PDA

View Full Version : Do you like Scott's new Mock Draft for the Bears?


gerky
04-12-2007, 05:08 PM
I'm a little skeptical about the recent mock draft that Scott has put up. I think the Bears are going to pick the best player at that point in the draft or they can possibly be adding depth at certain positions.

I haven't heard anything about Daniel Manning being moved to cornerback, which wouldn't be a bad idea considering that Tillman and Vasher's contracts are expiring soon. If these rumors are true, then I like the Michael Griffin pick.

The other pick I like is Quincy Black. He is a versatile outside linebacker just like Brian Urlacher was coming out of college. It provides depth at the position and a possible replacement for Lance Briggs.

The only pick I don't like is Ben Grubbs. I think they should consider taking a wide receiver here. Dwayne Jarrett could be here and so will Sidney Rice. They need someone to play beside Berrain in a couple of years after the Moose is gone.

bearfan
04-12-2007, 06:24 PM
I despise the 1st rounder, but love everything else. Griffen and Black are 2 guys that I have come to like, and I think would be very good for us. But missing out on reciever in the 1st round, especially with Jarrett there would kill the draft for me

Smokey Joe
04-12-2007, 07:46 PM
This is what I wrote in the Mock Draft Live thread about Scott's latest mock...

If it was between Jarrett and Grubbs for pick 31 for the Bears, I would hope JA would take Jarrett. Ruben Brown has been signed, and both Terrence Metcalf and Roberto Garza are signed long term. And apparently the org. is very high on Tyler Reed who was just drafted last year... OG IS NOT A FIRST ROUND NEED!

If Griffin is there at 37, I don't see how JA could pass him up. Even though they did just get AA and Mike Brown will be returning, I don't think you can pass on a talent like Griffin. And yes, Manning might be moving to CB to either replace Vasher or Tillman, who are both free agents at the end of the year. But, I am not ruling out the possibility of both of them returning.

I have no problem with Quincy Black, but I really think Brandon Jackson is going to be the pick for the Bears in the 3rd if he is there. But I have no problem with Quincy Black in the 3rd. I would say OLB is the biggest need on the team, but there just isn't good value early, and in no way do I think Durant would be worth 31, let alone 37.

pellepelle_10
04-13-2007, 12:07 AM
I'm a little skeptical about the recent mock draft that Scott has put up. I think the Bears are going to pick the best player at that point in the draft or they can possibly be adding depth at certain positions.

I haven't heard anything about Daniel Manning being moved to cornerback, which wouldn't be a bad idea considering that Tillman and Vasher's contracts are expiring soon. If these rumors are true, then I like the Michael Griffin pick.

The other pick I like is Quincy Black. He is a versatile outside linebacker just like Brian Urlacher was coming out of college. It provides depth at the position and a possible replacement for Lance Briggs.

The only pick I don't like is Ben Grubbs. I think they should consider taking a wide receiver here. Dwayne Jarrett could be here and so will Sidney Rice. They need someone to play beside Berrain in a couple of years after the Moose is gone.

First and formost I'm lost on the whole Minnesota Peterson pick. This is crazy. It makes absolutely no sense at all. I'm truly lost on that selection.


I'm a little shocked we just pass up on Jarrett who would IMO be an ideal replacement for Moose and just let him get taken by Tampa in the 2nd. We could just select him 31st and Grubbs 37th like one of his past drafts had it. To me this would be a better selection. As I am a big Griffin fan I don't understand drafting Grubbs 31st when several drafts have him 37th. Even Griffin 31st and Grubbs 37th makes more sense.

pellepelle_10
04-13-2007, 12:14 AM
This is what I wrote in the Mock Draft Live thread about Scott's latest mock...

VERY VERY well put Smokey. Grubbs has been talked up and it seems as though he could be very good...BUUUUUTTT we just pass up on Griffin who shouldn't drop this low AND Jarrett? C'mon now. How do we just pass up on Jarrett and LET him go to Tampa who would at that point would be a gaurantee to take him. We could get both Jarrett and Grubbs if we went Jarrett first. My whole point is if Grubbs drops to us he "should" still be there at 37. Why take him 31st when we can get him 37? Especially when we could have a WR that will not go past Tampa in the 2nd. Makes no sense to me. If Griffin drops this low we'd better take Griffin and Jarrett. JMO though.

awfullyquiet
04-13-2007, 02:59 AM
i dunno.

scott i think has some wires crossed. with minn and peterson. for sure.

as far as the bears. i don't think griffin will be around by 37. probably not by 31 either. safety is the biggest 'gamechanger' on D lately. seeing that it's the trendy topic amongst everyone. if griffin is gone by 37 do you still think were gonna be picking up a safety round 2?

OL still makes 'sense' i mean, as far as it can. if staley or grubbs is available we'll jump on that like a mouse in a bag. yeah, ruben is resigned. no he's still near thirty five. he's athletic, still plays well in our line, but how much longer does he got? oh, not much more than this year. which is good, because he's signed to a one year contract. we're not looking for a starter to fill in for brown. john st. clair and metcalf are the fill-ins. they won't maintain a starter postion. grubbs/beekman will be in after a year. brown will NOT be resigned one more year. ergo. OG is one of our tops.

I think the bears are going to look for an upgrade to Fred miller soon too. i don't know if it's gonna be through the draft (if its there, i hope they pull the trigger). I've never been consistantly impressed by him since he joined the bears. I mean, he's huge. Huge. Huge. Man has eagle wings. but he doesn't have the same push that he did, say, in 2004. i get distracted from my point easily. but the fact of the matter is, if we have top quality OT on our table, we'll take that before an OG because ruben still plays at a high level. for how long remains unknown, but miller doesn't play at the next level as often. give him the competition of some fresh young legs to beat him out. rookie elite linemen are a weird concept (with the exception of centers, because they're not real people)...

