hope there. Of course, CB was a position we were deep on to begin with.

It is not inconceivable that, with a bad 08-09, we are talking a full restructuring as we would potentially be breaking in a new QB and a lot more. So, the answer is neither. We're very much in no man's land.

Geo
02-26-2008, 01:52 AM
Quick thoughts to say:

(1) I'd attribute much of the struggles in the running game (especially) and the passing game to the struggles/drop-off in the offensive line. When the offensive line gets addressed this offseason, although I don't think Faneca will sign with the Bears (Jets & 49ers seem like stronger suitors, we'll see), then the offense will improve from there. Yes, I think that includes Ced Benson. Maybe I'm too believing.

(2) Angelo drafted the GOAT return man, come on give him more credit.

(3) The Bears did draft Josh Beekman last year, terrific value I thought. But he seems to be solely suited for center ...

toonsterwu
02-26-2008, 01:56 AM
On Hester - Yes, he gets credit for that, although the value of Hester was shown clearly this past year. On a good team, he can boost you levels. On a bad team, he isn't worth much more than the highlight reel. But that's true for the returners in general.

But talking up Hester as a top receiver next year? Not big on that at all. Granted, the issues of Bradley have forced things to a head, which can be blamed on the coaching staff and Bradley, but the front office does get some blame for not preparing and thus beginning the talk of Hester as a potential lead receiver sooner than later. If it happens, great. The fact that it's being talked about, though, is worrisome.

The problem with the 07 draft is that he went Bazuin/Wolfe. Even if the back end pans out, we're talking about cover 2 DB's (McBride/Graham/Payne) and an interior lineman (no expectations on Aaron Brant, another late round OL stiff that we take - Bryan Anderson/Tyler Reed/Aaron Brant). The fact that one year later, we are extending Alex Brown makes the Bazuin pick that much worse. The implication with the pick was that we would deal Brown. Granted, I'm pleased we haven't, as Anderson's hype has come down quite a bit. The Wolfe pick was an egregious act of arrogance, though. Rather than to try and pick a RB that could challenge Benson, he found someone to complement Benson.

Is Angelo the worst drafter out there? Of course not. But he has brought us to our current predicament, and continues the trend of being spotty in the early rounds, which is always a bigger problem. The fact that he hasn't brought in young OL talent early in the past since 2002 basically with Columbo and Metcalf is also another point.

DaBear89
02-26-2008, 01:57 AM
another question, say we tank this year and have a top 10 pick after going with say Williams in round 1 and WR in 2. do we take an OT in Oher/Loadholt, QB in Stafford/Bradford, or any RB b/c i love next year class a lot too.

bearsfan_51
02-26-2008, 02:00 AM
I thought the '06 draft was fantastic. I mean, to criticize the Mark Anderson pick in the 5th round because he doesn't play the run very well. Come on.....

Last year's draft was too cocky. But the Olsen pick was a great one (even if it was a bit of a no-brainer) and I still think Mike Okwo will be the eventual starting linebacker on this team, either at WILL or MIKE.

I think the '03 and '04 drafts were excellent as well, so I'm not sure if you were trying to make a point there or not. Tommie, Tank, Berrian, and Vasher aren't good enough in the first four picks?

A draft with Tillman and Briggs? Come on now....

Geo
02-26-2008, 02:02 AM
Maybe it's just me, but I think the Bears are close to being a playoff contender. Or actually, they are a playoff contender/team when healthy. I'm picking them to be in 08, at least.

The injuries of the defense plus the aforementioned offensive line kept them from getting back to the Tournament last year imo. The secondary and the interior of the D Line was a mess.

Also, as much I like Dez Clark and wanted to see him get the ball more the last 20 or so games, Greg Olsen needs to touch the ball as much as possible. The sky is the limit for that kid imo.

bearsfan_51
02-26-2008, 02:04 AM
I actually don't think that we'll be very good next year, but it's due to a myriad of decisions that are not related to our drafting. If there is one thing that I am still confident about this team it's Jerry Angelo's ability to find talent. I'm not a Lovie Smith fan, never have been, but at least he's got a scheme that Jerry can easily find talent for.

Geo
02-26-2008, 02:05 AM
Actually, I should reserve my pick until I see what the Bears do at safety and wide receiver. And how well the Williams/Okwo battle for WLB goes, I think Okwo wins it to be honest. Nice pick ala Freddy Keiaho for the Colts.

toonsterwu
02-26-2008, 02:18 AM
I thought the '06 draft was fantastic. I mean, to criticize the Mark Anderson pick in the 5th round because he doesn't play the run very well. Come on.....

Last year's draft was too cocky. But the Olsen pick was a great one (even if it was a bit of a no-brainer) and I still think Mike Okwo will be the eventual starting linebacker on this team, either at WILL or MIKE.

I think the '03 and '04 drafts were excellent as well, so I'm not sure if you were trying to make a point there or not. Tommie, Tank, Berrian, and Vasher aren't good enough in the first four picks?

A draft with Tillman and Briggs? Come on now....

I think either I should've been clearer or you are misreading the intent of my post.

The only draft that I am criticizing in value is 07. I hated that draft with a passion.

As for the rest, what I am saying is that the results after 04 (if you note the end, I did say that we got to where we were because of his early success in 03/04), the results in our draft haven't been good. Not criticizing the value there at all, but rather the end result of said players. In fact, I think I typed somewhere in there that the drafts looked good.

There's actually been some negative reports out on Okwo, so that is worth watching.

And just to reiterate a point in the previous post - do I think Angelo is a terrible drafter? No. But I don't think he's a great drafter. The problem is, I think over the last couple years, he hasn't adequately planned for the future, and has shown some arrogance in drafting, particulary last year, although.

But just to reiterate, the only draft I'm questioning the value on is 07. What I am saying is that, we are in our predicament because his 05-07 drafts haven't panned out in many respects, and that is on Angelo and the scouting staff. I do not question the value of 05/06 of any of the picks.

toonsterwu
02-26-2008, 02:23 AM
another question, say we tank this year and have a top 10 pick after going with say Williams in round 1 and WR in 2. do we take an OT in Oher/Loadholt, QB in Stafford/Bradford, or any RB b/c i love next year class a lot too.

It really comes down to what happens with our other veterans. Let's say Tait is still playing well. Then I'd wait on OT and try to address one of our other positions. QB may be a consideration. I'm not sure next year's RB class is as strong as it may look.

Some things to keep in mind long run -

a) DT - Sure, Harris is great. Dvoracek could be the NT answer, but it might be a position we have to look at. At some point, youth at DT is a thought.

b) DE - Keep in mind that Ogunleye and Brown are both aging. Granted, this shouldn't be like what happened with OT (that is, our age caught up with us without depth) as we have Anderson. But that is position that might go through upheaval, although if Bazuin pans out, then we might not.

b) LB - Assuming Briggs is gone, as we all do, this is actually a huge year. We have to see what Williams/Okwo can offer. If neither show enough, then we've got a mess next year. Hopefully Williams can step up, though.

So conceivably, the defense could be an area that needs to be addressed.

Geo
02-26-2008, 02:27 AM
Am I the only one who thinks the Bears should put Bazuin in at DT on passing downs? Put him next to Tommie Harris inside, with two ends of their choosing outside, and just pass rush the **** out of teams. Maybe I've seen too much DEs sliding inside to DT in watching the Colts, they had a 7th round rookie in Keyunta Dawson of Texas Tech even start at DT thanks to the injuries, but I think Bazuin has the strength and the motor to handle it.

Not sure if the Bears are that willing to concede the run that much, but I'd put Bazuin inside.

Thanks for the note on Okwo, toon. Obviously I wasn't aware. Although, considering he was on IR since the first week of September, I'm wondering what the neg reports are exactly.

toonsterwu
02-26-2008, 02:27 AM
Maybe it's just me, but I think the Bears are close to being a playoff contender. Or actually, they are a playoff contender/team when healthy. I'm picking them to be in 08, at least.

The injuries of the defense plus the aforementioned offensive line kept them from getting back to the Tournament last year imo. The secondary and the interior of the D Line was a mess.

Also, as much I like Dez Clark and wanted to see him get the ball more the last 20 or so games, Greg Olsen needs to touch the ball as much as possible. The sky is the limit for that kid imo.

We've been somewhat discussing this in the other thread, but we probably need 2 TE sets for the Bears offense to be at it's best. That allows our best matchups.

I don't disagree that we could be in the playoffs ... what I am cautioning on is that, for Bears fans, we are largely talking the positive scenario where things go well. There are holes, and there are a lot of them. There are some potential internal answers, there is FA money, and there are draft picks. So, in a positive world, all things get addressed. In a negative one, though, we are on the precipice, and if things don't fall in place, it could be overhauling time in many key areas.

