PDA

View Full Version : LSU DT Glenn Dorsey to the Bears?


cinnamonheart85
03-20-2008, 08:06 AM
Let's say that Glenn Dorsey falls out of the top 10 due to injury concerns and is on the board when the Chicago Bears select at #14. Should they consider taking Glenn Dorsey? He would be a perfect fit in the Cover 2 defense run by the Bears, and would start immediately next to Tommie Harris. I know about all the offensive needs for this franchise, but he would most definately be the best player available.

awfullyquiet
03-20-2008, 09:43 AM
i don't like it

he'd be a great guy in the 1 position, but i think need will still dictate otherwise. it depends on how the board falls above to them.

if it's a choice between top 4 OT's and Dorsey, they'll pick the OT

BeerBaron
03-20-2008, 09:59 AM
aye. i think in order for dorsey to fall past the teams even just ahead of us like denver and carolina, and especially before them in cincy and new orleans, they would have to be picking some of the guys we would want like chris williams, clady, otah or mendenhall.

so if he were to fall through all of them, i coudl see a few of them taking guys we want. but even then...our offense is just so messed up...

i can fathom it but man, i tihnk a lot would have to happen

awfullyquiet
03-20-2008, 11:30 AM
if dorsey fell to us, we'd be able to trade down. easy peasy.

BeerBaron
03-20-2008, 03:41 PM
if dorsey fell to us, we'd be able to trade down. easy peasy.

if he fell past everyone in front of us without anyone trading up, idk, his injury must be one hell of a concern. maybe we wouldnt find a trade down partner.

regoob2
03-20-2008, 05:55 PM
This is why I'm glad on not a GM, Dorsey is a great talent and has to be considered strongly there. i dont know honestly.

BeerBaron
03-20-2008, 06:25 PM
This is why I'm glad on not a GM, Dorsey is a great talent and has to be considered strongly there. i dont know honestly.

well ill pretend i am for a second. (and you all should thank god everyday that im not the bears GM, lol)

if hes there, and the OT's are gone, i take him. i bet every analyst in existence would rip the pick apart, but my god, if hes healthy, we would have one ungodly dline interior.

he and harris would put the old stroud/henderson duo to shame.....

now if chris williams were there lets say......man, tough call. if we let someone trade up with us to get dorsey, we risk having the lions snap williams right up. but if we could pick up a 1st and 2nd rounder maybe, fill our needs that way.....ugh, i just dk....

bearfan
03-20-2008, 06:57 PM
I would take him in a heartbeat. Yes we have a good defense, and offense needs the work, but to have a defensive line that looks like Brown (and anderson)/Harris/Dorsey/Ogun would give us the best line in all of football. I dont think you can pass up a skilled player like Dorsey (or Ellis if he somehow drops) to draft a position that is deep this year.

So it would maybe look something like:
1) Dorsey/Ellis
2) Nicks/Cherilious?/Baker?
3) Charles/Forte/Rice/whoever
3) OG
4) Johnson/Woodson/Ainge/Booty

So not really much of a difference in stuff that we predict/hope that we go with, just a step back.

BeerBaron
03-20-2008, 06:59 PM
aye yeah i can see that, but if we take a nicks or OT like that in round 2, we're basically guranteeing that we find ourselves in need of another OT in a few years when tait starts to go the way of fred miller.

i guess because we'd still be getting dorsey...it could be justified....our dline would be sick. very sick. assuming his health concerns arent really there.

bearsfan_51
03-20-2008, 07:00 PM
It won't happen.

But if it did happen, it's because his value would have dropped so low to place him below us. If there are teams that strongly need a DT passing on him (Saints, Broncos, Panthers to name three) he wouldn't be value to a team that doesn't.

BeerBaron
03-20-2008, 07:21 PM
It won't happen.

But if it did happen, it's because his value would have dropped so low to place him below us. If there are teams that strongly need a DT passing on him (Saints, Broncos, Panthers to name three) he wouldn't be value to a team that doesn't.

could turn out to be willis mcgahee like couldnt it? i mean, dorsey is a monster when hes healthy and thats where the concerns are about him now.

what if those teams simply have such a need there that they cant wait on him to get healthy. they take like, in the case of the saints a LB like rivers or the broncos and panthers go OT, just to get help sooner.

now i know we need help just as badly as they do at other spots, but if he would fall through them, he wouldnt necessarily have to be devalued that much

awfullyquiet
03-20-2008, 08:35 PM
It won't happen.

But if it did happen, it's because his value would have dropped so low to place him below us. If there are teams that strongly need a DT passing on him (Saints, Broncos, Panthers to name three) he wouldn't be value to a team that doesn't.

but not someone like the jags.

cinnamonheart85
03-20-2008, 08:57 PM
You all have written some thoughtful insights to my original question. Here is why I think that Dorsey would be a great selection if he were availble to the Bears at #14. The offense has so many needs (QB, RB, WR, OT, OG, etc.) that the Bears cannot possibly fix all this with one draft class. In my estimation, it may take 2-3 good draft classes + free agency to fix the offense in Chicago. So why not fill the need positions later and take the best player available (in this scenario, Dorsey, because of a fall in the draft due to injury concerns). The Bears can find a good RT in the 2nd and a QB and WR with the two 3rd round selections they have. RB's can always be found later, so the Bears can take a flyer on one in round 4. Any thoughts on this philosophy?

regoob2
03-20-2008, 09:11 PM
Well if all the picks panned out then it would be great, but there also lies the problem.

BeerBaron
03-20-2008, 09:17 PM
Well if all the picks panned out then it would be great, but there also lies the problem.

aye, agreed. your always more likely to have a higher round pick work out. i mean tehres always that chance that a 4th rounder turns out just as good as a first rounder but for the most part that doesnt happen as much.....

my philosophy is to usually try and fill needs and find guys who can be starters within 1 or 2 years while you use the late rounds for depth.

i think, worst case scenario, we could hold off on RB and WR until that late. S too. our starters could be servicable at least in those spots so we could take our time developing guys at those spots that late.

but i think with our 4 top 3 round picks, OT NEEDS to be taken. the rest can be shuffled a round or two depending on the value of the players at the positions of need still available.

bearsfan_51
03-20-2008, 10:56 PM
You all have written some thoughtful insights to my original question. Here is why I think that Dorsey would be a great selection if he were availble to the Bears at #14. The offense has so many needs (QB, RB, WR, OT, OG, etc.) that the Bears cannot possibly fix all this with one draft class. In my estimation, it may take 2-3 good draft classes + free agency to fix the offense in Chicago. So why not fill the need positions later and take the best player available (in this scenario, Dorsey, because of a fall in the draft due to injury concerns). The Bears can find a good RT in the 2nd and a QB and WR with the two 3rd round selections they have. RB's can always be found later, so the Bears can take a flyer on one in round 4. Any thoughts on this philosophy?
That's a fine thought, but again, you have to keep in mind WHY those teams which really need a DT would pass on Dorsey. If they would pass on Dorsey, why would he be the right fit for us when we actually do have much bigger needs.