KBear
04-13-2007, 07:26 AM
The Griffin pick was a value pick. So if he is not there, I dont see the Bears going safty that early.

I'm fine with Grubbs in the first, I do think he will be there at the 37th pick, but he is still good value at 31. So I dont love the pick, but I dont mind it either. If the Bears dont grab one of the top 3 OG in this draft, then I would rather they not draft one at all, because they would not make the final roster.

I like the Black pick in the third, I would not mind a RB there, but I see RB more as a day 2 need then a day one selection.

Hurricane Ditka
04-13-2007, 12:09 PM
Ben Grubbs is a good pick. Ruben Brown can't play for ever. The offensive line is going to be a major target whether you like it or not Pele.

pellepelle_10
04-13-2007, 01:46 PM
Ben Grubbs is a good pick. Ruben Brown can't play for ever. The offensive line is going to be a major target whether you like it or not Pele.

I never said he wasn't. (how did you get this from my statement?) I did however say it would be assanine for us to select him with the 31st pick when there is a VERY HIGH chance we could get him at 37th. Nothing is pre-determined and none of us know the outcome of the draft but if I could get a top tier receiver and still have a HIGH CHANCE of getting a top tier Guard then I'd take the better of the two. I'll admit I don't want a guard drafted high but if we're after Grubbs taking him in the 1st wouldn't be smart play. There is no need taking a player higher than he may end up being taken hence the reason why I made my statement. You're gambling either way but Chicago could still be in favor of selecting Grubbs with the 37th pick. Missing out on another top tier player that will not last until 37th would not be smart drafting. Apparently I'm not the only one who see's this. *looks at Smokey and other posters commentary*

awfullyquiet
04-13-2007, 01:57 PM
pelle, who do you think is vital that the colts, raiders, brownies, bucs, lions will take between 31 and 37?

pellepelle_10
04-13-2007, 03:15 PM
pelle, who do you think is vital that the colts, raiders, brownies, bucs, lions will take between 31 and 37?

I think that the colts have a good chance at getting an OLB since Cato June is now gone. If they don't select an OLB I can see them adding some help for the DT position.

The Browns have many needs so its kinda hard to determine which way they'll go. Same goes with the Raiders. My hopes are Oakland goes DT or WR (assuming we've already acquired Jarrett) The only way I see them going WR is if Porter or Moss are gauranteed to leave. O-Line is definatelly a concern for them so there is a slight chance Grubbs could go then. Even if he did there is Sears and Blalock who could also be acquired with the 37th pick.

The lions are pretty sound (other than maybe qb) on offense so I don't really see them making it a priority in the top rnds of the draft. Defense has been a weakness for them and they have a lot of positions they could upgrade. They could end up going DB after trading Bly. This would be the most logical choice given their defense performed soso last season.

As for the Bucs they could also go many routes. They're defense is aging and they're in great need of a young defensive playmaker. On offense they also need a receiver to replace oldman Galloway who is still holding on. Quarterback could also be another option for them as well.

Hurricane Ditka
04-13-2007, 03:16 PM
Theres a good chance Grubbs will get taken in between 31 and 37. I'd rather have Jarrett, but I think Grubbs is a good pick.

Smokey Joe
04-13-2007, 03:43 PM
Grubbs will not be picked by the Bears in the first... and quote me on this now, OG WILL NOT BE TAKEN FIRST DAY BY THE BEARS, UNLESS THERE IS JUST INCREDIBLE VALUE THAT YOU CANNOT PASS UP!

Ruben Brown is back for at least one more season, and IMO, he should have another 2-3 good seasons left in him. OG is not as a physically taxing position like RB. Also, both Terrence Metcalf and Roberto Garza have both been signed LONG-TERM! But yes, they are kinda fillers rather than starts. BUT!, the organization has been very high on Tyler Reed from everything I have read, and it looks like he is who the organization will try and develop for another year or two, and groom to be a starter...

OT is a need... NOT OG!!!!!!!!!!!

pellepelle_10
04-13-2007, 03:47 PM
Grubbs will not be picked by the Bears in the first... and quote me on this now, OG WILL NOT BE TAKEN FIRST DAY BY THE BEARS, UNLESS THERE IS JUST INCREDIBLE VALUE THAT YOU CANNOT PASS UP!

Ruben Brown is back for at least one more season, and IMO, he should have another 2-3 good seasons left in him. OG is not as a physically taxing position like RB. Also, both Terrence Metcalf and Roberto Garza have both been signed LONG-TERM! But yes, they are kinda fillers rather than starts. BUT!, the organization has been very high on Tyler Reed from everything I have read, and it looks like he is who the organization will try and develop for another year or two, and groom to be a starter...

OT is a need... NOT OG!!!!!!!!!!!

I'm still standing on my comment regarding an offensive lineman not being taken in the 1st. I don't think its going to happen. If I'm wrong I'll glady eat crow. Doubters get your plates ready.

Hurricane Ditka
04-13-2007, 03:55 PM
Grubbs will not be picked by the Bears in the first... and quote me on this now, OG WILL NOT BE TAKEN FIRST DAY BY THE BEARS, UNLESS THERE IS JUST INCREDIBLE VALUE THAT YOU CANNOT PASS UP!

Ruben Brown is back for at least one more season, and IMO, he should have another 2-3 good seasons left in him. OG is not as a physically taxing position like RB. Also, both Terrence Metcalf and Roberto Garza have both been signed LONG-TERM! But yes, they are kinda fillers rather than starts. BUT!, the organization has been very high on Tyler Reed from everything I have read, and it looks like he is who the organization will try and develop for another year or two, and groom to be a starter...