I mean, the loss of Dvoracek was brutal. I hope he can be solid next year, because if he can, that's one less worry. To depend on it, though, would seem to be foolhardy. Adams is a nice backup plan, but another body would be nice. The injuries at the secondary are a bit better covered next year, as we added so many DB's. The offensive line still would have age even if we work in kids, which is always a concern.

toonsterwu
02-26-2008, 02:30 AM
I actually don't think that we'll be very good next year, but it's due to a myriad of decisions that are not related to our drafting. If there is one thing that I am still confident about this team it's Jerry Angelo's ability to find talent. I'm not a Lovie Smith fan, never have been, but at least he's got a scheme that Jerry can easily find talent for.

I'm just curious how drafting isn't a component of what has been causing our woes. The last three drafts haven't exactly produced a lot of help. It may yet turn around. Certainly, one can say that injuries are a component that can't relate to that, but to that extent, the draft is meant to provide said depth.

I guess what frustrates me more is how we draft. Again, the only year where I question the values is 07. But that draft was awfully bad. The fact that from 05-07, we didn't add OL depth has bothered me, as you well know. The fact that, with a young QB, we took minimal efforts to provide weapons was a problem. Granted, I'm not blaming Rex's failure on the lack of weapons. What I am saying is that, in drafting for a young QB, we didn't provide the adequate receiving weapons in the early stages.

Now all that said, I also don't want to fault it solely on drafting. I'm nto a big beliver that Lovie was that much better a coach than Dick Jauron. In many respects, they are similar. Solid defensive guys. Good character guys. Both perhaps loyal to a fault (although Lovie was willing to strike Terry Shea quickly).

toonsterwu
02-26-2008, 02:38 AM
Actually, I should reserve my pick until I see what the Bears do at safety and wide receiver. And how well the Williams/Okwo battle for WLB goes, I think Okwo wins it to be honest. Nice pick ala Freddy Keiaho for the Colts.

I actually don't see the similarities. Keiaho was an explosive speed 4.5ish timed guy that had good quicks. Okwo had the quicks, but not the explosive speed (I think 4.7's).

I'm rooting for Jamar. The raw tools for the cover 2 are better and he's a heady player who has learned all three LB spots.

And while I was a fan of Okwo's, I am a bit worried by the beat writer's comments the other day, suggesting that Okwo looks like he could be in the could-miss category, or something along those lines, when discussing our 2007 draft.

toonsterwu
02-26-2008, 02:42 AM
Am I the only one who thinks the Bears should put Bazuin in at DT on passing downs? Put him next to Tommie Harris inside, with two ends of their choosing outside, and just pass rush the **** out of teams. Maybe I've seen too much DEs sliding inside to DT in watching the Colts, they had a 7th round rookie in Keyunta Dawson of Texas Tech even start at DT thanks to the injuries, but I think Bazuin has the strength and the motor to handle it.

Not sure if the Bears are that willing to concede the run that much, but I'd put Bazuin inside.

Thanks for the note on Okwo, toon. Obviously I wasn't aware. Although, considering he was on IR since the first week of September, I'm wondering what the neg reports are exactly.

Really a side note first, but Dan Bazuin is a really, really poor man's Chris Long.

If I remember camp correctly, and other Bears fans followed more at the time, we did use Bazuin as an interior pass rusher, and I am open to that idea on third downs to try and get him on the field and to try and give us an advantage. Thing is, I really wonder how much Bazuin adds to the pass rush over Dvoracek on the interior, if Dvoracek is healthy. Dusty's quicks isn't that are behind Dan and obviously has a size advantage.

I mean, if we were healthy, having our 3 end rotation and Dvoracek/Harris inside is a DL is a DL that we can play with on an every down basis. Of course, health has been an issue, and the depth issues have shown.

bearsfan_51
02-26-2008, 02:45 AM
I'm just curious how drafting isn't a component of what has been causing our woes. The last three drafts haven't exactly produced a lot of help. It may yet turn around.

Now all that said, I also don't want to fault it solely on drafting. I'm nto a big beliver that Lovie was that much better a coach than Dick Jauron. In many respects, they are similar. Solid defensive guys. Good character guys. Both perhaps loyal to a fault (although Lovie was willing to strike Terry Shea quickly).
I'm not saying it's totally out of the picture, but I would put it pretty low in terms of what I predict to be our general decline.

First and foremost I would say it's the team's frugal nature. Yes in an ideal world we would hit on every draft pick, but when we don't have the resources to keep the players we do hit on (Briggs, Berrian) or to bring in anyone to help with the picks that don't work (umm...anyone), that's a big problem too. Perhaps this falls on Angelo. If that's the case then I'm much more critical of him. It seems like they gave him some cash to spend when he came in to make up for the terrrrrrrrible personel moves that were done before him (I don't think that can be underscored too much), but since then they've done essentially nothing at all in terms of acquiring outside help, or in keeping their own.

Secondly I would say coaching. I'll never understand why Ron Turner has become such a fall guy but Lovie Smith is a genuis. Our schemes are pretty vanilla on defense, and it's a cold day in hell that we'll make an important adjustment at halftime. I actually liked what Babich was doing against San Diego before Dvoracek got hurt. Hopefully that will keep up.

Terrible trades. This I will put more on Jerry. I HATED the Darwin Walker trade. Not because it cost us much, just because it was so stupid and pointless that it epitomized the arogance that was last offseason far more than any other move. The Chris Harris trade was acceptable if the coaching staff preferred McGowan, though I would question that decision as well.

Bad luck. Yes injuries happen to every team, but we've had some pretty catostrophic injuries this year. It's not Angelo's fault that Mike Brown and Dvoracek are both made out of paper. I would also chalk up the fact that the one time we're picking in the top 5 it's the worst draft in the last 20 years. Give us a top 5 pick when it's Big Ben or D'Brick or hell even Reggie Bush. The Benson pick was obviously a flop, but it's not like there was anything else from 4-10 that's done much better. Benson set off a series of moves that all turned out bad for us. I agree he should have recognized a need for legit competition more though.

I think that you've got a point about drafting as a cohesive unit rather than drafting for value. I think Angelo himself has even aknowleged that in his recent pressers. That said I think if we had a better coaching staff we could account for that better, and if we had owners willing to spend money we could account for some of our misses in ways that teams like the Hawks, Cowboys, etc., seem to do every single year.

bearsfan_51
02-26-2008, 02:48 AM
I think it's unlikely we carry more than 7 d-lineman on an active gameday roster.

Tommie, O-Gun, Alex, Anderson, Dusty D, Anthony Adams, Israel Idonije.

Now Idonije can play special teams as well, so 8 is a possibility, but I think barring injury (and who knows with Dusty) it's 50/50 if Bazuin is active on gamedays, let alone if we draft another defensive tackle.

toonsterwu
02-26-2008, 02:54 AM
Side note first before I check bf's comments. Since this is the draft thread, outside of his UVA status, I am becoming more open to drafting Albert at 14 if his value justifies it. Plug him in at LG, which clearly is a need, and then find a RT later. Granted, that would necessitate going OL twice in the first 3rounds, but early indications seem to be that we are not going to pursue OL that heavily.

Speaking of FA for a second, I'm fine with not dipping for the big money guys on OL. they are ridiculously overpaid. That does mean, though, that if we aim to compete, we need to dip in FA to address other needs to offer ourselves the flexibility to draft OL early (and I'd add often ... I honestly would not mind 3 OL picks, although I'm starting to think St. Clair may end up as a stopgap RT if we do go OG earlier than OT).

bearsfan_51
02-26-2008, 03:00 AM
I should also note it's 3 AM and I'm finishing a paper, so pardon my lax spelling and sentence structure.

toonsterwu
02-26-2008, 03:01 AM
Well, I don't really disagree with anything bf said in those two posts outside of the general disagreement on where to place the role of failures in the draft in recent years.

So, let's see. Anything else to talk about.

I'll say this - If they suddenly decided to retool now, I wouldn't be against it. Now, granted, that's a bit unlikely after the extensions, but if they suddenly decided, hey, let's trade some veterans off, I'd be open to the idea.

Random thought 2: I'd love to be able to get 5 relatively young OL guys together in the near future and have them together for 3 or more years. I mean, we work in 2 guys this year. Maybe another guy after 08, and maybe 2 guys after 09 when we might push Kreutz/Tait aside.

Random thought 3: I'm still fine with moving Ricky Manning Jr. Rather than having the kids stuck, I'm fine with giving the nickel role to McBride and letting Graham and other folks battle out the end of the depth chart. Not expecting it, though.

Geo
02-26-2008, 03:11 AM
I think any team is bound to have needs such that you look back on the Draft and wonder why they didn't address it. The Colts are stupid good when it comes to the Draft, but they're no different:

(1) They didn't address defensive tackle near enough, not drafting anyone for years, and it came back to bite them a number of seasons/playoff games but especially the horror of 06. Thankfully they finally drafted Q-Pit in the 3rd round and struck gold with UDFA Big Ed, else 2007 would have been worse than 2006 with Booger going down in training camp;

(2) the team couldn't draft a blasted runningback unless he's a 1st round pick. And it came back to bite them in the playoff loss to San Diego, as the guy they picked up from the CFL in Kenton Keith cost them the game with his stone hands. They'll draft a runningback now, finally.

