PDA

View Full Version : Michael "Burner" Turner


pellepelle_10
03-02-2008, 03:17 PM
Falcons | Turner agrees to six-year contract
Sun, 2 Mar 2008 12:51:57 -0800

John Murphy, of Yahoo Sports, reports free-agent RB Michael Turner (Chargers) has agreed to a six-year contract with the Atlanta Falcons. The deal includes $15 million of guaranteed money and is expected to be worth over $34 million in total.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Another possibility down the tube. It's looking more and more likely a draftee will be in Chicago. Boy do we love to blow good opportunities.

bearsfan_51
03-02-2008, 03:19 PM
We didn't blow that at all. The Falcons gave more money to Turner, who has yet to even prove himself as a starter, than we gave to Lance Briggs, a multiple time pro-bowler in his prime.

Think about that, get some perspective, and back up off the ledge.

Gay Ork Wang
03-02-2008, 03:25 PM
Well i dont think we wouldve payed Turner #1 Money anyways with benson still on the roster

toonsterwu
03-02-2008, 03:35 PM
We didn't blow that at all. The Falcons gave more money to Turner, who has yet to even prove himself as a starter, than we gave to Lance Briggs, a multiple time pro-bowler in his prime.

Think about that, get some perspective, and back up off the ledge.

Using Briggs as perspective isn't the best idea. I don't necessarily disagree with the base fact that Turner was overpaid, but that's the RB position. At RB, it's always been about potential due to the rapid wear and tear. Comparatively, as much as the LB position has grown over, say, the past decade or so in importance, it's still a position where teams feel they can find a player.

The reason I'd agree with pelle on this one is simple. Which RB in the 2nd tier is going to really push Benson? Sure, the top 3 RB's could push Benson, but the chances seem iffy of us taking a top 3 RB right now. So, who out of that 2nd tier pushes? Jamaal Charles' inconsistency? Ray Rice's lack of size? I could see a guy like Forte pushing, so that's a possibility, but with the dearth of big backs, there's going to be some teams going after him. Wouldn't surprise me if Forte lasted until day 2 that some teams push up in the 3rd.

For me, it isn't an issue of what Turner is or is not, but rather, who can be a legitimate challenger. I don't want a guy that's the number 2 to complement Benson with an outside shot of challenging for the lead role. I have a bad feeling that we might be looking at, say, a Mike Hart in day 2. If we find one, a legitimate challenger, then sure, I'd rather go that route.

The worst part is ... with all our money, what are we doing? Saving it for the non-existent interest? Granted, that's a whole separate issue.

BeerBaron
03-02-2008, 03:57 PM
Using Briggs as perspective isn't the best idea. I don't necessarily disagree with the base fact that Turner was overpaid, but that's the RB position. At RB, it's always been about potential due to the rapid wear and tear. Comparatively, as much as the LB position has grown over, say, the past decade or so in importance, it's still a position where teams feel they can find a player.

The reason I'd agree with pelle on this one is simple. Which RB in the 2nd tier is going to really push Benson? Sure, the top 3 RB's could push Benson, but the chances seem iffy of us taking a top 3 RB right now. So, who out of that 2nd tier pushes? Jamaal Charles' inconsistency? Ray Rice's lack of size? I could see a guy like Forte pushing, so that's a possibility, but with the dearth of big backs, there's going to be some teams going after him. Wouldn't surprise me if Forte lasted until day 2 that some teams push up in the 3rd.

For me, it isn't an issue of what Turner is or is not, but rather, who can be a legitimate challenger. I don't want a guy that's the number 2 to complement Benson with an outside shot of challenging for the lead role. I have a bad feeling that we might be looking at, say, a Mike Hart in day 2. If we find one, a legitimate challenger, then sure, I'd rather go that route.

The worst part is ... with all our money, what are we doing? Saving it for the non-existent interest? Granted, that's a whole separate issue.

agreed with pretty much everything here. and the briggs comparison was a bad one...yeah we payed it to him, but that didnt really help us with our need at RB now did it?

as for the RBs you mentioned, i think charles could do it. he seems like he would be a good one cut runner for when we break out 2 TEs (which i hope to god we do and do often) and forte i think is a very well rounded back.

the problem is that anyone we take after about round 2 just doesnt have a significant enough investment in to take the job away from benson.

i mean, we could find an ahmad bradshaw type in the 7th round who blows us the hell away with his ability, but becaues benson was a 4th overall pick with a lot of time and money in, theres no way someone drafted that late takes the job away.

its ******, but thats how it works im afraid.....it would take a reincarnation of walter f-wording payton to knock benson off legitimately im afraid.

so thats why i contend that we go o-line and beef that up so if we're stuck with benson, we at least give him the best situation possible to suck in

pellepelle_10
03-02-2008, 04:00 PM
Using Briggs as perspective isn't the best idea. I don't necessarily disagree with the base fact that Turner was overpaid, but that's the RB position. At RB, it's always been about potential due to the rapid wear and tear. Comparatively, as much as the LB position has grown over, say, the past decade or so in importance, it's still a position where teams feel they can find a player.

The reason I'd agree with pelle on this one is simple. Which RB in the 2nd tier is going to really push Benson? Sure, the top 3 RB's could push Benson, but the chances seem iffy of us taking a top 3 RB right now. So, who out of that 2nd tier pushes? Jamaal Charles' inconsistency? Ray Rice's lack of size? I could see a guy like Forte pushing, so that's a possibility, but with the dearth of big backs, there's going to be some teams going after him. Wouldn't surprise me if Forte lasted until day 2 that some teams push up in the 3rd.

For me, it isn't an issue of what Turner is or is not, but rather, who can be a legitimate challenger. I don't want a guy that's the number 2 to complement Benson with an outside shot of challenging for the lead role. I have a bad feeling that we might be looking at, say, a Mike Hart in day 2. If we find one, a legitimate challenger, then sure, I'd rather go that route.

The worst part is ... with all our money, what are we doing? Saving it for the non-existent interest? Granted, that's a whole separate issue.

No need to debate with this guy toons. He's so full of himself it hurts. Anyone who has a difference in opinion he nearly has a heart-attack. This is nearly the same amount we offered Cedric Benson, a runningback who didn't prove ANYTHING in the pro's. I don't see why we wouldn't pay the same for someone who has actually done something. He's only 26yrs old with very little mileage.