OT is a need... NOT OG!!!!!!!!!!!Ruben Brown has a year left, tops. Terrance Mercalf is not starter material, he proved that last year, with Brown leaving next year, it's be nice to have Ruben's replacement on the roster. There are almost no reports of Tyler Reed, who was a bad pick last year to begin with. Reed is training camp fodder, he'll be lucky to make the 53 man roster, he's not even in the same escelon as Justin Blalock, Ben Grubbs, or Ryan Kalil. Offensive Guard, and Tackle are both needs, Fred Miller has very little left in the tank, and John Tait is better suited to play right tackle. I wouldn't mind Tony Ugoh at 37, but that's too early for James Marten.

Now quote me on this OFFENSIVE LINE will be taken on the first day by the Bears.

KBear
04-13-2007, 03:59 PM
The Bears probably wont get a chance to draft a good OT in this draft. I would just rather pass on them all together or just use one of our 7th rounders on one to put on the practice squad and develop like they are doing with Reed.

Smokey Joe
04-13-2007, 05:05 PM
Ruben Brown has a year left, tops. Terrance Mercalf is not starter material, he proved that last year, with Brown leaving next year, it's be nice to have Ruben's replacement on the roster. There are almost no reports of Tyler Reed, who was a bad pick last year to begin with. Reed is training camp fodder, he'll be lucky to make the 53 man roster, he's not even in the same escelon as Justin Blalock, Ben Grubbs, or Ryan Kalil. Offensive Guard, and Tackle are both needs, Fred Miller has very little left in the tank, and John Tait is better suited to play right tackle. I wouldn't mind Tony Ugoh at 37, but that's too early for James Marten.

Now quote me on this OFFENSIVE LINE will be taken on the first day by the Bears.
I put your quote in my sig... if your a man, you will put mine in yours (this sounds like when we were in bed the other night :D)

Hurricane Ditka
04-13-2007, 05:09 PM
Well my statement applies to the entire offensive line, yours only applies to guard.

Smokey Joe
04-13-2007, 05:14 PM
Well my statement applies to the entire offensive line, yours only applies to guard.

I don't care...

Hurricane Ditka
04-13-2007, 05:40 PM
I don't care...
No you don't.

Smokey Joe
04-13-2007, 10:00 PM
No you don't.
exactly... and that is one mighty fine sig quote you got there.

Bearsfan123
04-13-2007, 10:55 PM
My trade idea:

Bears send to Bills:
Lance Briggs

Bills Send to Falcons:
1st rd pick

Falcons send to Bears:
Both 2nd rd picks



so the Bills get: Lance Briggs
they lose:12th overall

Atlanta gets: 12th overall
they lose: 2 2nd rd picks

Bears get: 2 2nd rd picks
they lose:Lance Briggs

Then our draft could look like this:
1st:Dwayne Jarret WR
2a:Michael Griffin S
2b: Justin Blalock OG/T
2c-trade this to Seattle along with our 4th rder and next years 4th for their 2nd and 3rd rders
2c(Seattles)-Ben Patrick TE
3a(Seattles)-Quinn Pitcock DT
3b-Quincy Black OLB

That would be incredible.

VoteLynnSwan
04-13-2007, 11:25 PM
that would never happen.

awfullyquiet
04-13-2007, 11:40 PM
if joe staley drops to 31, or we trade up and down to 15-ish. we'll pick up OT, which is (as i've said in other threads) the idea of the day.

Smokey Joe
04-14-2007, 01:35 AM
that would never happen.
^^^ what you said.

Bearsfan123
04-14-2007, 10:51 AM
meh, its a fun thought, and i like the possibility.

pellepelle_10
04-16-2007, 02:39 AM
What would you guys think about this draft?

Rnd 1. Dwayne Jarret WR - USC
Rnd 2. Ben Grubbs OG - Auburn
Rnd 3. Rufus Alexaner OLB - Oklahoma

pellepelle_10
04-16-2007, 02:44 AM
The Bears probably wont get a chance to draft a good OT in this draft. I would just rather pass on them all together or just use one of our 7th rounders on one to put on the practice squad and develop like they are doing with Reed.

KBear you see the trend of the Bears not drafting O-Lineman in the top rnds? I've been trying to explain this trend for quite sometime now. Not to say that it won't be broken but its evident Angelo believes he doesn't need to use top rnd draft picks on O-Lineman when he can select other positions. If Grubbs is selected in the 2nd round I won't cry (I'm still going to be a little upset but Grubbs in the 2nd is a good value) but if an O-Lineman gets selected with a 1st rounder I'm going to be livid. I don't see it happening. I hope an O-Lineman isnt' selected in the 2nd either but I could live with Grubbs in the 2nd.

Hurricane Ditka
04-16-2007, 06:40 AM
KBear you see the trend of the Bears not drafting O-Lineman in the top rnds? I've been trying to explain this trend for quite sometime now. Not to say that it won't be broken but its evident Angelo believes he doesn't need to use top rnd draft picks on O-Lineman when he can select other positions. If Grubbs is selected in the 2nd round I won't cry (I'm still going to be a little upset but Grubbs in the 2nd is a good value) but if an O-Lineman gets selected with a 1st rounder I'm going to be livid. I don't see it happening. I hope an O-Lineman isnt' selected in the 2nd either but I could live with Grubbs in the 2nd.He's never taken a WR, TE, DB, or OLB in the first before either, does that mean he won't take one?

awfullyquiet
04-16-2007, 12:21 PM
KBear you see the trend of the Bears not drafting O-Lineman in the top rnds? I've been trying to explain this trend for quite sometime now. Not to say that it won't be broken but its evident Angelo believes he doesn't need to use top rnd draft picks on O-Lineman when he can select other positions.

but he has. that's the thing... but we haven't had a serious problem with our o-line since 2005 (2004 was another story, tait, steve edwards, qasim mitchell, columbo, and metcalf turned surferboy hutch into a pindoll with 3400 sacks(-ish)). everyone since has been pretty decent. we tried drafting marc columbo. and. yeah.

so what JA couldn't get from marc columbo... (which is irrelevent, he's still a rather good lineman), he can get with a solid-ish O-Line and two-three new linemen to eventually supersede metcalf and st. clair. i doubt he's THAT antsy about picking a lineman since columbo. he just hasn't had the need to fuss with it. the free agency isn't here this year.

we really need to ditch fred miller, move tait back to right tackle and find a good left tackle (but with the price that good LTs have been commanding lately...)