Disappointing in retrospect, but it is what it is. Only so many picks in the Draft I guess.

Alright, rapid fire response ... launch! First 51:

Frugal- the team locked up Tillman, Vasher, and signed Manning Jr. Still the best corner trio in the entire league imo. Urlacher, locked up. Tommie Harris isn't going anyway, he's among the elites at his position although it's paramount to keep him fresh throughout the season. Great bookends in Ogun and Brown are locked up. They have signed guys in FA, although they are wary of the big deal (hence I think they don't land Faneca).

Babich- I'm looking forward to seeing what he can do with a healthy defense.

Trades/luck/safeties- Again, to bring up the Colts, they literally draft a safety every year. Not sure about 02 without checking, but 03-07 checks out. (Plus they landed a sleeper last year in UDFA Melvin Bullit, this kid is good stuff. Roy Williams can't hold his jock. The kid they drafted from Troy barely saw any play time because of him.) I think the scheme necessitates it, plain and simple. Not sure if the Bears do the same, although I would venture to guess yes. But with this type of defense, I think it's wise to draft at least one safety every year. Can't hurt special teams coverage.

Spending money- obviously, it hurts the Bears that they spent 4 years developing Bernard Berrian, and now another team (Raiders imo) will benefit from that time and effort by signing him. And the Bears start from scratch, although I think a good deal of Bradley. Deserving his own mention:

Briggs- I thought about it the other day, and I can't think of a better overall linebacker in the league. Briggs is the best imo. So it's going to be hard to re-sign him, especially when they'e got Urlacher locked up and the scheme is amenable to young guys/mid-round picks.

Now toon- Maybe it's just me, but there's no way in hell I draft a guard in the 1st round. I just don't place the value on guards that high, myself. I don't understand the crazy money these guys are seeing, which makes the Colts signing Lilja to 5 years/20M look even better (I liked the deal myself). For me, tackle and center are much more important.

toonsterwu
02-26-2008, 03:17 AM
Oh, let me be clear, I prefer tackle. I also prefer RB in the first round. On the off chance 4 OT's are gone before 14 (has happened in a few of my scenarios) or that no OT is of value there, I am open to OG, though, particularly if the intent is to potentially groom Albert as tackle long run. That's a judgement for Hiestand to make.

On a whole aside, for a long time, I was thinking we'd draft a QB in the first 2 rounds. That said, I'm starting to think we won't, which worries me. If we wait until the third, we'll likely miss out on the top 4. There are outside chances that guys like Josh Johnson and Andre' Woodson are off by our 3rd rounder. Not likely both, but it's not impossible.

I could see us pursuing John David Booty for some odd reason, which scares me. I'm more inclined to go after a Kevin O'Connell than a JD Booty.

Geo
02-26-2008, 03:59 AM
I think the Bears, in terms of quarterbacks and their roster, are stuck between two schools of thought (not sure how good of an idea this is, I'm just coming up with it from reading your post and not ruminating on it any):

1. Fix the offensive line first. Which means sticking with capable starters Sexy Rexy and Neckbeard the Pirate. The OL needs to get better, with talented youth. Fixing it now means whoever is at quarterback - but especially for a young quarterback - will get a chance to succeed with a strong running game and pass protection. Keep the defense strong, and that means success.

2. Start grooming the future quarterback now. If they don't want the kid to get thrown into the fire, now would be the time to get him if you think you can get the right guy. However anyone not drafted in the 1st round is signed to a max of 4 years, which presses the issue somewhat of determining if he's the guy, especially if he doesn't see much action in his first two years. And who's to say how good/strong the rest of the team will be as in a few years? Guys are only getting older, and the league changes one year after next. How hard did the Bucs fall after 02, the Ravens stayed stronger than those saps did.

Can the Bears do both? Yes and no imo.

Yes, they can draft a left tackle this year and maybe sign a guard in FA (Bell from Tenn was a good mention by 51) or draft one in the fourth round. Although two rookies on the line at once, plus Tait likely being moved to RT, is a scary proposition.

But this means drafting a quarterback prospect this year from the 2nd round on. Is the right guy there? I'm not sure ... even if Brohm is there, the memory of him melting at Rutgers can't escape me. The system he came from, the picks he threw ... I'm somewhat intrigued by Flacco but am not buying any of the hype, sorry Joes (Smokey and Flacco). I admit, Charlie Frye comes to mind, in terms of success if he has a really good team around him ... Henne, I can never shake that the Michigan team was never his team, never his offense. It was Mike Hart's, and the team plus Henne played like it, whether or not the coaches were primarily to blame ... honestly, I like Woodson the most. I think he's been battered so much he's underrated right now, and the prospect of working with him is worth the development for me. And I'm not sure it's a very long period of development. That he was as accurate as he was while dealing with bouts/throws of inaccuracy is startling, even if he feasted on short passes. Hey so do Tom Brady and Drew Brees ...

Booty, hmm, might not be so bad, assuming his accuracy can translate. I think I sort of like that idea, although I wonder if he's any better than Orton? ... Ainge might be interesting to consider, I think he might be like Eli or Rexy in that he'll put up some touchdowns but also some interceptions though. If I had to guess, but I would consider him even though he didn't show in college he couldn't get it done late in the game.

Who's on the horizon in 09? Curtis Painter of Purdue and Cullen Harper of Clemson, most likely. Both could be good fits maybe.

bearsfan_51
02-26-2008, 10:50 AM
Larry: With both Fred Miller and Ruben Brown not coming back and John Tait’s contract up after the 2009 season, is it possible the Bears will pick up more than one offensive lineman in the upcoming draft?

Jesse
Chicago

Jesse: Given the Bears’ need to retool their offensive line, I can definitely see them selecting two linemen in the draft.

This should make more than a few people happy. Considering that Mayer is essentially a tool of the franchise, I'm sure that answer came from someone above him.

awfullyquiet
02-26-2008, 10:54 AM
I'd be perfectly fine with grooming a blank slate qb in the mid rounds for a few years.

Which is why i'd pick flacco. I don't like the hype. But I do understand, he's is the top development quarterback this year. In three seasons, with the bears. He could most likely be ready, and take the offense to another level (assuming the qb coaching staff doesn't blow. again. pep hamilton has a lot to learn still in my book). Woodson, i'm okay with too. I still think that he'll go before flacco. His upside is greater.

4th round QB. Definitely. If it means trading around to move up in certain situations? yeah.

bearsfan_51
02-26-2008, 10:55 AM
This isn't just me being anti-Flacco here, but there isn't a quarterback in the draft that has higher upside than Woodson.

k0ng
02-26-2008, 11:34 AM
With the recent health concerns surroundning Dorsey, what do we do if he is there for us at 14? The same type of injury concerns let Tommie slide to us.

What about Vilma? If all the Jets want is a 3rd, should we take a chance? This guy could be better than Briggs in our scheme. The Bears and Jets seems to have a good relationship.

Also, what do you guys think if we did this in FA?

Resign Berrian
Sign Bryant Johnson(we could easily draft someone in 3rd or 4th rounds though)
Sign OG Justin Smiley
Sign S Gibril Wilson

BeerBaron
02-26-2008, 11:57 AM
With the recent health concerns surroundning Dorsey, what do we do if he is there for us at 14? The same type of injury concerns let Tommie slide to us.

What about Vilma? If all the Jets want is a 3rd, should we take a chance? This guy could be better than Briggs in our scheme. The Bears and Jets seems to have a good relationship.

Also, what do you guys think if we did this in FA?

Resign Berrian
Sign Bryant Johnson(we could easily draft someone in 3rd or 4th rounds though)
Sign OG Justin Smiley
Sign S Gibril Wilson

smiley? eh, if the 49ers dont want a guy back...that should be a sign....and wilson hasnt played in a cover 2 before. idk about that one either.

and if we resign berrian, id rather go with bradley and hester as 2 and 3 and then not sign anyone else major

vilma...eh. id rather see what we have in the (who would be much cheaper) jamar williams. the coaching staff seems real high on him

as for dorsey....hmm, if he slides to 14 wed have to strongly consider it. i think it depends on what we in FA and who else is available in the draft.

if we have our choice of OTs or we dont address RB sooner, i think those needs outweigh DT. but we would have to be very tempted....

BeerBaron
02-26-2008, 11:59 AM
This isn't just me being anti-Flacco here, but there isn't a quarterback in the draft that has higher upside than Woodson.

wooooo!!!! finally someone agrees with me on woodson. in that LSU game, when it went to OT, i actually called my brother at home and told him to get the game on. not just because it was a good game but i thought woodson was looking amazing.

a year on the bench to work on his mechanics could do wonders for him, and with his stock seemingly falling for no real apparent reason, we could get him in the 3rd at least

toonsterwu
02-26-2008, 02:22 PM
This isn't just me being anti-Flacco here, but there isn't a quarterback in the draft that has higher upside than Woodson.