I've been an advocate for Jonathan Stewart and Rashard Mendenhall ever since the season began so I don't know what all the hostility is for. If anything this is showing more and more we may end up having no choice but to settle on one of these bruisers in the draft to create good competition for Benson. I do know this..if we do draft a Mendenhall or Stewart they will make a bundle of money with no Pro experience. I'm fine with either but Turner would have been a good option so we could free up the draft to go after more need positions. (offensive-line, now wide receiver, depth at dt, and a qb ala Flacco, Henne)

Someone keep this guy from the anti-depressants before he loses himself on this board. Its simply not that serious. lol

pellepelle_10
03-02-2008, 04:03 PM
agreed with pretty much everything here. and the briggs comparison was a bad one...yeah we payed it to him, but that didnt really help us with our need at RB now did it?

as for the RBs you mentioned, i think charles could do it. he seems like he would be a good one cut runner for when we break out 2 TEs (which i hope to god we do and do often) and forte i think is a very well rounded back.

the problem is that anyone we take after about round 2 just doesnt have a significant enough investment in to take the job away from benson.

i mean, we could find an ahmad bradshaw type in the 7th round who blows us the hell away with his ability, but becaues benson was a 4th overall pick with a lot of time and money in, theres no way someone drafted that late takes the job away.

its ******, but thats how it works im afraid.....it would take a reincarnation of walter f-wording payton to knock benson off legitimately im afraid.

so thats why i contend that we go o-line and beef that up so if we're stuck with benson, we at least give him the best situation possible to suck in

I hope this is not the case but what do we do..im simply not going to be Jerry Angelo's "fruit of the looms" ahem. He's dragging feet as usual and needs to learn from past mistakes that we're not as good as they've thought. This arrogance has gotten us into a lot of problems. They need to be more aggressive in bringing in help. We're simply not that good. I'm really hoping ur right Beer and toons. This is really getting bad Angelo hasn't made any real effort to show interest in ANY players. I agree we need to keep our own but there's more to it than that. Even with our current players we need ADDITIONAL help. Does Angelo realize this yet?

bearsfan_51
03-02-2008, 09:02 PM
It's a comparison between making logical choices and splurging in the market out of impulse and fear. Signing Michael Turner wouldn't push Benson, it would make Benson obsolete. Now, you could make the case that is a good thing, but you simply cannot tie up that much money into the runningback position. It affects our ability to resign Tommie, Devin, etc. By comparison, Marshawn Lynch was the 12th pick and he signed a 6 year-18 million dollar deal. Even I'm not sure we could budget that in the runningback position, but it's at least reasonable.

Also, you've got to think about the parameters of what we're talking about financially here. Did anyone actually think we were going to spend that 30 million in cap room? Just because the money is there metaphysically doesn't mean we're going to spend it. The Bears are primarily owned by a family. An incredibly rich family I'll grant you, but it's not like Dan Snyder or Jerry Jones where they can blow 40-50 million and not bat an eye. I'm sure that Angelo is given a budget by Ted Phillips that is quite different than what the salary cap looks like. That might not be a fun thing to think about as a fan, but it's the reality of being a fan of the Bears, always has been.

bearsfan_51
03-02-2008, 09:06 PM
I hope this is not the case but what do we do..im simply not going to be Jerry Angelo's "fruit of the looms" ahem. He's dragging feet as usual and needs to learn from past mistakes that we're not as good as they've thought. This arrogance has gotten us into a lot of problems. They need to be more aggressive in bringing in help. We're simply not that good. I'm really hoping ur right Beer and toons. This is really getting bad Angelo hasn't made any real effort to show interest in ANY players. I agree we need to keep our own but there's more to it than that. Even with our current players we need ADDITIONAL help. Does Angelo realize this yet?
If you want a team that spends a lot of money in the market there are a lot of teams out there. You live in Seattle no? I suggest the Seahawks. I mean honestly, I'm not trying to be a dick here (though your above comments were kind of cute), but if you're going to whine everytime we don't sign someone I would suggest a different team.

bearsfan_51
03-02-2008, 10:46 PM
By the way, I don't think anyone would argue that the contract we gave to Benson isn't terrible. I just looked it up and it made me cringe (5 years-35 million, 17 million in guarantees). But like I said before, that was the absolute worst draft to have a top 5 pick in. Most Bears fans wanted Mike Williams (which would have been even worse), as I recall Toonster wanted Cadillac Williams, and I personally wanted to trade up for Edwards (though obviously have no idea if that was ever a possibility).

Either way, that has definately ****** up our franchise, but short of passing on the pick altogether there weren't really any better options.

toonsterwu
03-02-2008, 11:51 PM
Just to be clear, my mantra was

ABC - Anybody but Cedric

My preference was Braylon, but if you remember the dynamics then, that was fairly unlikely even if he had been available and the news reports indicated all along that our focus was RB. Out of the RB's that were going to be there, I preferred to go Caddy over Cedric (as Ronnie was a certainty to be gone).

toonsterwu
03-02-2008, 11:58 PM
Speaking of Benson and obsolete, I wonder if that surgery will make him close to it. I mean ... the idea of Benson losing a step, as the Chicago Sun-Times article hinted at, is scary in it's own right.

Btw, I've got the outlines to a new mock going, with 13 picks in the bank (well, more have been sketched out). Won't be done for at least a week, as I've got a lot of stuff this week.

1. Miami Dolphins – QB Matt Ryan, Boston College
2. St. Louis Rams – DE/OLB Chris Long, Virginia
3. Atlanta Falcons – DT Glenn Dorsey, LSU
4. Oakland Raiders – OT Jake Long, Michigan
5. Kansas City Chiefs – OT Jeff Otah, Pittsburgh
6. New York Jets – OLB/DE Vernon Gholston, the Ohio State
7. Dallas Cowboys f/ San Francisco 49ers via New England Patriots – RB Darren McFadden
8. New Orleans Saints f/ Baltimore Ravens – DT Sedrick Ellis, USC
9. Cincinnati Bengals – OLB/DE Derrick Harvey, Florida
10. Baltimore Ravens f/ New Orleans Saints – CB Leodis McKelvin, Troy
11. Buffalo Bills – DE Quentin Groves, Auburn
12. Denver Broncos – OT Ryan Clady, Boise State
13. Carolina Panthers – OT Chris Williams, Vanderbilt

I think most expectations would be Mendenhall if the draft fell this way, but I figured I'd put it out there and get some reactions. (14-26 loosely look like

14. Chicago Bears – RB Rashard Mendenhall, Illinois
15. Detroit Lions – RB Jonathan Stewart, Oregon
16. Arizona Cardinals – CB Mike Jenkins, South Florida
17. Minnesota Vikings – DL Phillip Merling, Clemson
18. Houston Texans – LB Keith Rivers, USC
19. Philadelphia Eagles – S Kenny Phillips, the U
20. Tampa Bay Buccaneers – CB Aqib Talib, Kansas
21. Washington Redskins – CB Dominique Rodgers-Cromartie, Tennessee State
22. New England Patriots f/ Cleveland Browns via Dallas Cowboys – OLB Cliff Avril, Purdue
23. Pittsburgh Steelers – WR Malcolm Kelly, Oklahoma
24. Tennessee Titans – WR Limas Sweed, Texas
25. Seattle Seahawks – WR Devin Thomas, Michigan State
26. Jacksonville Jaguars – OG Branden Albert, Virginia

awfullyquiet
03-03-2008, 12:08 AM
By the way, I don't think anyone would argue that the contract we gave to Benson isn't terrible. I just looked it up and it made me cringe (5 years-35 million, 17 million in guarantees). But like I said before, that was the absolute worst draft to have a top 5 pick in. Most Bears fans wanted Mike Williams (which would have been even worse), as I recall Toonster wanted Cadillac Williams, and I personally wanted to trade up for Edwards (though obviously have no idea if that was ever a possibility).

Either way, that has definately ****** up our franchise, but short of passing on the pick altogether there weren't really any better options.

The contract isn't terrible. He made 2 mill a year based on his lack of incentives.