KBear
04-16-2007, 12:40 PM
KBear you see the trend of the Bears not drafting O-Lineman in the top rnds?


I have, I also have seen a trend of the Bears taking RBs and DEs in the first round, does that mean thats what we should suspect the Bears will do this year? Angelo also never used to draft offensive skill position players in the first day of the draft, that changed with Berrian, and even more so with Bradley and Benson.


I also notice the lack of WRs drafted in the first round by the Bears. They only have drafted 4 first round WRs in the last 40 years (David Terrell, Curtis Conway, Wendell Davis and Willie Gault). And Davis was the second of two first round picks in the 1988 draft.

awfullyquiet
04-16-2007, 01:43 PM
it's true.
and we all remember david terrell.

pellepelle_10
04-16-2007, 08:36 PM
He's never taken a WR, TE, DB, or OLB in the first before either, does that mean he won't take one?

Here's the bigger picture Ditka.

Bear's offensive lineman:

Starters:

John Tait - T - Free Agent acquired from KC
Ruben Brown - G - Free Agent who played for Buffalo
Olin Kruetz - C - Drafted by Chicago in 1998
Roberto Garza - G - Free Agent who played for Atlanta
Fred Miller - T - Free Agent who played for Tennessee

Reserves:

John St. Clair - T - Free Agent who played for St. Louis
Terrence Metcalf - G - Drafted by Chicago in 2002
Anthony Oakley - C - Undrafted Free Agent
Mark LeVoir - T - Undrafted Free Agent
Tyler Reed - G - Drafted by Chicago in 2006<---6th rnd

Looking at our roster it seems like the only rookie drafted under Angelo is Terrence Metcalf. All the rest on this team are.......Free Agents.

There's more to this though.

2002 there were 2 lineman drafted.

Marc Colombo in the 1st round, and Terrence Metcalf in the 3rd round.

2003 there were 0 lineman drafted.

2004 there were 0 lineman drafted.

2005 there was 1 lineman drafted. Bryan Anderson with the 2nd to last pick in the NFL Draft.

2006 there was 1 lineman drafted in the 6th rnd.

hmmmm...I wonder what the reasoning behind this is?

Lets look even closer.

In 2004 Tait was brought in.
In 2005 Miller was brought in.
In 2005 Garza was brought in.
In 2005 Brown was also brought in.

4 lineman drafted from 2002 until now (with 2 on the current lineup) ..5 consecutive years while 8 free agents reside on the current roster. You're not getting the trend here? This is very telling news here Ditka. No other position has a trend like this. These numbers are speaking very highly that Angelo for some reason doesn't prefer to draft offensive lineman high or at all in the draft. 5 consecutive seasons tell all. On top of that our offensive line is fairly good so do you think he's going to go with what he's done well at..or...turn a new stone and try bringing in a 1st round lineman. I'm thinking he's going to go with what has worked. His first season he drafted O-Line high...one was a bust..the other is STILL a backup. The other was simply a throwaway pick. (hell they could have probably got Anderson as an undrafted FA). They seem to like Reed but he was drafted in the 6th round. Angelo is drafting these guys dead last in drafts since 2003.

I'm growing on Grubbs for the 2nd at best but in all honestly I'm not sold its going to happen for this info I've given you. Its not that I don't think these lineman aren't talented which some of them are. Angelo just doesnt' draft lineman. So for me to think..oh..this is the year..he's going to surprise us all and draft....yes a LINEMAN in the 1st round...I can't. All I have to go off of is whats happened before. This isnt like he may or may not select from what you can see...he has not drafted a servicable lineman since 2002. This is a long time especially when you can say 2005 was the first season our line came together. 2002-2004 our offensive line was a complete disaster. That is 3 seasons of the line being a MAJOR MAJOR issue. Not 1 year. 3 years.

VoteLynnSwan
04-16-2007, 08:44 PM
well the issue is we have a need at OL either now or in the future, and we did NOT address OL through Free Agency... So unless JA plans on look at FA offensive linemen next year... he's likely to address it via the draft.

pellepelle_10
04-16-2007, 09:19 PM
well the issue is we have a need at OL either now or in the future, and we did NOT address OL through Free Agency... So unless JA plans on look at FA offensive linemen next year... he's likely to address it via the draft.

I don't see that being out of the question. Again I'm not anti O-Lineman. I'm simply saying that with Jerry Angelo's history of drafting since he's been in Chicago it doesn't involve a lineman in the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, or 5th rounds. For me to assume that he all of a sudden goes against the grain is just not reasonable to me.

I really don't mind Chicago going O-Line but here's my issue.

At OLB we have Urlacher who is our gem. Briggs is a stud but he's also an a-hole. That leaves Hunter Hillenmeyer (decent talent..nothing special by any means) and a bunch of backups aside from Jamar Williams who we still know nothing of.

Putting it into perspective we have Urlacher, Hillenmeyer, a rookie who we have no idea how he will perform and backups who are not servicable. In all honestly excluding Briggs this will be one of the weakest LB cores we've had since Angelo has been in office.