Why does Woodson have a higher upside than Flacco? Flacco's got the stronger raw arm, he's got the height, he's got the athleticism, and he's got less mechanical issues right now.

Geo
02-26-2008, 02:29 PM
How well can Flacco read a defense and go through his progressions, I wonder. Especially against the speed of the NFL.

BeerBaron
02-26-2008, 02:32 PM
Why does Woodson have a higher upside than Flacco? Flacco's got the stronger raw arm, he's got the height, he's got the athleticism, and he's got less mechanical issues right now.

hes only an inch taller than woodson, and we dont have to question woodsons level of competition. he beat the eventual national champions while playing a terrific game!

flacco couldnt even hang with palko at pitt and then looked bad while even beating app state, the D-1aa champs......uh huh

i will take woodson any day...hes my fav QB in the draft since i watched beat lsu

awfullyquiet
02-26-2008, 02:34 PM
wooooo!!!! finally someone agrees with me on woodson. in that LSU game, when it went to OT, i actually called my brother at home and told him to get the game on. not just because it was a good game but i thought woodson was looking amazing.

a year on the bench to work on his mechanics could do wonders for him, and with his stock seemingly falling for no real apparent reason, we could get him in the 3rd at least

IT COULD do wonders for him. By no means you will for sure be able to retrain his mechanics. Mechanical issues aren't easy to break. Ask Michael Vick.

The safer pick to develop is Flacco. He may not be the smartest QB (in terms of having superior vision or defensive reading skills), but, put him in a develop the run/stop the run system as the bears have been for oh... a while. i think he'll be more than we could need from the qb position.

Woodson would be the better fit for a more balanced offense. Like Detroit (maybe). Houston. St Louis even might be a good fit for him. Carolina too.

BeerBaron
02-26-2008, 02:36 PM
ill take woodson in the 3rd over flacco in 2 (or even 1 as some would think)

Geo
02-26-2008, 02:37 PM
Obviously, who doesn't love Flacco's size? The arm, probably the best in the class. Seems like a good guy too.

Team interviews should be interesting, when the coaches quiz him about offenses and defenses.

bearsfan_51
02-26-2008, 02:43 PM
Why does Woodson have a higher upside than Flacco? Flacco's got the stronger raw arm, he's got the height, he's got the athleticism, and he's got less mechanical issues right now.


What does mechanical issues have to do with upside? Isn't the whole point of "upside" is what player would be the best if mechancal issues were worked out?

Flacco probably has a bigger arm, but I think Woodson has a better arm. The biggest problems with Woodson are

1) Mechanics
2) Focus
3) Footwork/Pocket presence

All three can be worked upon. I think that #2 is probably the most glaring, but if I'm taking a "project", I'd go for somone that has already proven that they have winning intangibles.

awfullyquiet
02-26-2008, 02:58 PM
What does mechanical issues have to do with upside? Isn't the whole point of "upside" is what player would be the best if mechancal issues were worked out?

Flacco probably has a bigger arm, but I think Woodson has a better arm. The biggest problems with Woodson are

1) Mechanics
2) Focus
3) Footwork/Pocket presence

All three can be worked upon. I think that #2 is probably the most glaring, but if I'm taking a "project", I'd go for somone that has already proven that they have winning intangibles.

what's mechanical issues have to do with it? motion. how many years did it take grossman to improve his throwing motion to compensate for his size? oh. a few. woodson has the same issues, imo, as grossman. i feel, that he can turn into a taller grossman (which may/may not be good...)

i think 1 and 2 go hand in hand. (really 2 is the key to 1 and 3), and that without focus, to overcome bad habits is impossible. Salesian studies tell me that one all the time (i.e. the devout life by st. francis de sales). If you're not precise, but accurate, it's easier to gain precision with experience and a refinement and repetition of the throwing motion (see garrard and how he's moved from being a little more wild throwing to precise and accurate with just a year of PT), fixing accuracy issues is more of an issue, which is what i think woodson will experience. He can put the ball in the tire very well, but not have the right placement every time because of the speed of the game, footwork, and will struggle from that.

I'd trust the coaching staff with Flacco over Woodson. The bears have had issues with footwork with both quarterbacks for 4 years. Sure, QB's may have a resistance to learn, but two of them? Unlikely. I'd take the one with less negatives.

Number 10
02-26-2008, 03:47 PM
Alright guys here is my Bears draft with the analysis from my 13 pager I put up this past weekend. I think you guys would have to love this first 3 rounds-

TRADE:
CHI trades #14 (1) to SEA for #25 (1), #55 (2), and 2009 3rd rounder
Angelo will have a tough decision on his hands at this point. Does he go for another franchise RB, acknowledging the Benson decision was wrong? Maybe he should have traded up for Brohm? I think he can find some great players for what he needs later in this draft, therefore he’ll find a trading partner to stockpile picks. Seattle will overpay a tad and fork over three picks for a back they want in the worst way.

25 - CHI (f/SEA) - Gosder Cherilus - OT - Boston College

I think Angelo makes that trade down from 14 with Cherilus in mind. He knows he can get his RT at this spot, which would hopefully be Williams or Cherilus. I said back in December that before their QB mess is solved, the Bears need to upgrade that line big time. I think they’ll go hard after Faneca but I still think this pick will happen either way. Cherilus will aid the run game especially and seemed to really step it up late in the year and at the Senior Bowl in pass protection. I don’t buy the notion that says you can’t spend a 1st on a career RT. He’ll be a staple in the trenches for a long time on a team that needs vast improvement there.

44 - CHI - Felix Jones - RB - Arkansas

Chicago has to be happy with this pick. Benson isn’t the answer and while I’m sure they’ll give him a good amount of carries next year, there needs to be another option. I doubt Angelo breaks the bank on Turner, instead he goes after an explosive Jones that gives this offense another homerun threat.

55 - CHI (f/SEA) - Andre Woodson - QB - Kentucky

I think Grossman will be back in 2008, but his long term potential here will be on a short leash. Woodson looked erratic at times at the Senior Bowl but I think he has too much of an upside here to pass on. Solid situation to be thrown into that will allow him a year or two to sit and watch.

75 - CHI - Anthony Collins - OT - Kansas

Future replacement for Tait, the last piece to a rebuilt O-line.

90 - CHI (f/SD) - Jonathan Hefney - S - Tennessee

Versatile d-back with great range. Not sold on D. Manning being a starting player anymore.

toonsterwu
02-26-2008, 05:46 PM
Whoa folks. Aren't we talking about pure upside here? I don't see how intangibles and level of competition are an aspect of pure upside (and that mechanics aren't).

I would tend to think that mechanics have a greater role than intangibles and level of competition (overrated). The zip that the player gets from their delivery comes as much from the mechanics as anything else. Okay, maybe I should say release in terms of mechanics, then. Woodson's good ... but the zip, the velocity that Flacco gets seems to be a bit better. Although I actually didn't see any mph measurements this year, unlike the past, so who knows.

To that extent bf, I'm wondering what a better arm is for you then. I would say a better arm is the one that gets better velocity on his ball and has the better arm strength, both of which I think goes to Flacco (although velocity, again, dunno exactly).

awfullyquiet
02-26-2008, 06:22 PM
To that extent bf, I'm wondering what a better arm is for you then. I would say a better arm is the one that gets better velocity on his ball and has the better arm strength, both of which I think goes to Flacco (although velocity, again, dunno exactly).

Release height. Arc height.

The higher you are, the shorter the distance the ball will have to travel to a receivers body (less arc, more straight line.)

Moreso than speed. This is the key to arm strength in my book. Physics. Yo.

Strength of competition I think is not nearly as important... much to the SEC's chagrin.

BeerBaron
02-26-2008, 07:14 PM
strength of competition is only overrated when your for a guy from a small school. swap it around and you could make an amazing argument against small schools guys. its how arguing works.

now what you cant do, is point to height as a disadvantage. woodson has at least 4 inches of grossman. i think thats an awful comparison for one....

plus, flacco, moving up draft boards. might take a low first rounder to ensure you get him. woodson, seemingly moving down, could be had in the 3rd easily most likely.....

therefore, the smaller investment in woodson leads to greater upside.....

awfullyquiet
02-26-2008, 07:29 PM
agreed. he's only good in the mid 3rd/4th round.

bearsfan_51
02-26-2008, 07:43 PM
Whoa folks. Aren't we talking about pure upside here? I don't see how intangibles and level of competition are an aspect of pure upside (and that mechanics aren't).