As far as Turner... All the experience, none of the loss of tread. What? 250 carries over 4 years? Potential. Upside. Power. Finesse. We could have paid turner the money, and benson would have only cost us 1.8 mil (his 850 yard bonus is huge though) To keep benson at 850 yards wouldn't have been hard, and if benson did happen to make 900 yards, it means, he'd probably be worth the money.

toonsterwu
03-03-2008, 12:14 AM
That is correct. Benson hasn't hit all his incentives, so his contract cost is actually much better. It's funny how one of his incentives is at 701 yards, and he hasn't hit it yet. I mean, NLTBE incentives are often a joke, but well, in this case, it's turned out true. He's getting there, though. 647, 674. Maybe 690 next year. Okay, that's a bit harsh, but the whole Sun-Times blurb about Benson potentially being a step slower has to scare the heck out of a Bears fan. I thought he was a slightly better A-Train when we drafted him, but it's scary to think that A-Train at the same age might've been faster.

Scary to think about the Michigan twosome being so long ago. Felt like yesterday. When we drafted Terrell in 2001, that was the first time I came on nfldc i think.

awfullyquiet
03-03-2008, 12:49 AM
That is correct. Benson hasn't hit all his incentives, so his contract cost is actually much better. It's funny how one of his incentives is at 701 yards, and he hasn't hit it yet. I mean, NLTBE incentives are often a joke, but well, in this case, it's turned out true. He's getting there, though. 647, 674. Maybe 690 next year. Okay, that's a bit harsh, but the whole Sun-Times blurb about Benson potentially being a step slower has to scare the heck out of a Bears fan. I thought he was a slightly better A-Train when we drafted him, but it's scary to think that A-Train at the same age might've been faster.

Scary to think about the Michigan twosome being so long ago. Felt like yesterday. When we drafted Terrell in 2001, that was the first time I came on nfldc i think.

nuts. 701. not 850.

I read that today and freaked out. I really think i can outrun benson now from the way mulligan wrote it. a 6.2 40

bearsfan_51
03-03-2008, 01:03 AM
That's true, I forgot how incentive laden his contract was. Silly runningbacks, when will they learn?

Regardless, we're much better off allocating our recourses elsewhere. It's not that Benson doesn't need some very serious competition, I hope that we get a runningback in the first 3 rounds (you can draw criticisms of Charles or Rice, but both can be starting backs in the league IMO).

I mean..if you look over the other free agents:

Faneca is a great guard, but he's past his prime, doesn't play a position of great financial importance (even in this changing market), and the Steelers have an uncanny ability to know when a player is no longer worth keeping around.

Berrian should have been franchised in my opinion. That said, I would not have wanted us to give him the contract he got. I wouldn't have been against it mind you, but he's certainly not going to earn all of that money. It's a luxury I think the Vikings could more easily afford as they already have some of the other pieces in place.

Other than that, what big free agents were there? I can see the case for Turner, but he got elite money, and I don't think the return on investment will ever be what they paid. I understand that's usually how free agency works, but isn't that more of an argument why we don't need to be Snyder/Arthur Blank-like spenders?

Obviously this draft is incredibly important for Angelo. I've made no bones about the fact that I love the guy more than any player on the team, but even I say that if he can't get at least two gems of offensive players in this draft he's going to have to step aside for someone who can. That said, I don't think Michael Turner is going to make or break our season next year, and that's a panic free agent signing IMO.

bearsfan_51
03-03-2008, 01:11 AM
I will say this though, we need to sign a receiver with some starting experience. Whether it's Johnson, Hackett, hell even I would be ok if we gave Javon Walker an incentive-laden contract.

Point is, this talk about drafting a receiver in the first round scares me. I don't believe it, but there was something in the Sun-Times about how they feel nobody left is a #1 receiver (true) and that they are likely to go to the draft to find that.

I get the idea of Berrian not being a #1 receiver and so thus not paying him like one. However, if there is a need that can be put off for future years it's wide receiver. The offensive line MUST be adressed for the future and for the now.

awfullyquiet
03-03-2008, 01:26 AM
I will say this though, we need to sign a receiver with some starting experience. Whether it's Johnson, Hackett, hell even I would be ok if we gave Javon Walker an incentive-laden contract.

Point is, this talk about drafting a receiver in the first round scares me. I don't believe it, but there was something in the Sun-Times about how they feel nobody left is a #1 receiver (true) and that they are likely to go to the draft to find that.

I get the idea of Berrian not being a #1 receiver and so thus not paying him like one. However, if there is a need that can be put off for future years it's wide receiver. The offensive line MUST be adressed for the future and for the now.

i don't get how GM's don't understand the offensive line is the key to any mediocre talented team overachieving. And by GM's i do mean the redskins.

incentive laden contracts are okay except for the numbers it put against the cap. i wish i knew where that extra money goes though. i'm not a big enough cap-follower to know that. i'd be okay with many players as long as we get a good price for them. The real issue though is that tons of these contracts we see that are huge, we have no idea what the specifics are ever. I doubt berrian will ever see that much money from the vikes.

bearsfan_51
03-03-2008, 01:31 AM
Go to rotoworld.com, it's a gem. That's where I get all my contract numbers. I also posted a thread about how much every player counts against the cap this year. It's pre-Briggs though.

And to answer you question, it's 16 mil guaranteed, 23 million in the first three years, so he'll see a fair share of it, probably all of it considering he's pretty young.

pellepelle_10
03-03-2008, 02:08 AM
If you want a team that spends a lot of money in the market there are a lot of teams out there.

There's a difference between dumping cash and SHOWING INTEREST or better yet BRINGING IN SOMEONE AS IF THEY WANT TO MAKE SOME PROGRESS. Something we have yet to do this offseason despite the plethora of needs we have to fill.


I mean honestly, I'm not trying to be a dick here (though your above comments were kind of cute)

Aww that made me blush. Why thank you. As for trying to be a dick you've already taken the cake. Tell us something we don't already know. It only took me the first time to comment on the Bears Team Forum to figure that out.


but if you're going to whine everytime we don't sign someone I would suggest a different team.

I'd rather watch you rip holes in your chair and belittle everyone who has a difference on opinion than yourself oh wise one. You're rather entertaining. Keep up the good work! *applauds*

bearsfan_51
03-03-2008, 02:21 AM
I really have no idea what you're talking about. I told you to get some perspective, which you've still completely failed to do. Nothing you've said so far has gone beyond total hyperbole. As for the rest, I can assure you I've never spent a second giving a **** what you think or do, if you get your jollies out of me making fun of you, go right ahead and continue to offer up stupid comments.

I guess if we brought people in, fed them, and then didn't sign them to ridiculous contracts that would make you happier. Whatever floats your boat.

pellepelle_10
03-03-2008, 02:26 AM
By the way, I don't think anyone would argue that the contract we gave to Benson isn't terrible. I just looked it up and it made me cringe (5 years-35 million, 17 million in guarantees)

The way you've been running off I'd figure you'd already know this one oh wise one. Yes this is why I've already stated that we could have at least showed interest or brought the guy in. Hopefully you will listen to what I'm saying instead of jumping the gun trying to drown peoples opinions. I've seen many posters make credible statements. Maybe you should try listening to them instead of making yourself into some knowall.

Again

Signing Turner to a 35 million contract seems to be much more logical than giving it to some unproven rookie runningback don't ya think!?! It's nice that you finally know that Benson had the same deal. How long ago was this contract signed? 3yrs ago? *rolling eyes* Maybe it's you that needs to think about what YOU'RE saying.