We had Urlacher, Colvin, and Holdman to start
Urlacher, and Holdman with Briggs as a rookie (when Colvin left)
We had a Urlacher, a seasoned Briggs, and Hillenmeyer as a rookie (when Holdman left)

I'm sorry but Hillenmeyer amounts to none of our 2nd best LB's. He's not even close. So the only true player we have now is a vet in Urlacher..thats basically it. A band-aid (Hillenmeyer) and an if (Jamar Williams) and bunch of duds.

At Defensive Back we have Tillman and Vasher. We lost one of these guys and the backfield was getting exposed. Ricky Manning was SOLID in nickel situations but man on man....the guy was toast. He couldn't save his life. In addition its pretty much gauranteed that Vasher or Tillman might be gone next season due to cap costs. Similar to how Vasher was groomed for the starting position we need to start this with another young stud. We really have no choice. It doesn't have to be in the 1st round nor the 2nd. It needs to be addressed in this draft though and even if Tillman and Vasher weren't to leave you still have to think of "what if they get injured again". Manning is great a nickel but I'm sorry..he's simply not #1 or #2 material. Neither is anyone else on this defense. If Daniel Manning ends up being that guy then you have Safety an issue all over again. We already have concerns with Brown so we're back to square one with Safety again.

I think O-Line is a concern for next season but we can also look at it this way. Angelo has been good at getting good lineman (primarily through FA). Even if it costs us a little bit it will not hurt us getting someone who is already estabilished and can make an immediate impact on our offensive line rather than waiting another season for maturing. If we got an O-Lineman this year I agree that it would help for next season. This is why I'm trying to take in this whole idea of Grubbs in the 2nd. I wouldn't however make it a top need for the simple fact that its not a problem this year. It will be a problem NEXT season.

Also..Metcalf is a G and Tyler Reed is supposedly thought of highly. Reed has 1 yr under his belt so whose to say he may not get more time this year in spot duty? Tait and Miller are old but they're not as old as Brown. Kruetz still has a few yrs left in the tank and even if worse came to worse Garza has already played C for Atlanta. Looking at this the only major concerns are Tackle (St. Claire is a gamble).

Hurricane Ditka
04-16-2007, 09:52 PM
I don't see that being out of the question. Again I'm not anti O-Lineman. I'm simply saying that with Jerry Angelo's history of drafting since he's been in Chicago it doesn't involve a lineman in the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, or 5th rounds. For me to assume that he all of a sudden goes against the grain is just not reasonable to me.

I really don't mind Chicago going O-Line but here's my issue.

At OLB we have Urlacher who is our gem. Briggs is a stud but he's also an a-hole. That leaves Hunter Hillenmeyer (decent talent..nothing special by any means) and a bunch of backups aside from Jamar Williams who we still know nothing of.

Putting it into perspective we have Urlacher, Hillenmeyer, a rookie who we have no idea how he will perform and backups who are not servicable. In all honestly excluding Briggs this will be one of the weakest LB cores we've had since Angelo has been in office.

We had Urlacher, Colvin, and Holdman to start
Urlacher, and Holdman with Briggs as a rookie (when Colvin left)
We had a Urlacher, a seasoned Briggs, and Hillenmeyer as a rookie (when Holdman left)

I'm sorry but Hillenmeyer amounts to none of our 2nd best LB's. He's not even close. So the only true player we have now is a vet in Urlacher..thats basically it. A band-aid (Hillenmeyer) and an if (Jamar Williams) and bunch of duds.

At Defensive Back we have Tillman and Vasher. We lost one of these guys and the backfield was getting exposed. Ricky Manning was SOLID in nickel situations but man on man....the guy was toast. He couldn't save his life. In addition its pretty much gauranteed that Vasher or Tillman might be gone next season due to cap costs. Similar to how Vasher was groomed for the starting position we need to start this with another young stud. We really have no choice. It doesn't have to be in the 1st round nor the 2nd. It needs to be addressed in this draft though and even if Tillman and Vasher weren't to leave you still have to think of "what if they get injured again". Manning is great a nickel but I'm sorry..he's simply not #1 or #2 material. Neither is anyone else on this defense. If Daniel Manning ends up being that guy then you have Safety an issue all over again. We already have concerns with Brown so we're back to square one with Safety again.

I think O-Line is a concern for next season but we can also look at it this way. Angelo has been good at getting good lineman (primarily through FA). Even if it costs us a little bit it will not hurt us getting someone who is already estabilished and can make an immediate impact on our offensive line rather than waiting another season for maturing. If we got an O-Lineman this year I agree that it would help for next season. This is why I'm trying to take in this whole idea of Grubbs in the 2nd. I wouldn't however make it a top need for the simple fact that its not a problem this year. It will be a problem NEXT season.

Also..Metcalf is a G and Tyler Reed is supposedly thought of highly. Reed has 1 yr under his belt so whose to say he may not get more time this year in spot duty? Tait and Miller are old but they're not as old as Brown. Kruetz still has a few yrs left in the tank and even if worse came to worse Garza has already played C for Atlanta. Looking at this the only major concerns are Tackle (St. Claire is a gamble).First of all the only person that's high on Tyler Reed is Smokey Joe, and Reed is not the future of the offensive line. You want to site all the times Angelo has done this and Angelo has done that, when he's never done what you expect him to do either. Linebacker was an big need, when Holdman and Colvin left, but Angelo still waited until the third round to draft Briggs. He didn't address the offensive line via free agency this year, and you draft for the future, last year we drafted Manning, and Hester, and this year we traded for Archuleta, we aren't going defensive back early. Angelo has never drafted a WR, DB, LB, TE, or FB in the first round, so your own argument is your downfall.