I would tend to think that mechanics have a greater role than intangibles and level of competition (overrated). The zip that the player gets from their delivery comes as much from the mechanics as anything else. Okay, maybe I should say release in terms of mechanics, then. Woodson's good ... but the zip, the velocity that Flacco gets seems to be a bit better. Although I actually didn't see any mph measurements this year, unlike the past, so who knows.

To that extent bf, I'm wondering what a better arm is for you then. I would say a better arm is the one that gets better velocity on his ball and has the better arm strength, both of which I think goes to Flacco (although velocity, again, dunno exactly).

From what I've seen of Flacco, his deep ball is very erratic. Woodson has his "wtf?" moments as well, but not to the same extent. I'm not as concerned with who throws a nicer ball to nobody in shorts. From what I've seen from game tape of both players, Woodson throws a more accurate and catchable ball while still having good arm strength.

When you add in pocket presence (neither player is very good, but Woodson is better), decision making skills (ditto), and level of competition (you can say it's overrated, I disagree), then I think Woodson has the potential to be a greater pro.

I would also add, that I think if there is any position where LOC is most important it's quarterback. I wouldn't be nearly as critical if we were talking about a runningback or a safety for example.

toonsterwu
02-26-2008, 07:44 PM
Oh, I've got no problem with saying we should pass on Flacco (although I am perfectly fine if we do, as I think he's the best QB in the draft). I'm fine with that. I was merely trying to discern why folks thought Woodson had more upside.

Btw, I was not comparing Grossman to Woodson, and I wasn't referencing height as a disadvantage for Woodson. He's got good height and build. Rather, I was saying that Flacco's height is a bonus in assessing upside.

Actually, the reason I think strength of competition for QB's is overrated is because at the end of the day, the tools are first and foremost the key thing. If an individual plays at a big school and does well, but lacks arm strength (one JD Booty comes to mind, along with Brohm), the value of compeition is minimal.

All that said, my point on Strength of competition being overrated resides in how that relates to upside, as I don't see it. Readiness, now yes, there's a definite quotient there that a strength of competition argument would involve. Upside? Don't see it.

toonsterwu
02-26-2008, 08:06 PM
From what I've seen of Flacco, his deep ball is very erratic. Woodson has his "wtf?" moments as well, but not to the same extent. I'm not as concerned with who throws a nicer ball to nobody in shorts. From what I've seen from game tape of both players, Woodson throws a more accurate and catchable ball while still having good arm strength.

When you add in pocket presence (neither player is very good, but Woodson is better), decision making skills (ditto), and level of competition (you can say it's overrated, I disagree), then I think Woodson has the potential to be a greater pro.

I would also add, that I think if there is any position where LOC is most important it's quarterback. I wouldn't be nearly as critical if we were talking about a runningback or a safety for example.

I think part of what you consider upside, I consider readiness, so in some respects, we may be viewing the same idea from two different prisms.

I tend to think that Flacco's deep ball has far more projectable consistency to the NFL than Woodson's. Keep in mind I'm a huge fan of Woodson's as well. The problem is that, unless his mechanics are fixed, I don't believe that the ball you see from Andre in college is applicable in judging what he can do in the pros on a consistent level. I don't think his deep ball (Andre's that is) is as consistent in fitting into windows as Flacco's

All in all, I also do feel that deep ball is overrated. I prefer the QB that can hit the 20 yard outs with consistency than the QB tha can hit the 50 yard bomb. Flacco's ball fits much better, as of now, in regards to hitting the tough intermediate passes.

By no means is this meant as a pump Flacco up thing. I think he is far and away the best QB prospect in the draft, the guy I would bank my money on (including over Matt Ryan). That said, he needs time. You need at least a year (on a side note, I think Andre probably needs a couple years).

All that said, I do believe that Flacco's pocket presence and feel is close, if not equal, to Woodson's, and his decision making is better.

As to LOC, my point was that I don't see the relevancy to upside. All that said, tools should be the first thiing in judging a QB's ability to translate.

Now, in finishing this post, I also don't expect us to deal up for Flacco, and I don't see him at our 2nd. I'll say this - I'd much rather take Josh Johnson in the 3rd (if he's there ... ) than Woodson. I'd much rather take Kevin O'Connell in the 5th to Woodson in the 3rd. the reason being, while I'm a big fan of Woodson's (just to reiterate, I actually prefer him over even Ryan, although value wise, they aren't close), we're talking about a 2 year period needed for him to develop. If that's the case, I'd rather try it with a high upside individual like O'Connell. Tweaking mechanics is easier said than done. As for Josh Johnson, his pocket presence, poise, and smarts, his football IQ, is ahead, and if we go QB in the 3rd, I'd rather have someone liek that, particularly when Josh has good upside (though I don't see him there in the 3rd).

The Legend
02-27-2008, 12:10 AM
Chris Williams Great Offensive Tackle to help who ever the your QB is now
Joe Flacco the QB that will be held up by Williams for years to come
Chilo Rachal the Guard the will make one the best left sides
Jamaal Charles will help his fellow texas Benson to make a nice 1-2 punch

http://www.nfldraftcountdown.com/forum/showthread.php?t=18574

like to see what you guys think about it

maybe a bad point of view would be the its all offensive picks
but i feel your D went thru injurys and will be better next year

awfullyquiet
02-27-2008, 12:19 AM
Tweaking mechanics is easier said than done.


Bingo. That's my sentements.
But. Can the bears do that? Eh. I worry.

BeerBaron
02-27-2008, 08:20 AM
Chris Williams Great Offensive Tackle to help who ever the your QB is now
Joe Flacco the QB that will be held up by Williams for years to come
Chilo Rachal the Guard the will make one the best left sides
Jamaal Charles will help his fellow texas Benson to make a nice 1-2 punch

http://www.nfldraftcountdown.com/forum/showthread.php?t=18574

like to see what you guys think about it

maybe a bad point of view would be the its all offensive picks
but i feel your D went thru injurys and will be better next year

thats not bad, id accept it. im not sure charles lasts that long though, but if hes there, itd be good by me

BeerBaron
02-27-2008, 11:04 AM
so scott has us going otah and then flacco....

im really starting to favor williams over otah, just for LT potential. i know otah had a bad combine and it might make him seem like a future RT only. so id still be ok with going otah in round 1, since he would fit in at RT which is out bigger area of need, though we would have to address a future LT a year or two down the line

k0ng
02-27-2008, 11:16 AM
Chris Williams Great Offensive Tackle to help who ever the your QB is now
Joe Flacco the QB that will be held up by Williams for years to come
Chilo Rachal the Guard the will make one the best left sides
Jamaal Charles will help his fellow texas Benson to make a nice 1-2 punch

http://www.nfldraftcountdown.com/forum/showthread.php?t=18574

like to see what you guys think about it

maybe a bad point of view would be the its all offensive picks
but i feel your D went thru injurys and will be better next year

I'd be pretty happy with that.

sweetness34
02-27-2008, 12:28 PM
I'd prefer Williams over Otah but it's still a very solid pick IMO. Had a bad combine but his on the field film speaks for itself.

I'm "eh" on Flacco. Can he be a good QB? Yep. Will he be? It's 50/50. He's certainly a risk in the 2nd Round.

Overall I'd give his draft a B, nothing amazing but nothing bad either.

BeerBaron
02-27-2008, 02:10 PM
I'd prefer Williams over Otah but it's still a very solid pick IMO. Had a bad combine but his on the field film speaks for itself.

I'm "eh" on Flacco. Can he be a good QB? Yep. Will he be? It's 50/50. He's certainly a risk in the 2nd Round.

Overall I'd give his draft a B, nothing amazing but nothing bad either.

yeah, like i said id prefer williams over otah but as long as we get someone decent in at RT ill accept it.

as for flacco, im pretty "eh" there too. im hoping someone (other than us) trades up into the end of round 1 to snag him. maybe atlanta if they pass on ryan, ive heard that theyre high on him too.

but if they dont take ryan, it opens up the possibility of me experiencing one of the worst ever draft days with us taking a different and much much worse QB much much higher....

Gay Ork Wang
02-27-2008, 02:27 PM
hopefully Ryan doesnt fall

Clady, Mendenhall, Williams, otah or stewart.
Those are the guys i want to be our 1st round pick

Smokey Joe
02-27-2008, 03:42 PM
I'd be estatic if we got Williams, Flacco, Rachal, and Charles all in the first 3 round.

toonsterwu
02-27-2008, 04:25 PM
Most indications do seem to point to Williams as the OT we want from that Clady/Williams/Otah group. Only time will tell. I'm not too worried about Otah's combine as he had the ankle injury.

I'd be happy with Flacco/Rachal/Charles if that was the rest of the mock (didn't read the 2nd round and on).

DaBear89
02-28-2008, 01:19 AM
seeing some of the newest mocks have me thinking. say we take Williams in the 1st. but by tim our 2nd rolls around all value is essentially gone at QB/WR and most of the RBs too. would u be upset if we took Cherilus in the 2nd after Williams in the 1st. i know it prolly would never happen but what would be your reaction?

toonsterwu
02-28-2008, 01:22 AM
I'd be fine with that, but I highly doubt Cherilus slips that far. I've done scenarios where he slips, but never to us.