But like I said before, that was the absolute worst draft to have a top 5 pick in. Most Bears fans wanted Mike Williams (which would have been even worse), as I recall Toonster wanted Cadillac Williams, and I personally wanted to trade up for Edwards (though obviously have no idea if that was ever a possibility).

go on..stomp on more posters while patting yourself on the back.


Either way, that has definately ****** up our franchise, but short of passing on the pick altogether there weren't really any better options.

You're going on a tangent and I'm losing this entirely. My point was Chicago is blowing it for not even bringing in Turner to discuss anything. He's a very valuable runningback who would definatelly bring competition at the position. He's young..far more proven than any rookie we bring in and we could have at least put forth a worthy offer to entertain a signing. Whose to say even if we offered a few million less he wouldn't have preferred us for the simple fact we're a home team he would have loved to play for. We don't know this because we never made an offer to the guy. We simply dropped the ball and sat on our asses.

awfullyquiet
03-03-2008, 02:28 AM
There's a difference between dumping cash and SHOWING INTEREST or better yet BRINGING IN SOMEONE AS IF THEY WANT TO MAKE SOME PROGRESS. Something we have yet to do this offseason despite the plethora of needs we have to fill.

Aww that made me blush. Why thank you. As for trying to be a dick you've already taken the cake. Tell us something we don't already know. It only took me the first time to comment on the Bears Team Forum to figure that out.

I'd rather watch you rip holes in your chair and belittle everyone who has a difference on opinion than yourself oh wise one. You're rather entertaining. Keep up the good work! *applauds*

Pelle. Not to really defend bf here.
But why show interest if you don't need to. Right now we're not pushed to cap. We wont' be this year. I think we're in a place to make some decent strides in the draft that the FA coulda filled, but not at a price we were looking at. There's still some time though, the FA period isn't over, it's not done, there's still time and players outstanding.

He belittles everyone because he thinks he's right, and for the most part, he isn't stupid. but, this is football, and it's as subjective as music (and if you ask ERU something about this, he'll say it's ridiculous). There is a right way, and a wrong way. Calling BF out is normal. And if you can't stand up to an intense stupid array of criticisms. tits or gtfo.

bearsfan_51
03-03-2008, 02:30 AM
Are you ******* mental? Do you have any idea what a rookie contract for the 14th pick is? I'll give you a hint, it's about half of what Benson got. In fact, I already put Marshawn Lynch's numbers up there, and that was at the 12 spot.

Turner got a contract much bigger than what any runningback would get at 14, and I'd take Mendenhall or Stewart over him any day of the week.


Either that, or you're arguing with me on a point that nobody would disagree with. Of course the Benson pick was terrible, but like I laid out (in what you incorrectly thought was me trying to make myself look smart), there were no good options there. There wasn't a player on the board that would have been worth that money.

And you don't have a clue what we did. Hence the total hyperbole.

pellepelle_10
03-03-2008, 02:41 AM
I really have no idea what you're talking about.

I wouldn't expect you to.


I told you to get some perspective, which you've still completely failed to do.

yes dad


Nothing you've said so far has gone beyond total hyperbole.

Actually i'm just voicing my opinion just like everyone else on this board.


As for the rest, I can assure you I've never spent a second giving a **** what you think or do

IC you're still responding to my posts at all hours of the day so you must. *wink*


if you get your jollies out of me making fun of you, go right ahead and continue to offer up stupid comments.

This is true entertainment. You're a character. What can I say. You sit back and criticize opinions on a regular basis. Its one thing to have a difference of opinion..comment how you feel about it and have a friendly debate. You simply come of as if you're JA himself. You need some fresh air man. The cathode rays are getting the best of you.


I guess if we brought people in, fed them, and then didn't sign them to ridiculous contracts that would make you happier. Whatever floats your boat.

What like the one we f-d ourselves on already with the unproven bust Ceddy? The one you've just now figured received the SAME CONTRACT as a guy whose 26, played in the league 4yrs with low mileage, and never really missed a beat from the starter LT? Noooway!!! Hey JA who are we taking next. It must be that O-Lineman you've been ripping me to shreds for the past 24 months or better yet, your newfound love for runningback in the top tier of the draft.

pellepelle_10
03-03-2008, 02:43 AM
Pelle. Not to really defend bf here.
But why show interest if you don't need to. Right now we're not pushed to cap. We wont' be this year. I think we're in a place to make some decent strides in the draft that the FA coulda filled, but not at a price we were looking at. There's still some time though, the FA period isn't over, it's not done, there's still time and players outstanding.

He belittles everyone because he thinks he's right, and for the most part, he isn't stupid. but, this is football, and it's as subjective as music (and if you ask ERU something about this, he'll say it's ridiculous). There is a right way, and a wrong way. Calling BF out is normal. And if you can't stand up to an intense stupid array of criticisms. tits or gtfo.

I hear ya quiet and we all have our differences of opinions. I hear what you're saying about the FA and all we can do is voice what we see. None of us r JA so all we can do is speculate. We all could be wrong. *shrugs*

bearsfan_51
03-03-2008, 02:44 AM
He belittles everyone because he thinks he's right, and for the most part, he isn't stupid.
If telling someone to get some perspective is considered belittling now I fear for the status of our civilization. ****, that's not even the harshest thing I've said today.

And everything is subjective, but there's still a difference between a thoughtful and well-informed argument and hyperbole and dribble.

Toonster and I have been on this same board for over two years, we disagree on tons of things, far more often than we agree, to my knowledge I don't think either of us has ever disrespected the other in any way because he lays out his arguments in a thoughtful manner.

Smokey I like to **** with, and probably have been too mean to him at times(about the only person I would say that about), but I actually agree with him 9/10. Him and me were the Bears board for a few months there.

There are others as well, but those are the two that stand out to me. I suppose some people would feel bad about your above comments. I don't. I have enough time in my real life trying to pacify the feelings of the people that matter to me. I come off here to avoid doing my dissertation and blow off steam. Like you said, if you get all hot and bothered by some internet comments, maybe there is a Ziggy chatboard somewhere that's more friendly.

Or there's always the Seahawks.

bearsfan_51
03-03-2008, 02:46 AM
It must be that O-Lineman you've been ripping me to shreds for the past 24 months or better yet, your newfound love for runningback in the top tier of the draft.
No idea what this means. Probably because I honestly don't remember anything you've said other than "Benson sucks" (speaking of original).

I don't want a runningback in the first round, but I'm also not a huge fan of Otah so I wouldn't hate it. I think we absolutely have to adress our offensive line, without that it really doesn't matter what else we do.

pellepelle_10
03-03-2008, 02:47 AM
Speaking of Benson and obsolete, I wonder if that surgery will make him close to it. I mean ... the idea of Benson losing a step, as the Chicago Sun-Times article hinted at, is scary in it's own right.

Btw, I've got the outlines to a new mock going, with 13 picks in the bank (well, more have been sketched out). Won't be done for at least a week, as I've got a lot of stuff this week.