pellepelle_10
04-17-2007, 12:28 AM
First of all the only person that's high on Tyler Reed is Smokey Joe, and Reed is not the future of the offensive line. You want to site all the times Angelo has done this and Angelo has done that, when he's never done what you expect him to do either. Linebacker was an big need, when Holdman and Colvin left, but Angelo still waited until the third round to draft Briggs. He didn't address the offensive line via free agency this year, and you draft for the future, last year we drafted Manning, and Hester, and this year we traded for Archuleta, we aren't going defensive back early. Angelo has never drafted a WR, DB, LB, TE, or FB in the first round, so your own argument is your downfall.
!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?! *sigh*

I give up on you Ditka. There is simply no hope. I've been ridiculed for my posting but c'mon..you simply do not read Ditka. You ask questions that have been answered over and over again. Please read what I'm saying. Seriously..I'm not answering anymore of your questions if you're not going to read what I post.

Linebacker was a big need compared to what Ditka? You can only draft one guy in the 1st, 2nd rounds of the draft. There's only so many needs you can address with one pick. Do you expect WR, DB, OT, OG, C, DT, DE, QB to be taken care of in one pick? C'mon man. Listen to yourself sometimes. Again..this is the 3rd time I've stated this. Swann...here's that old post all over again man. (the one I've just posted today ..the 2nd time..)

We started with Urlacher, Colvin and Holdman. (3 SOLID linebackers at the time) Infact they were called by some one of the top LB trio's in the league at the time.

2003 - Colvin Leaves.

2003 - Lance Briggs is drafted to play this season

So now were at:

Urlacher, Holdman, and rookie Briggs. (2 SOLID linebackers still with rookie Briggs yet to prove himself which he ends up doing)

2004 - Holdman Leaves

2004 - Hunter Hillenmeyer ends up becoming the 3rd linebacker

So now were at:

Urlacher, Briggs (after a solid rookie season and now in his 2nd), Hillenmeyer in his first year starting and a few looks at D in 2003.


During all of these years we've at the LEAST had 2 very good Linebackers...so I'll AGAIN ask you ..do you really think we're going to select a 3rd linebacking spot over another starting position where a player will contribute more?!? Do you really think we're going to invest in a 3rd position over a 1st position?!?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

so back to this comment of yours.

Linebacker was an big need, when Holdman and Colvin left, but Angelo still waited until the third round to draft Briggs.

Holdman was still there when Briggs got drafted. Did you watch the Bears? LMAOO They played together BEFORE Holdman left..were you sleeping? Take a look at the 2003 season and you'll find this out. *sigh* oh boy....


He didn't address the offensive line via free agency this year, and you draft for the future

ummm...ok...how am I arguing against this? Again are you just typing or are you really reading what I post? Here's some snippets..for you to read...AGAIN


I don't see that being out of the question. Again I'm not anti O-Lineman.

I think O-Line is a concern for next season but we can also look at it this way. Angelo has been good at getting good lineman (primarily through FA).

If we got an O-Lineman this year I agree that it would help for next season. This is why I'm trying to take in this whole idea of Grubbs in the 2nd.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------


Angelo has never drafted a WR, DB, LB, TE, or FB in the first round, so your own argument is your downfall.

No he hasn't. He hasn't because those weren't the top needs. How many 1st rounders do you think we have Ditka? 20? We have 1 pick for 1 player. No $@#@ these positions haven't all been 1st round picks. The need to get them hasn't surpased what we've drafted. Then again I'm debating with someone who things Warrick Holdman was long gone before Briggs became a Bear.

QB, DT, DE, RB, DB/Special teams were positions addressed via the draft.

QB has been a need for decades.

DE has been a need since Richard Dent left.

DT was a need due to the DE we selected not panning out and Traylor, Ted Washington leaving.

I'm guessing the need for a WR, DB, LB, TE, or FB(!?!?! lmaoo) surpasses this huh? Listen to yourself sometime.

RB was a need because Turner didn't "think" Jones wouldn't fit the system. Many other people didn't but he did. So if any person feels the runningback "Doesn't fit" then guess which is going to be a big need. You got it!!! Runningback!!! Chicago passed on Mike Williams (thank goodness) and went with the runningback.

It was long discussed and even (Captured on the Bears warroom video where Santonio Holmes name was highlighted as a key player) that WR - Santonion Holmes could have been a Bear but Pittsburg decided to jump in front of them (hmm i wonder why us?) to get him. We traded down because Angelo didn't see value in the pick and decided to go with a player who was versitile at both Safety/Defensive Back with kick return abilities. Makes sense to me. TE wasn't selected apparently because they saw something in Desmond Clark that many including myself didnt. Low and behold Desmond Clark has the best season of his career this year. Hmm...maybe they know something we didn't. Maybe there's a reason you dont see TE getting drafted by the Bears high. O-Line? lol

I'm not even going to start about TE and FB is a non topic. You're dreaming if you expect us to select a FB in the 1st rnd. It's like....asking for another o-lineman in the 1st round...lol!! (j/k)

VoteLynnSwan
04-17-2007, 12:47 AM
i think if there's one thing you can learn from the pattern of Jerry Angelo's drafts is that there is no pattern. We'll just have to wait and see what he does, and no matter what I have to trust that it will turn out to be a good decision. It's not like it matters what I or anyone who's not in that warroom thinks about the issue.

pellepelle_10
04-17-2007, 01:09 AM
i think if there's one thing you can learn from the pattern of Jerry Angelo's drafts is that there is no pattern. We'll just have to wait and see what he does, and no matter what I have to trust that it will turn out to be a good decision. It's not like it matters what I or anyone who's not in that warroom thinks about the issue.