If we did do that, Williams likely goes inside for a year (or two), with Cherilus at RT.

The chances of all the value being gone at QB/WR/RB seem quite slim, though. We very well could go back to back OL even if there is value at other spots.

pellepelle_10
02-28-2008, 05:06 AM
I'd be fine with that, but I highly doubt Cherilus slips that far. I've done scenarios where he slips, but never to us.

If we did do that, Williams likely goes inside for a year (or two), with Cherilus at RT.

The chances of all the value being gone at QB/WR/RB seem quite slim, though. We very well could go back to back OL even if there is value at other spots.

RB will drop significantly after Stewart IMO. There are good runningbacks but you're definatelly dropping a bit in potential from the top 3. In all honesty I think there is a MUCH higher chance getting a top tier lineman in the 2nd versus RB which is why I feel selecting Mendenhall or Stewart rnd 1 would be the best way to go with OT/OG in the 2nd. At this point the inability to land any quality FA will definatelly alter our ability to do anything in the draft so with that said if we don't address any lineman in FA I'm hoping for Turner and some O-Lineman draft picks. *sigh* lol Maybe we can make an attempt at Gibril Wilson if NY doesn't sign him.

BeerBaron
02-28-2008, 11:48 AM
RB will drop significantly after Stewart IMO. There are good runningbacks but you're definatelly dropping a bit in potential from the top 3. In all honesty I think there is a MUCH higher chance getting a top tier lineman in the 2nd versus RB which is why I feel selecting Mendenhall or Stewart rnd 1 would be the best way to go with OT/OG in the 2nd. At this point the inability to land any quality FA will definatelly alter our ability to do anything in the draft so with that said if we don't address any lineman in FA I'm hoping for Turner and some O-Lineman draft picks. *sigh* lol Maybe we can make an attempt at Gibril Wilson if NY doesn't sign him.

top tier lineman in 2....i disagree. i think we'll be much harder pressed to find one who can be a day 1 starter there. and i definitally think we have no chance of finding one with real LT potential there either.

i think williams has to be the #1 on the draft board at 14. he can play either tackle or even guard if need be right away, plus he has real potential as a franchise LT in the future.

as for RB, i think if we dont go that way in round 1, we should just squat until round 3 where the value is better, but we can also find some decent players. as things stand right this second, jamal charles is about the only back id take where we are in 2, and some might call that a reach.

pellepelle_10
02-29-2008, 11:11 AM
top tier lineman in 2....i disagree. i think we'll be much harder pressed to find one who can be a day 1 starter there. and i definitally think we have no chance of finding one with real LT potential there either.

i think williams has to be the #1 on the draft board at 14. he can play either tackle or even guard if need be right away, plus he has real potential as a franchise LT in the future.

as for RB, i think if we dont go that way in round 1, we should just squat until round 3 where the value is better, but we can also find some decent players. as things stand right this second, jamal charles is about the only back id take where we are in 2, and some might call that a reach.

I agree somewhat. Carl Nicks and Brandon ALbert have a high chance of slipping into the 2nd. We're comparing 3 runningbacks who posted amazing combines in addition to solid season performances versus like 9 lineman? I think the chances of a lineman trickeling into the 2nd is MUCH higher given these numbers. there are 31 draft picks in the 1st rnd. It's not gauranteed 9 lineman are going to go so this reasoning I'm not agreeing with. This is possibly the best tackle draft in decades. We will have an opportunity at one of these guys in this draft and it doesn't have to be the 1st rnd like ur stating.

BeerBaron
02-29-2008, 11:29 AM
I agree somewhat. Carl Nicks and Brandon ALbert have a high chance of slipping into the 2nd. We're comparing 3 runningbacks who posted amazing combines in addition to solid season performances versus like 9 lineman? I think the chances of a lineman trickeling into the 2nd is MUCH higher given these numbers. there are 31 draft picks in the 1st rnd. It's not gauranteed 9 lineman are going to go so this reasoning I'm not agreeing with. This is possibly the best tackle draft in decades. We will have an opportunity at one of these guys in this draft and it doesn't have to be the 1st rnd like ur stating.

you can point to guys like nicks or collins and say yeah, they could start at RT right away. and they could.

but guys who go outside of the first typically arent looked at as future franchise LT like we could have with chris williams. if hes there at 14 and we pick anyone else, im gonna be pissed.

pellepelle_10
02-29-2008, 04:15 PM
you can point to guys like nicks or collins and say yeah, they could start at RT right away. and they could.

but guys who go outside of the first typically arent looked at as future franchise LT like we could have with chris williams. if hes there at 14 and we pick anyone else, im gonna be pissed.

I have a problem with this statement for the simple fact that every player that is drafted is in hopes they can "someday" become the future of the franchise. Nobody is saying the Nicks or Collins are better players than Williams however they will serve as good options for the second rnd and become a solid lineman for years to come. I can't think of one RB worth drafting in the 2nd round and a large reason is because talent wise I can think of several others positions with higher talent that would warrant it. (Flacco, a few WR's, OT's, DT's, and Safeties if they fall. We need to draft for value as well as need. RB falls off after the top 3. O-Lineman have a high chance of dropping into the 2nd and even the 3rd with still being able to get a top tier product. It makes no sense to get Williams and settle for some 3rd rnd marginal rb who will end up producing soso-if that numbers in the NFL. 3 of the 5 lineman are solid starters on our team. 0 of the 1 starting runningbacks are decent at best.

BeerBaron
02-29-2008, 04:32 PM
I have a problem with this statement for the simple fact that every player that is drafted is in hopes they can "someday" become the future of the franchise. Nobody is saying the Nicks or Collins are better players than Williams however they will serve as good options for the second rnd and become a solid lineman for years to come. I can't think of one RB worth drafting in the 2nd round and a large reason is because talent wise I can think of several others positions with higher talent that would warrant it. (Flacco, a few WR's, OT's, DT's, and Safeties if they fall. We need to draft for value as well as need. RB falls off after the top 3. O-Lineman have a high chance of dropping into the 2nd and even the 3rd with still being able to get a top tier product. It makes no sense to get Williams and settle for some 3rd rnd marginal rb who will end up producing soso-if that numbers in the NFL. 3 of the 5 lineman are solid starters on our team. 0 of the 1 starting runningbacks are decent at best.

ehhh....im still not sure. if we dont get a guy who figures to have long term LT potential this year, we're just going to need to do it again next year when tait goes downhill further.

with a good line and blindside defender, no QB or RB is going to be all that great. plus, traditionally, stud running backs turn up later in the draft that do true, quality lineman.

now i dont have a problem drafting mendenhall just from a best player perspective. hed be much better than blowing it on a QB like ryan who will just be terrible and drive this franchise into the ground over the time it takes people to realize that hes a huge bust. that said, i pray ryan isnt there with out pick...

anyway, like i said, im not against mendenhall. though i think if williams is there at 14, we should probably go there....

pellepelle_10
02-29-2008, 04:54 PM
ehhh....im still not sure. if we dont get a guy who figures to have long term LT potential this year, we're just going to need to do it again next year when tait goes downhill further.

This is one of the STRONGEST drafts ever for OT's so I have a hard time believing this "we're not addressing the o-line if they're not drafted in the 1st" mentality. I think any of the top 10 lineman easily have long term potential. U've already agreed Nicks and Collins have the capability of starting right away so how can you then retract and consider them as not having long term potential? They'll be rookies so how would they not have the capability of getting better as the years progress?


with a good line and blindside defender, no QB or RB is going to be all that great. plus, traditionally, stud running backs turn up later in the draft that do true, quality lineman.

I'm not speaking of rabbit out the hat selections here. I'm speaking of clear cut starters. I'm speaking of the 2nd and 3rd rounds. I can name many 1st rnd graded lineman that dropped into these rnds. Infact there were some last season. (Aaron Sears, Justin Blalock, and Tony Ugoh who all at one time had 1st rnd grades).

Tony Ugoh started and did very well as a rookie for Indy. He started 11 games and only gave up 1.5 sacks.

Sears started for Tampa Bay and had a decent year before getting injured. He allowed 3.5 sacks.

Blalock Started for Atlanta and performed marginal


now i dont have a problem drafting mendenhall just from a best player perspective. hed be much better than blowing it on a QB like ryan who will just be terrible and drive this franchise into the ground over the time it takes people to realize that hes a huge bust. that said, i pray ryan isnt there with out pick...

I agree and I don't think he's going to be the future like some have projected him to be.


anyway, like i said, im not against mendenhall. though i think if williams is there at 14, we should probably go there....