1. Miami Dolphins QB Matt Ryan, Boston College
2. St. Louis Rams DE/OLB Chris Long, Virginia
3. Atlanta Falcons DT Glenn Dorsey, LSU
4. Oakland Raiders OT Jake Long, Michigan
5. Kansas City Chiefs OT Jeff Otah, Pittsburgh
6. New York Jets OLB/DE Vernon Gholston, the Ohio State
7. Dallas Cowboys f/ San Francisco 49ers via New England Patriots RB Darren McFadden
8. New Orleans Saints f/ Baltimore Ravens DT Sedrick Ellis, USC
9. Cincinnati Bengals OLB/DE Derrick Harvey, Florida
10. Baltimore Ravens f/ New Orleans Saints CB Leodis McKelvin, Troy
11. Buffalo Bills DE Quentin Groves, Auburn
12. Denver Broncos OT Ryan Clady, Boise State
13. Carolina Panthers OT Chris Williams, Vanderbilt

I think most expectations would be Mendenhall if the draft fell this way, but I figured I'd put it out there and get some reactions. (14-26 loosely look like

14. Chicago Bears RB Rashard Mendenhall, Illinois
15. Detroit Lions RB Jonathan Stewart, Oregon
16. Arizona Cardinals CB Mike Jenkins, South Florida
17. Minnesota Vikings DL Phillip Merling, Clemson
18. Houston Texans LB Keith Rivers, USC
19. Philadelphia Eagles S Kenny Phillips, the U
20. Tampa Bay Buccaneers CB Aqib Talib, Kansas
21. Washington Redskins CB Dominique Rodgers-Cromartie, Tennessee State
22. New England Patriots f/ Cleveland Browns via Dallas Cowboys OLB Cliff Avril, Purdue
23. Pittsburgh Steelers WR Malcolm Kelly, Oklahoma
24. Tennessee Titans WR Limas Sweed, Texas
25. Seattle Seahawks WR Devin Thomas, Michigan State
26. Jacksonville Jaguars OG Branden Albert, Virginia

I love the pick. I can't wait until it finally happens so peeps like bearfan_51 can chomp on a platefull of crow. lol

awfullyquiet
03-03-2008, 02:47 AM
Turner got a contract much bigger than what any runningback would get at 14, and I'd take Mendenhall or Stewart over him any day of the week.

If either of them perform at 70% of what Turner does at 40% of the cost. It's a victory IMO.

Pelle. I don't see why you're hating on BF so much. Is it that bad in seattle right now?

bearsfan_51
03-03-2008, 02:51 AM
I really do think I hurt his feelings. Honestly pelle I didn't know I meant that much to you.

You wanna e-hug?

http://blog.masslive.com/tuningout/large_dog-and-cat-hugWoofstock2004-320.JPG

bearsfan_51
03-03-2008, 02:52 AM
If either of them perform at 70% of what Turner does at 40% of the cost. It's a victory IMO.
I suck at math. Break this down into paragraph form.

awfullyquiet
03-03-2008, 02:52 AM
If telling someone to get some perspective is considered belittling now I fear for the status of our civilization. ****, that's not even the harshest thing I've said today.

And everything is subjective, but there's still a difference between a thoughtful and well-informed argument and hyperbole and dribble.



Agreed. I have a penchant for the exaggeration though, so don't take the belittling as anything more than punching noobs.

pellepelle_10
03-03-2008, 02:59 AM
No idea what this means. Probably because I honestly don't remember anything you've said other than "Benson sucks" (speaking of original).

I don't want a runningback in the first round, but I'm also not a huge fan of Otah so I wouldn't hate it. I think we absolutely have to adress our offensive line, without that it really doesn't matter what else we do.

http://www.nfldraftcountdown.com/forum/showpost.php?p=726441&postcount=67

Maybe I'll refresh your memory 11-13-2007


Stewart is a fine player, but he will clearly come at a 1st round price, which will require us once again to carry Benson as our backup or eat all of his salary, something that I don't think we could do if we wanted to. Not to mention that we would completely ignore our other needs. It's simply not going to happen.

Please..continue..I'm loving this. LMAO

pellepelle_10
03-03-2008, 03:01 AM
If either of them perform at 70% of what Turner does at 40% of the cost. It's a victory IMO.

Pelle. I don't see why you're hating on BF so much. Is it that bad in seattle right now?

I'm not hating..hahah..again this is entertainment. It's pretty nice to say the least. Other than Premium gas at $3.79 and homework due in the morning I guess you can say its ok.

awfullyquiet
03-03-2008, 03:10 AM
I suck at math. Break this down into paragraph form.

Good.

Here's the deal.
Project mendenhall or stewart to run for at least 630 yards in
Project Turner to run for at least 900 (with norwood running for ~400-500)

If mendenhall or steward make what marshawn lynch does (which is 18/6, 10 Firm... and 400k in the first year, which would be... .75k per yard). and benson is making around 780k and if he runs, say 690 yards. or 1.13k per yard.... meaning around 1k per yard averaged between them.
Turner would be 34/6 (essentially, 4k+ per yard in this situation). Why pay more when you get the same result (ish). Yards aren't touchdowns, sure, but, yards are clock killers.

Paying 2 RB's pennys to run 1400 yards is cheaper than paying 1 rb to run 1400 yards. That's my argument. I like turner and think he would ran well in chicago, BUT, for the price. no way.

bearsfan_51
03-03-2008, 03:13 AM
http://www.nfldraftcountdown.com/forum/showpost.php?p=726441&postcount=67

Maybe I'll refresh your memory 11-13-2007



Please..continue..I'm loving this. LMAO

You go around saving everyting everyone says do ya? Well that was what, four months ago? I still don't think that we'll take a runningback, but it's not out of the question now. The fact that Brohm and Woodson dropped like rocks really cleared the way for an alternative option, but I still think it's 70-80% we go offensive line.

awfullyquiet
03-03-2008, 03:16 AM
but I still think it's 70-80% we go offensive line.

Didn't we say that last year?

JA continues to surprise.

bearsfan_51
03-03-2008, 03:17 AM
Good.

Here's the deal.
Project mendenhall or stewart to run for at least 630 yards in
Project Turner to run for at least 900 (with norwood running for ~400-500)

If mendenhall or steward make what marshawn lynch does (which is 18/6, 10 Firm... and 400k in the first year, which would be... .75k per yard). and benson is making around 780k and if he runs, say 690 yards. or 1.13k per yard.... meaning around 1k per yard averaged between them.
Turner would be 34/6 (essentially, 4k+ per yard in this situation). Why pay more when you get the same result (ish). Yards aren't touchdowns, sure, but, yards are clock killers.

Paying 2 RB's pennys to run 1400 yards is cheaper than paying 1 rb to run 1400 yards. That's my argument. I like turner and think he would ran well in chicago, BUT, for the price. no way.

Besides, you can find great RB's in the top of the draft lately. Lynch and AD are proof. Terrell isn't.
Yes. Well put. Not to mention that runningback is not a position that you can exclusively rely on one player anymore, so no matter who we get they are going to share the wealth so to speak (assuming there is any wealth to share). There are really very few runningbacks that I would take as top 10 picks or give 20+ million in signing bonuses to. Turner doesn't seem like he'll ever be the type to take a game over by himself. Perhaps in spurts, but not enough to demand that type of money.

bearsfan_51
03-03-2008, 03:18 AM
Didn't we say that last year?

JA continues to surprise.
Actually I think I was more in agreement with pelle last year about OL. I loved the Greg Olsen pick like a fat kids loves cake.

But it's time has come. We cannot put it off any longer.

awfullyquiet
03-03-2008, 03:25 AM
Actually I think I was more in agreement with pelle last year about OL. I loved the Greg Olsen pick like a fat kids loves cake.