Swan there is no pattern but what you see him draft in the top ends of the draft are clearly areas that need addressed.

QB, DE - Last top rated qb Erik Kramer in Turners last tenure with Chicago, and last D-Line sack artist Richard Dent in the early 90's.

DT - Flop of Michael Haynes who they thought would pan out. Also the loss of Traylor and Washington caused for an immediate need for DT which is why with both 1st, and 2nd round picks they draft DT's.

RB - Benson being a back that would better suit Turners system as Terry Shea's idea of a KC, St. Louis offense fell apart in Chicago. Thomas Jones ran scared the 1st year in combination of having a horrific offensive line and qb's such as Quinn, Krenzel, and Henry Burris. (why am I thinking about this era?)
I'm willing to be that if they saw the Thomas Jones of his second season before drafting Benson..he'd never be a Bear. Alot had to do with his performance of dancing around and falling after every shoestring tackle.

DB/Safety - Daniel Manning fit a lot of needs. One being the need at Safety/CB and the second being a need in special teams. It wasn't until them landing the gold mine Devin Hester that they probably noticed in training camp that those return abilities wouldn't be needed. Hester was the man.

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

Again all of these drafts had an immediate need. I've already said that Angelo's drafts are a crapshoot but we can say that he's been likely to draft this and draft that. Its like saying..Angelo won't draft a FB in the 1st, or 2nd round. Chances are you're going to be RIGHT. No different than me saying that if Angelo skipped TE last year then its probably just as high of a chance he'll do the same this year. These are all generalizations but there is reason to them. Saying he's going to draft a Guard has no backing. Same with any offensive line position. Is it possible it will happen. Sure. Its possible for us to draft a fullback in the 1st round but these chances are slim to none. It's no different.

My arguement is based on Angelo's draft trends he is not prone to draft an O-Lineman with the first pick. I think my arguement holds more weight than saying he will draft a 1st round lineman for the simple fact that it hasnt been performed in 4 years and as there have been a number of seasons where O-Line still remained a top issue it was never addressed in the draft. It was addressed in FA. Infact our current team consists of 2 times the FA's than draft picks. (2 of them coming out of rnds 6 and 7) Now if people want to think he'll draft O-Line in the 1st cool. We all have our rights to our opinion. We can agree to disagree. I just don't see there being any proof that this speculation holds any weight. It's my belief. If I'm wrong then so be it. I'll eat my plate of crow if I'm wrong. Get your laughs in because if they don't I'm not going to want to hear it when its not addressed in the 1st.

VoteLynnSwan
04-17-2007, 01:46 AM
It's not worth arguing with you about it... all i'm saying is that lets wait until after the draft to see what happened instead of speaking in certaintys before it.

awfullyquiet
04-17-2007, 02:40 AM
My arguement is based on Angelo's draft trends he is not prone to draft an O-Lineman with the first pick. I think my arguement holds more weight than saying he will draft a 1st round lineman for the simple fact that it hasnt been performed in 4 years and as there have been a number of seasons where O-Line still remained a top issue it was never addressed in the draft. It was addressed in FA. Infact our current team consists of 2 times the FA's than draft picks. (2 of them coming out of rnds 6 and 7) Now if people want to think he'll draft O-Line in the 1st cool. We all have our rights to our opinion. We can agree to disagree. I just don't see there being any proof that this speculation holds any weight. It's my belief. If I'm wrong then so be it. I'll eat my plate of crow if I'm wrong. Get your laughs in because if they don't I'm not going to want to hear it when its not addressed in the 1st.

He's been the GM for 6 years now. One of those seven years he picked a lineman in columbo with pick 29. 1/6th is definitly a trend of those of us with serious statistical background. so he hasn't drafted other things because he's had other needs... now that i think of it, it's really 5 pick. last year we didn't have a #1 draft pick... obviously. we had danieal manning as 2.10... and was he good? yeah. but mostly due to mike brown's skill. he's not counted. so in 1 of 5 drafts he goes lineman with the first pick.

period. that is the answer. there is zero discussion.
out of RB, QB, OL, DL, DB, LB, DL, WR. (assuming FB and TE are lumped into RB and WR respectively for their similar purposedness), there's 8 positions. to pick at a greater consistancy than 1/8 is a trend over 5 years. Whether or not the numbers mean anything is questionable, but as far as pure fact. Numbers don't lie. The man has picked OL first round more than he's picked QB's, CB'...
oh god.
i forgot mccaskey basically was the end all be all of the bears organization till 2003. i think we've all neglected this. JA's role has been negligable before then.
that ruins all my calculations i've been running to find a trend of any sort.

everyone. take note. pre-2003 he wasn't in charge. he didn't have the final say. dick jauron and mccaskey had the final says. it was part of jaurons contract. duh. i feel stupid for forgetting that.

i don't think he's averse to going OL first round. i don't think he's averse to anything first round either.

btw vote LS. props on the muse.

Hurricane Ditka
04-17-2007, 06:39 AM
!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?! *sigh*

I give up on you Ditka. There is simply no hope. I've been ridiculed for my posting but c'mon..you simply do not read Ditka. You ask questions that have been answered over and over again. Please read what I'm saying. Seriously..I'm not answering anymore of your questions if you're not going to read what I post.

Linebacker was a big need compared to what Ditka? You can only draft one guy in the 1st, 2nd rounds of the draft. There's only so many needs you can address with one pick. Do you expect WR, DB, OT, OG, C, DT, DE, QB to be taken care of in one pick? C'mon man. Listen to yourself sometimes. Again..this is the 3rd time I've stated this. Swann...here's that old post all over again man. (the one I've just posted today ..the 2nd time..)