I don't mind Williams as the pick and I won't be terribly upset however I think our chances of getting a productive OT in the 2nd round or even 3rd rnd vs a RB we will have a higher value than going the opposite way. Also we're speaking of top tier RB's who we haven't seen perform this good in a long LONG time. You just cannot pass up on that. It's not every year you get RB's who are 225+ who are as athletic, strong as these guys and have played to the level they have. Why else you think people have been so enamored with their performances? There's a reason to this. You don't get this in the combine every year.

Gay Ork Wang
02-29-2008, 05:02 PM
There is a dropoff in talent, but dont forget, 1st round prospect doesnt always turn out to be what u think, especially RBs. i.e. Benson. This years draft is also really filled with good RBs.

So im not worried about both, we should be happy that we need RBs and OTs. This years draft almost looked like it is made for rebuilding in the trenches

BeerBaron
02-29-2008, 05:29 PM
There is a dropoff in talent, but dont forget, 1st round prospect doesnt always turn out to be what u think, especially RBs. i.e. Benson. This years draft is also really filled with good RBs.

So im not worried about both, we should be happy that we need RBs and OTs. This years draft almost looked like it is made for rebuilding in the trenches

i would have made the case the year benson was drafted that he may have been the safest prospect.....so even running backs are far from sure things.

DaBears0530
03-02-2008, 08:31 PM
with the bears shopping Griese, what is the best pick we could receive and from whom.

bearsfan_51
03-02-2008, 08:57 PM
I doubt we'll get anything for him. He's making more than he should at this point, even in this market.

DaBears0530
03-02-2008, 08:58 PM
so hes just getting cut. how much would we save?

BeerBaron
03-02-2008, 08:59 PM
i think it says in the needs thread or whatever its called. has what they count against the cap i eblieve

regoob2
03-03-2008, 12:40 PM
Anyone have an opinion on Warrick Dunn? He's the exact opposite of Benson quick small good hands, good attitude. Sounds like a good compliment/Mentor for Ced. Gives flexibility in the draft and can also help teach Wolfe. Obviously a stop gab guy but I always liked him.

bearsfan_51
03-03-2008, 12:42 PM
At this point I think Wolfe is a better version of Dunn. Dunn seems like a great person and teamate, but I just don't see the need for him personally.

Gay Ork Wang
03-03-2008, 12:49 PM
and he is old

toonsterwu
03-03-2008, 01:03 PM
I expect Dunn to head to a team with more certainty to compete (that is, they are coming off a better season than us). I can really see him "go home" to Tampa, where they could use some help. Indy makes some sense. I don't see us getting in on this.

M.O.T.H.
03-07-2008, 10:47 AM
Bears don't want Kentucky QB Woodson?

(http://www.suntimes.com/sports/football/bears/830255,CST-SPT-bearnt07.article)If the Bears have any interest in Kentucky quarterback Andre Woodson, they're doing a good job of disguising it. Twenty-five teams were represented at Woodson's workout Wednesday in Lexington, and a coach on hand confirmed a report in the Louisville Courier-Journal that the Bears were one of the seven absent. -- Chicago Sun-Times

Gay Ork Wang
03-07-2008, 10:56 AM
yay give us Flacco in the 3rd id be happy

BeerBaron
03-07-2008, 11:35 AM
Bears don't want Kentucky QB Woodson?

(http://www.suntimes.com/sports/football/bears/830255,CST-SPT-bearnt07.article)If the Bears have any interest in Kentucky quarterback Andre Woodson, they're doing a good job of disguising it. Twenty-five teams were represented at Woodson's workout Wednesday in Lexington, and a coach on hand confirmed a report in the Louisville Courier-Journal that the Bears were one of the seven absent. -- Chicago Sun-Times

yeah i poseted a link to that in another thread.

it depresses me though....i think woodson has loads of potential and would prefer him in the 3rd to any other QB available before that.

guess im SoL...i dont mind flacco too much though. id prefer him in the 2nd to henne there or (gulp) ryan sooner than that......

i think brohm in the 2nd, if he lasts that long, is a good pick there. i just dont think we'd touch him at 14. in fact i know we wouldnt.

Gay Ork Wang
03-07-2008, 03:36 PM
Apparently we signed Lloyd to a one - year deal

that means 6 WRs into Training camp without the Draft (Booker, Bradley, Hass, Davis Hester and Lloyd)

well i think a lil bit competition is always good its nothing huge

http://www.nfl.com/freeagency/story?id=09000d5d80716d17&template=without-video&confirm=true

SFbear
03-07-2008, 04:29 PM
Apparently we signed Lloyd to a one - year deal

that means 6 WRs into Training camp without the Draft (Booker, Bradley, Hass, Davis Hester and Lloyd)

well i think a lil bit competition is always good its nothing huge

http://www.nfl.com/freeagency/story?id=09000d5d80716d17&template=without-video&confirm=true

With his connection to Turner it makes sense but all I remember about this guy is him completely wussing out on a catch when he saw Mike Brown's shadow.

Oh and this:

http://www.sfgate.com/blogs/images/sfgate/fortyniners/2005/11/07/sp_giants49erscajc101.jpe

bearsfan_51
03-07-2008, 04:42 PM
Brandon Rideau is also under contract. Come on...does anyone look at my depth chart thread?:(

Geo
03-07-2008, 04:50 PM
Hass was on the roster all of last year, if I have it right ... was he ever active?

bearsfan_51
03-07-2008, 04:53 PM
Hass was on the roster all of last year, if I have it right ... was he ever active?

Nope. Rasheid Davis was our only "true" slot guy, though Moose played out of the slot quite a bit as well.

dabears10
03-07-2008, 05:03 PM
Nope. Rasheid Davis was our only "true" slot guy, though Moose played out of the slot quite a bit as well.

I thought Hass played special teams the last two weeks?

BeerBaron
03-07-2008, 05:23 PM
i was just ranting about the unnecessary pick up of lloyd...didnt see it here.

my opinion doesn't change however, this just pisses me off. much rather have just gone with bradley/hester opposite booker. or add booker into the mix for 1 and 2.

lloyd completely vanished in washington. just eating up a roster spot....

AaronGrayisKing
03-13-2008, 12:04 PM
I hope we don't get Woodson in round 1 or Flacco(future david carr) in round 3.


The best qb in the draft will be Henne in round 2. After we get best available OT in round 1, Round 3 could be a couple different players. Forte RB or Jordy Nelson if he's still available, what about John Sullivan C in round 4 who can kick out and play OG til kruetz is done.

Gay Ork Wang
03-13-2008, 12:36 PM
yesss get them started about Henne...and Flacco is noway going to be David Carr, noone is that horrible and also Woodson will hardly be taken in the 3rd

AaronGrayisKing
03-13-2008, 03:17 PM
I guess I should clarify that I don't think Woodson will fall to the 3rd round, I was just quoting from someone up a couple posts that had us taking Woodson in the first.

The main thing is Woodson = NO. Flacco = No. Henne+Bears = Super Bowl 2010

iowatreat54
03-13-2008, 03:47 PM
Henne blows...I wouldn't take him til at least our 2nd 3rd round pick, and that's if Flacco, Brohm, and Woodson are all gone

SFbear
03-13-2008, 04:12 PM
So the Lions now have a very obvious need at RB and are one slot below us which should make some interesting scenarios. I could see them trading ahead of us if Mendenhalll is there or another team trading with us to outflank the Lions.

Geo
03-13-2008, 04:41 PM
If I were the Lions, I'd just stay at #16 and take either Mendenhall or Stewart. Win-win imo.

But then again they have a habit of unnecessarily trading up to get a guy they really like.

Smokey Joe
03-13-2008, 06:54 PM
what do you guys think about Kevin Jones as maybe a free agent signing? I would like him, but it depends on the price and if he can actually walk by August.

regoob2
03-13-2008, 09:10 PM
what do you guys think about Kevin Jones as maybe a free agent signing? I would like him, but it depends on the price and if he can actually walk by August.I don't want any of the lions left overs. There's a reason they cut him.

k0ng
03-13-2008, 11:02 PM
what do you guys think about Kevin Jones as maybe a free agent signing? I would like him, but it depends on the price and if he can actually walk by August.

We don't need any more whiny runningbacks.

bearsfan_51
03-14-2008, 12:04 AM
Larry: What is Mike Brown’s status and how important is the safety position in the draft?

Scott L.
Alburtis, Pennsylvania

Scott: Mike Brown is continuing to rehab his torn ACL and is expected to return in 2008. But after the injuries he’s suffered each of the past four seasons, the Bears are not counting on him to be healthy for a full season. They value Brown as a talented player and a team leader, but any contributions they receive from him are a bonus. I don’t see the Bears taking a safety in the draft. Jerry Angelo described the crop of safeties in the draft as “anemic” and the Bears are high on young players such as Danieal Manning, Brandon McGowan and Kevin Payne.



This is very interesting to me, and I was starting to come around to this point earlier. It's interesting I guess that the Bears (and let's face it, Larry Mayer writes what the Bears tell him to write), are basically putting it out there that they won't draft a safety.