But it's time has come. We cannot put it off any longer.

And everyone knows it too. Everyone and their mom should know, after you drop two linemen, you will be picking OL in the draft.

That being said, it's really gonna be fun come round one. because either it's going to be ol, rb, ol. or rb, ol, ol. unless there's some serious talent that lands in our faces.

pellepelle_10
03-03-2008, 03:28 AM
You go around saving everyting everyone says do ya? Well that was what, four months ago? I still don't think that we'll take a runningback, but it's not out of the question now. The fact that Brohm and Woodson dropped like rocks really cleared the way for an alternative option, but I still think it's 70-80% we go offensive line.

hmm..funny how you've commented our need for a runningback all of a sudden.(i even commended you on a few of YOUR mocks because of it) .or do you want me to slap you around with those posts again..trust me its not hard for me to find. I have very few posts unlike yourself. I wouldn't dare search through pages upon pages of your wavoring opinions. This sh_t is porous like Wisconsin Cheese.

http://www.nfldraftcountdown.com/forum/showpost.php?p=753806&postcount=1

http://www.nfldraftcountdown.com/forum/showpost.php?p=772728&postcount=191

awfullyquiet
03-03-2008, 03:30 AM
You go around saving everyting everyone says do ya? Well that was what, four months ago? I still don't think that we'll take a runningback, but it's not out of the question now. The fact that Brohm and Woodson dropped like rocks really cleared the way for an alternative option, but I still think it's 70-80% we go offensive line.

i think he uses the 'advanced search' function.

bearsfan_51
03-03-2008, 03:36 AM
hmm..funny how you've commented our need for a runningback all of a sudden.(i even commended you on a few of YOUR mocks because of it) .or do you want me to slap you around with those posts again..trust me its not hard for me to find. I have very few posts unlike yourself. I wouldn't dare search through pages upon pages of your wavoring opinions. This sh_t is porous like Wisconsin Cheese.

http://www.nfldraftcountdown.com/forum/showpost.php?p=753806&postcount=1

http://www.nfldraftcountdown.com/forum/showpost.php?p=772728&postcount=191
Are you serious?

How does that contradict ANYTHING I've said.

Felix Jones in the 2nd isn't the same as giving Michael Turner 20 million dollars. Nor is saying that we need to get another runningback. Another runningback to me is Felix Jones, Jamaal Charles, Ray Rice, or Kevin Smith in rounds 2 or 3.

If you're going to criticize me at least have some ground to stand on. You're not even disagreeing with me. Find a post where I said that we should give a runningback 23-24 million in guarantees. I never said we don't need another runningback, that would be stupid, I just think it's not our most important need.

pellepelle_10
03-03-2008, 03:40 AM
i think he uses the 'advanced search' function.

Actually I search my commentary. His ridicule follows my posts like flies to sh_t. It's not too hard to forget. He always has some pompus remark to make. I'll now take it for what its worth............................................. .................................................. ..................................

pellepelle_10
03-03-2008, 03:57 AM
Are you serious?

How does that contradict ANYTHING I've said.

Felix Jones in the 2nd isn't the same as giving Michael Turner 20 million dollars. Nor is saying that we need to get another runningback. Another runningback to me is Felix Jones, Jamaal Charles, Ray Rice, or Kevin Smith in rounds 2 or 3.

If you're going to criticize me at least have some ground to stand on. You're not even disagreeing with me. Find a post where I said that we should give a runningback 23-24 million in guarantees. I never said we don't need another runningback, that would be stupid, I just think it's not our most important need.


Originally Posted by bearsfan_51
Stewart is a fine player, but he will clearly come at a 1st round price, which will require us once again to carry Benson as our backup or eat all of his salary, something that I don't think we could do if we wanted to. Not to mention that we would completely ignore our other needs. It's simply not going to happen.

Apparently not genius. So much you said we have other needs? So why would you have the 2nd round (a VERY HIGH PICK which most NEEDS or HIGH VALUE PICKS are addressed) containing a runningback of all positions? Get your stuff straight. You're confused. You have some nerve trying to bash anyone on this board. lol. I think the dissertation is calling you. I admit. This circus act needs to hit Vegas. You will get paid good money for this. Ringling Bros., Barnum & Bailey..eat your heart out!

BeerBaron
03-03-2008, 08:23 AM
good lord people whats all this about then?

hell, i change my thoughts on subjects all the time. i usually keep the same general idea but ill start to swing different directions with it....like how i was against the bears going running back once upon a time and now ive just sort of accepted it though i dont think it should be a first round need reallly...oh well

lookslike i missed out on a good long argument though, lol. and what the **** were you guys doing up at 430am? that'd be too early for me to get up to watch football, much less argue about it, lol

Bighead734
03-03-2008, 08:32 AM
I didn't read all these posts because it started to sound like Jr. High kids bickering, but I agree with bearsfan_51 about Michael Turner. I don't think he's worth that much money...to the Bears. We are keeping Cedric Benson because we're going to ride out our investment at least for another year and see if he can improve after getting healthy.

But the key, as always, is improving the offensive line. Benson rushed for 4.1 yards a career through his first two seasons and actually showed the burst to get by linebackers at times. If any of you know anything about blocking and holes, you could see that the Bears were creating nothing for any of our RBs. (And this rumor about Bears players not wanting to block for Benson is proposterous - "You play to win the game!")

We drafted Benson as a Larry Johnson-style back. He's not going to have AP-like runs or even LT-like runs, but if given any type of blocking at all I think he still has a chance.

That said, the RB position does need to be addressed and will be in the first three rounds. A RB at 14 would cost the Bears about the same as Marshawn Lynch's contract which isn't much. The Bears can also grab a RB in the 2nd or 3rd that could make a difference.

My point is, is that if you thought we were going to sign multiple to-tier free agents, you were living in dream world. The Bears have never done it that way and have always built through the draft. I think the Bears will sign a WR, Julius Jones (may cost too much though), an OLman or S, but it won't be for nearly $40 mil, $20 of which is up front.

Gay Ork Wang
03-03-2008, 09:25 AM
Apparently not genius. So much you said we have other needs? So why would you have the 2nd round (a VERY HIGH PICK which most NEEDS or HIGH VALUE PICKS are addressed) containing a runningback of all positions? Get your stuff straight. You're confused. You have some nerve trying to bash anyone on this board. lol. I think the dissertation is calling you. I admit. This circus act needs to hit Vegas. You will get paid good money for this. Ringling Bros., Barnum & Bailey..eat your heart out!
Do u realize these threads were made in November....freaking November. The Giants sucked and the packers couldve won the SB. We wouldve been mad happy to pick Woodson at that point. Hell everyone changes there mind. Everyone. Why is it such a big deal if he said about 3 months ago that we wouldnt pick a RB and now he thinks: hm maybe it is an acceptable idea?
I really dont get why u r upset.

Bf said he wouldnt have paid Turner that money. I wouldnt have either. Is he a RB in the league? yes. Is he good? yes. Is he proven? No. I mean we was playing behind one of the best RBs ever and had a monster oline. Like Geo said, when he came onto the field it was the 4th Quarter. the D# was tired. Again im not saying that he is bad, but he is not proven yet IMO. So why pay such a player with #1 RB money?

bearsfan_51
03-03-2008, 10:22 AM
Pelle that might have been the dumbest ******* thing I've ever heard. I'll say it again, there's a difference between giving Michael Turner 23 million in guarantees and drafting a runningback in the 2nd round. You will find nobody that agrees with you.

BeerBaron
03-03-2008, 10:49 AM
im still willing to wager that a first round RB is only a backup choice to tackle at this point. i think that williams has got to be the prime choice pick right now with maybe mendenhall behind him.

though i think if williams isnt there, we try to trade down. seems to be a reasonable. if we cant, i say mendenhall. if we do, i think otah. maybe even otah at 14 if he hasnt hurt his own stock enough to turn the bears off to him.

but this whole running back thing....i blame cedric benson. if he would have just worked out like a #4 pick should....that bastard!

if you wanna know something funny, i was in favor of going mike williams and jj arrington that year, lol. at least if we did that, we would know that they were both terrible by now and could have moved on....

awfullyquiet
03-03-2008, 11:45 AM
Apparently not genius. So much you said we have other needs? So why would you have the 2nd round (a VERY HIGH PICK which most NEEDS or HIGH VALUE PICKS are addressed) containing a runningback of all positions? Get your stuff straight. You're confused. You have some nerve trying to bash anyone on this board. lol. I think the dissertation is calling you. I admit. This circus act needs to hit Vegas. You will get paid good money for this. Ringling Bros., Barnum & Bailey..eat your heart out!

I don't think you understand.

A second round or third round pick will give us something that can be very productive.

e.g. kenny irons, mjd, julius jones, clinton portis, ladell betts, brian westbrook.

look how these guys did their rookie years? worst case scenerio, we don't get an improvement on benson with them. best case scenario? we can have an adequate one two punch that'll make both our receivers look better, our quarterback look better...

i'm jumping on the, we at least need some running back if we can, bandwagon.

sweetness34
03-03-2008, 11:48 AM
I'll step in for '51 on here...He's always respectful of other people's opinions, and a lot of time he gives people ****, including me. The fact is he and toonster are bar none two of the best posters we have on this entire board. They know a lot, they really do.

Are they right all the time? No, but neither are the so called "experts" of the NFL.

First off with the whole RB thing, Rashard won't be there at 14 IMO. His stock is soaring right now and I've been hearing Carolina is intrigued with him at #10.

Secondly, I think we'll address OT (Williams or Otah) at #14 unless someone slips. You don't dump Miller and Brown without addressing the OL in the draft early and I love Kris Williams, that way we could move Tait back to the right side because Williams is a LT prospect.

Thirdly, a guy like Jones or Charles would be awesome in the 2nd or 3rd. Jones won't be there but I think Charles will. And there is no way in hell we should have given Turner that kind of money. He's a nice looking back but it remains to be seen if he can carry a full load. And re-signing Briggs was priority #1 after Berrian left.

Granted I don't agree with Angelo on all things but I think he's done the right thing so far in this offseason. Like it or not, we are rebuilding, even if we re-sign Berrian, get Faneca, nab Turner, etc...We still have a QB issue, our running game isn't proven, we can't resign Briggs, and our Safeties are still a question mark. And even with Berrian back we still have question marks at WR.

It's time to get through the draft and make this team stronger because we are not going to make the Super Bowl this season or the next, we need to rebuild this team.

pellepelle_10
03-03-2008, 01:17 PM
good lord people whats all this about then?

hell, i change my thoughts on subjects all the time. i usually keep the same general idea but ill start to swing different directions with it....like how i was against the bears going running back once upon a time and now ive just sort of accepted it though i dont think it should be a first round need reallly...oh well

lookslike i missed out on a good long argument though, lol. and what the **** were you guys doing up at 430am? that'd be too early for me to get up to watch football, much less argue about it, lol

Must have been EST because I'm pst. Its one thing to change opinions but to be a complete knowall...change your opinion and then act like you never said it is another. It's in the bag..its really not that serious lol. I was just calling out what I saw. *shrugs*

pellepelle_10
03-03-2008, 01:57 PM
I'll step in for '51 on here...He's always respectful of other people's opinions, and a lot of time he gives people ****, including me. The fact is he and toonster are bar none two of the best posters we have on this entire board. They know a lot, they really do.

We're all entitled to opinions and I'll leave it at that.


Are they right all the time? No, but neither are the so called "experts" of the NFL.

Even experts are wrong. Its a given. Some just don't realize it, others do and admit it or shut up.


First off with the whole RB thing, Rashard won't be there at 14 IMO. His stock is soaring right now and I've been hearing Carolina is intrigued with him at #10.

and Atlanta is scratched off as a possibilty for getting McFadden. Again we agree to disagree on this and I respect this opinion. I can understand your point.


Secondly, I think we'll address OT (Williams or Otah) at #14 unless someone slips. You don't dump Miller and Brown without addressing the OL in the draft early and I love Kris Williams, that way we could move Tait back to the right side because Williams is a LT prospect.

I won't be upset with Williams and the O-Line clearly needs upgrading but again this is difference of opinions. Some feel O-Line will resolve both pass and rush. Others feel a RB who can make plays will produce despite the o-line and help the offense improve a-la LT during his first years in the league.


Thirdly, a guy like Jones or Charles would be awesome in the 2nd or 3rd. Jones won't be there but I think Charles will And there is no way in hell we should have given Turner that kind of money. He's a nice looking back but it remains to be seen if he can carry a full load.

Same can be said with many backs. Lamont Jordan, Chester Taylor, Marion Barber, Laurence Maroney, Steven Jackson, and Larry Johnson to name a few.


And re-signing Briggs was priority #1 after Berrian left.

couldn't agree more but I don't think this should have stopped the ability to entertain other players for other positions. These guy can multitask. Many teams do very well at this. Why can't we?


Granted I don't agree with Angelo on all things but I think he's done the right thing so far in this offseason.

He's performed marginal. I'm not upset he hasn't signed anyone..I'd have to say I'm more upset at the fact that he's not showing initiative to bring in players.


Like it or not, we are rebuilding, even if we re-sign Berrian, get Faneca, nab Turner, etc...We still have a QB issue, our running game isn't proven, we can't resign Briggs, and our Safeties are still a question mark. And even with Berrian back we still have question marks at WR.

It's time to get through the draft and make this team stronger because we are not going to make the Super Bowl this season or the next, we need to rebuild this team.

Fair enough.

awfullyquiet
03-03-2008, 03:42 PM
Granted I don't agree with Angelo on all things but I think he's done the right thing so far in this offseason. Like it or not, we are rebuilding, even if we re-sign Berrian, get Faneca, nab Turner, etc...We still have a QB issue, our running game isn't proven, we can't resign Briggs, and our Safeties are still a question mark. And even with Berrian back we still have question marks at WR.

It's time to get through the draft and make this team stronger because we are not going to make the Super Bowl this season or the next, we need to rebuild this team.

Yeah. I don't like the chances of the Bears the season to make the playoffs.

GB may have overachieved a bit, but the Vikings didn't. Either way, you have two almost playoff caliber teams to work against. With Berrian, Faneca, and Turner, we would have been making a run at the playoffs. This year it seems less likely.

bearsfan_51
03-03-2008, 03:50 PM
I never one time changed my opinion. I've tried to explain the difference between giving Michael Turner 20+ in guarantees and taking a runningback in the 2nd or 3rd round. So have other people. You still just don't ******* get it. Nobody is saying Benson is the answer, we're saying that's too much money for a guy that really hasn't proved ****. He's Lamont Jordan at this point in his career.