Guess that means it really will be an offensive draft with a defensive tackle thrown in.

Bearsfan123
03-14-2008, 12:09 AM
Larry: What is Mike Brown’s status and how important is the safety position in the draft?

Scott L.
Alburtis, Pennsylvania

Scott: Mike Brown is continuing to rehab his torn ACL and is expected to return in 2008. But after the injuries he’s suffered each of the past four seasons, the Bears are not counting on him to be healthy for a full season. They value Brown as a talented player and a team leader, but any contributions they receive from him are a bonus. I don’t see the Bears taking a safety in the draft. Jerry Angelo described the crop of safeties in the draft as “anemic” and the Bears are high on young players such as Danieal Manning, Brandon McGowan and Kevin Payne.



This is very interesting to me, and I was starting to come around to this point earlier. It's interesting I guess that the Bears (and let's face it, Larry Mayer writes what the Bears tell him to write), are basically putting it out there that they won't draft a safety.

Guess that means it really will be an offensive draft with a defensive tackle thrown in.

ugh this makes me cry alittle bit.

Hurricane Ditka
03-14-2008, 01:43 AM
Because the Bears aren't going to throw away draft picks at a position that is clearly not one of their bigger needs in a weak draft class?

Bearsfan123
03-14-2008, 11:53 AM
Because the Bears aren't going to throw away draft picks at a position that is clearly not one of their bigger needs in a weak draft class?

Clearly not one of their bigger needs? Have we been watching the same team? If i remember right, every bears fan or nearly so was livid with the terrible play of our safeties this past year. Is it a weak class, yes, but it is a huge need that has left our D in a terrible position, especially last season. I wanted Kenny Phillips from the start, because we cannot count on Brown to play more than half a game, and Daniel Manning has not improved. Im a fan of McGowan but his deficiencies in coverage have been exposed as well as having Mike Brown like durability, so you want to rely on Payne?

Gay Ork Wang
03-14-2008, 12:13 PM
Well u cant say, hey we had one bad year, lets draft a first round safety. We have 2 safeties that r just entering there second year and a third entering his 3rd year. Thats not alot. They need to learn, get some snaps and adjust. Give them a chance and Safety is not in our Needs. Its prolly, OL, QB,RB,WR,NT and then safety

Bearsfan123
03-14-2008, 01:46 PM
Well u cant say, hey we had one bad year, lets draft a first round safety. We have 2 safeties that r just entering there second year and a third entering his 3rd year. Thats not alot. They need to learn, get some snaps and adjust. Give them a chance and Safety is not in our Needs. Its prolly, OL, QB,RB,WR,NT and then safety

i disagree, but hey, thats what opinions are for. My list goes OL, QB, S, WR, RB, NT

I strongly dislike Benson but we can all agree that the O-line was one of the bigger reasons he sucked.

Gay Ork Wang
03-14-2008, 02:03 PM
well if its like that WR should be higher than S. We dont have poop at WR.

DaSuperfan
03-14-2008, 04:13 PM
I think we should draft Mendenhall if Clady isn't there. I don't know that Otah is worth the 14th pick in the draft. Now, if Clady and Mendenhall are both off the board, then I'd trade down a few spots and pick up some additional pick(s) and take Otah.

regoob2
03-14-2008, 05:20 PM
I think we should draft Mendenhall if Clady isn't there. I don't know that Otah is worth the 14th pick in the draft. Now, if Clady and Mendenhall are both off the board, then I'd trade down a few spots and pick up some additional pick(s) and take Otah.good luck trading down.

regoob2
03-14-2008, 05:21 PM
i disagree, but hey, thats what opinions are for. My list goes OL, QB, S, WR, RB, NT

I strongly dislike Benson but we can all agree that the O-line was one of the bigger reasons he sucked.I agree safety is a big need but we cant fix it through the draft at least this year.

bearsfan_51
03-14-2008, 05:24 PM
I think 14 is a spot we actually could trade down, though I don't think we will considering our dire need for an offensive tackle.

44 seems like a more likely spot to trade down.

Smokey Joe
03-15-2008, 08:56 AM
At 14, the only team I can see making a trade up would be the Jags so they can get someone like Harvey or Merling. And if we could get their 1st and 2nd, plus a future 3rd (looking at the trade value chart, that'd be equal value), I'd do the trade. At 26, one of Cherilus, Albert, and maybe Otah or Williams (I could see one of them taking a dip on draft day) should be the there. I personally wouldn't mind Cherilus at all since he is, with Jake Long, being the most NFL ready in this draft. While Cherilus will likely be forever stuck at RT, he can start right away and at the very least be very productive. Only real negative would be the fact we still need a franchise LT once Tait leaves.

AaronGrayisKing
03-15-2008, 10:34 AM
At 14, the only team I can see making a trade up would be the Jags so they can get someone like Harvey or Merling. And if we could get their 1st and 2nd, plus a future 3rd (looking at the trade value chart, that'd be equal value), I'd do the trade. At 26, one of Cherilus, Albert, and maybe Otah or Williams (I could see one of them taking a dip on draft day) should be the there. I personally wouldn't mind Cherilus at all since he is, with Jake Long, being the most NFL ready in this draft. While Cherilus will likely be forever stuck at RT, he can start right away and at the very least be very productive. Only real negative would be the fact we still need a franchise LT once Tait leaves.


Merling is out of the first round with the surgery...

Smokey Joe
03-15-2008, 12:12 PM
Merling is out of the first round with the surgery...
well, that still leaves Harvey who is better then Merling.

toonsterwu
03-15-2008, 12:13 PM
I wouldn't go that far yet. Merling is too talented that he could definitely get the benefit of the doubt, particularly if he works out pre-draft as most expect he'll do in the final days. It'll come down to how doctors view it, but a sports hernia isn't the end of the world, and the fact that he's taken the surgery is actually a positive sign.

Smokey Joe
03-15-2008, 12:55 PM
I was thinking about it, and trading down to about 26 like my proposed trade with the Jags (their 1st and 2nd [and additional future pick] for 14) would make a lot of sense, IMO. My ideal, but highly unrealistic, draft would go like (I am picking players based on where I think they will go):

Round-Position In round) Pos. Player, College
1-26) RT Gosder Cherilus, Boston College
2-13) QB Joe Flacco, Delaware
2-27) DT Trevor Laws, Notre Dame
3-12) WR Jerome Simpson, Coastal Carolina
3-27) OG Roy Schuening, Oregon St.
4-11) RB Cory Boyd, South Carolina
5-09) LB Jonathan Goff, Vanderbilt
6-09) WR D.J. Hall, Alabama
7-08) OL Kerry Bown, Appalachian St.
7-CP) DB D.J. Wolfe, Oklahoma

regoob2
03-15-2008, 01:32 PM
I'd prefer Chris Williams over Gosder and laws. I was never blown away by laws, he's a nice player.

toonsterwu
03-15-2008, 01:34 PM
btw, a potential trade up opportunity might be Dallas. Just something to watch there. Dallas needs to get a CB in there. They might go with Cason at 28, but if they decide to go for a top 4, they may end up having to bolt up, as there's a good chance the top 4 won't be there in the 20's.

Gay Ork Wang
03-15-2008, 02:07 PM
that actually would be awesome. maybe Otah/Williams drops and then who? Felix Jones?

regoob2
03-15-2008, 03:16 PM
Jonathan Stewart at 22, Gosder at 28. That would be sick.

iowatreat54
03-15-2008, 03:18 PM
Jonathan Stewart at 22, Gosder at 28. That would be sick.

I would be ecstatic with that...I'm actually hoping for this now

BeerBaron
03-15-2008, 03:58 PM
Jonathan Stewart at 22, Gosder at 28. That would be sick.

that would be nice especially with stewarts stock taking a hit with his surgery and all....

plus it doesnt look like theres anyone in that 20s range who would take him ahead of us

VoteLynnSwan
03-15-2008, 06:46 PM
i am 100% sure that if we take Stewart that turf toe problem will become huge with him... we haven't had ANY luck with runningbacks since Payton, and an excuse like that could be all it takes.

awfullyquiet
03-15-2008, 07:49 PM
Seriously.

I think everyone's still drinking the flacco.

I don't think JA will find the value before he's picked off the board. In my mocks i haven't even contemplated him in the bears scheme.

BeerBaron
03-15-2008, 07:56 PM
Seriously.

I think everyone's still drinking the flacco.

I don't think JA will find the value before he's picked off the board. In my mocks i haven't even contemplated him in the bears scheme.

hes better off than chad henne. that guy doesnt fit any pro scheme because hes not a very good pro...

regoob2
03-15-2008, 08:23 PM
i am 100% sure that if we take Stewart that turf toe problem will become huge with him... we haven't had ANY luck with runningbacks since Payton, and an excuse like that could be all it takes.
Stewart is a stud I love him. Too bad we need OL.