Then again, you're not even upset about that, you're upset that we aren't making enough headlines, because quite frankly you don't have a ******* clue who we are or aren't talking to, and neither does anyone else.

It could have been as simple as:

"Hey (insert agent name), we're interested in bringing Michael Turner in for a visit".

"Ok Jerry but we're already talking to Atlanta on a deal for 20 mil guaranteed"

-Click-

You're just whining to whine, and it's annoying. Either he's worth that money or he's not, but don't make this an argument about who we're having snacks with or not. That's laughable.

toonsterwu
03-03-2008, 04:37 PM
If there's a team that's going to jump on Mendenhall early, my guess would be Cincinnati at 9 (btw, Carolina has the 13th pick ... ). That's a team where, depending on how they pursue things (that is, if they still go 3-4) could look that way. The other darkhorse would be a jump by Seattle up.

Carolina's an interesting story. There are suggestions that Gross is moving back to LT, which I don't necessarily buy. I can't see them keeping Wharton at LT unless they have no other options. All that said, they could use pass rushing help as well. I think one of the more telling statements was that they basically said they would look for a complement to Deangelo., which implies to me that they want Deangelo as the lead back. Keep in mind that they actually zone blocked a bit, which fits Deangelo. Certainly possible they look big back early, but they have other needs as well.

bearfan
03-03-2008, 04:45 PM
I cant see the Bengals taking a RB w. all the defensive problems that they have, and the fact that they have Rudi Johnson, Kenny Watson, they also drafted Irons didnt they? And if they were to take a RB, you would think it is in their best interest to take one later on due to the pool of talent at the position over some of the others

pellepelle_10
03-03-2008, 05:11 PM
If there's a team that's going to jump on Mendenhall early, my guess would be Cincinnati at 9 (btw, Carolina has the 13th pick ... ). That's a team where, depending on how they pursue things (that is, if they still go 3-4) could look that way. The other darkhorse would be a jump by Seattle up.

Carolina's an interesting story. There are suggestions that Gross is moving back to LT, which I don't necessarily buy. I can't see them keeping Wharton at LT unless they have no other options. All that said, they could use pass rushing help as well. I think one of the more telling statements was that they basically said they would look for a complement to Deangelo., which implies to me that they want Deangelo as the lead back. Keep in mind that they actually zone blocked a bit, which fits Deangelo. Certainly possible they look big back early, but they have other needs as well.

I agree about the Seattle comment toons. I'm hoping Carolina doesn't go RB and allows Deangelo to get his year to prove his worth. He played well last year prior to injury. Hopefully they'll go Kenny Philips.

BeerBaron
03-03-2008, 05:18 PM
out of all the teams picking ahead of us, i cant with certainty say that RB is a top need for any of them.

one of them will end up with mcfadden because hes too valueable to pass up, and mendenhall may end up with one if another need guy they were targeting is gone. but i dont think any of them are going in with the idea of addressing RB as the top need...

and, in a way, i dont think we are either. im fairly certain that we've got to be looking at OTs there, chris williams specifically. if hes gone, i look for us to try and trade down like crazy and if we dont, maybe we go mendenhall or possibly reach a little for the LT deficient otah

pellepelle_10
03-03-2008, 05:33 PM
out of all the teams picking ahead of us, i cant with certainty say that RB is a top need for any of them.

one of them will end up with mcfadden because hes too valueable to pass up, and mendenhall may end up with one if another need guy they were targeting is gone. but i dont think any of them are going in with the idea of addressing RB as the top need...

and, in a way, i dont think we are either. im fairly certain that we've got to be looking at OTs there, chris williams specifically. if hes gone, i look for us to try and trade down like crazy and if we dont, maybe we go mendenhall or possibly reach a little for the LT deficient otah

It's pretty much a crap shoot as far as who takes what position. It could end up McFadden and the other RB's getting taken by some team nobody expected. (Leftwich going to Jacksonville or Peterson going to Minny) OT or RB would make sense for us but JA has evaded O-Line like the plague in our drafts. Thats my only issue with it. It makes sense to go either way although I'd prefer RB first.

bearsfan_51
03-03-2008, 05:34 PM
I find it interesting that Mayer mentioned Limas Sweed in his article today about Mike Mayock's mock. Could mean nothing, but the fact that the Bears are even throwing wide receivers names out there as 1st round possibilities is a change.

pellepelle_10
03-03-2008, 06:07 PM
If we don't show some interest in the remaining few or we end up short handed which doesn't seem impossible given Angelo's weak efforts this may be a possibility.

BeerBaron
03-03-2008, 06:21 PM
ugh, not sweed...id much much much rather have devin thomas. i think hes got future stud written all over him.

decent size, better than most speed....he was badly used in the mich st offense before this year though.

if we didnt have any other needs somehow, id love for him to be the first round pick

regoob2
03-03-2008, 06:40 PM
Devin Thomas in the first??? Get over the 4.33 it wasn't official. lol jk. I always liked Sweed and he's my favorite receiver in this draft. He has enough speed and can make plays, he can go up and get it. I wouldn't take any receiver in the first but if I had a gun to my head I'd take Sweed.

pellepelle_10
03-03-2008, 08:21 PM
Devin Thomas in the first??? Get over the 4.33 it wasn't official. lol jk. I always liked Sweed and he's my favorite receiver in this draft. He has enough speed and can make plays, he can go up and get it. I wouldn't take any receiver in the first but if I had a gun to my head I'd take Sweed.

lol..i agree 100% I think Thomas would be nice if he remained avail for the 2nd. I'd really like for us to nab Caldwell, or Hawkins in the later rnds if possible.

bearsfan_51
03-03-2008, 09:18 PM
I actually think Sweed would be a tremendous fit for our offense and what we're trying to do.

But cripes....talk about throwing the white flag out for next year.

pellepelle_10
03-03-2008, 09:33 PM
I actually think Sweed would be a tremendous fit for our offense and what we're trying to do.

But cripes....talk about throwing the white flag out for next year.

As much as I like Sweed you know as well as any WR is possibly one of the least productive 1st yrs for a rookie. This would DEFINATELLY mark the beginning of a rebuild for Chicago. Sweed is good but I can't exactly say he's set the scene like the WR's of last yrs draft did.

BeerBaron
03-03-2008, 09:45 PM
eh sweed.....meh.

i warmed up to him after he ran a sufficient 40 for a player like he is, but i dont think id want him...

like i said, i think devin thomas is the stud of this class. hes a blend of everything youd want physically in a WR.

i know theres like a .000000045 chance wed take him, but someone will get him and have a hell of a WR

awfullyquiet
03-04-2008, 09:08 PM
I cant see the Bengals taking a RB w. all the defensive problems that they have, and the fact that they have Rudi Johnson, Kenny Watson, they also drafted Irons didnt they? And if they were to take a RB, you would think it is in their best interest to take one later on due to the pool of talent at the position over some of the others

They did. Rudi, Watson, and Irons are called 'depth'. They'd be silly to pick up mendenhall there too. Irons showed flashes of what they want, and Rudi/Watson are great for the time being, With a defense, they'll properly evolve.