We started with Urlacher, Colvin and Holdman. (3 SOLID linebackers at the time) Infact they were called by some one of the top LB trio's in the league at the time.

2003 - Colvin Leaves.

2003 - Lance Briggs is drafted to play this season

So now were at:

Urlacher, Holdman, and rookie Briggs. (2 SOLID linebackers still with rookie Briggs yet to prove himself which he ends up doing)

2004 - Holdman Leaves

2004 - Hunter Hillenmeyer ends up becoming the 3rd linebacker

So now were at:

Urlacher, Briggs (after a solid rookie season and now in his 2nd), Hillenmeyer in his first year starting and a few looks at D in 2003.


During all of these years we've at the LEAST had 2 very good Linebackers...so I'll AGAIN ask you ..do you really think we're going to select a 3rd linebacking spot over another starting position where a player will contribute more?!? Do you really think we're going to invest in a 3rd position over a 1st position?!?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

so back to this comment of yours.



Holdman was still there when Briggs got drafted. Did you watch the Bears? LMAOO They played together BEFORE Holdman left..were you sleeping? Take a look at the 2003 season and you'll find this out. *sigh* oh boy....



ummm...ok...how am I arguing against this? Again are you just typing or are you really reading what I post? Here's some snippets..for you to read...AGAIN


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



No he hasn't. He hasn't because those weren't the top needs. How many 1st rounders do you think we have Ditka? 20? We have 1 pick for 1 player. No $@#@ these positions haven't all been 1st round picks. The need to get them hasn't surpased what we've drafted. Then again I'm debating with someone who things Warrick Holdman was long gone before Briggs became a Bear.

QB, DT, DE, RB, DB/Special teams were positions addressed via the draft.

QB has been a need for decades.

DE has been a need since Richard Dent left.

DT was a need due to the DE we selected not panning out and Traylor, Ted Washington leaving.

I'm guessing the need for a WR, DB, LB, TE, or FB(!?!?! lmaoo) surpasses this huh? Listen to yourself sometime.

RB was a need because Turner didn't "think" Jones wouldn't fit the system. Many other people didn't but he did. So if any person feels the runningback "Doesn't fit" then guess which is going to be a big need. You got it!!! Runningback!!! Chicago passed on Mike Williams (thank goodness) and went with the runningback.

It was long discussed and even (Captured on the Bears warroom video where Santonio Holmes name was highlighted as a key player) that WR - Santonion Holmes could have been a Bear but Pittsburg decided to jump in front of them (hmm i wonder why us?) to get him. We traded down because Angelo didn't see value in the pick and decided to go with a player who was versitile at both Safety/Defensive Back with kick return abilities. Makes sense to me. TE wasn't selected apparently because they saw something in Desmond Clark that many including myself didnt. Low and behold Desmond Clark has the best season of his career this year. Hmm...maybe they know something we didn't. Maybe there's a reason you dont see TE getting drafted by the Bears high. O-Line? lol

I'm not even going to start about TE and FB is a non topic. You're dreaming if you expect us to select a FB in the 1st rnd. It's like....asking for another o-lineman in the 1st round...lol!! (j/k)You totally missed the point chief. You sound like a broken record. And I know all about Santonio's name being highlighted and blah blah blah. My point is you can't complain that Angelo has never done this or that, and then expect him to do what you want him to while you ignore that he's never done that either. And I mis-spoke on the Holdman thing, just shut your mouth sometimes, you god damn ******. I was off by one season, shoot me.

pellepelle_10
04-17-2007, 02:25 PM
He's been the GM for 6 years now. One of those seven years he picked a lineman in columbo with pick 29. 1/6th is definitly a trend of those of us with serious statistical background. so he hasn't drafted other things because he's had other needs... now that i think of it, it's really 5 pick. last year we didn't have a #1 draft pick... obviously. we had danieal manning as 2.10... and was he good? yeah. but mostly due to mike brown's skill. he's not counted. so in 1 of 5 drafts he goes lineman with the first pick.

period. that is the answer. there is zero discussion.
out of RB, QB, OL, DL, DB, LB, DL, WR. (assuming FB and TE are lumped into RB and WR respectively for their similar purposedness), there's 8 positions. to pick at a greater consistancy than 1/8 is a trend over 5 years. Whether or not the numbers mean anything is questionable, but as far as pure fact. Numbers don't lie. The man has picked OL first round more than he's picked QB's, CB'...
oh god.
i forgot mccaskey basically was the end all be all of the bears organization till 2003. i think we've all neglected this. JA's role has been negligable before then.
that ruins all my calculations i've been running to find a trend of any sort.

everyone. take note. pre-2003 he wasn't in charge. he didn't have the final say. dick jauron and mccaskey had the final says. it was part of jaurons contract. duh. i feel stupid for forgetting that.

i don't think he's averse to going OL first round. i don't think he's averse to anything first round either.

btw vote LS. props on the muse.



this has already been stated buddy

Looking at our roster it seems like the only rookie drafted under Angelo is Terrence Metcalf. All the rest on this team are.......Free Agents.

There's more to this though.

2002 there were 2 lineman drafted.

Marc Colombo in the 1st round, and Terrence Metcalf in the 3rd round.

pellepelle_10
04-17-2007, 02:31 PM
He's been the GM for 6 years now. One of those seven years he picked a lineman in columbo with pick 29. 1/6th is definitly a trend of those of us with serious statistical background. so he hasn't drafted other things because he's had other needs... now that i think of it, it's really 5 pick. last year we didn't have a #1 draft pick... obviously. we had danieal manning as 2.10... and was he good? yeah. but mostly due to mike brown's skill. he's not counted. so in 1 of 5 drafts he goes lineman with the first pick.

period. that is the answer. there is zero discussion.
out of RB, QB, OL, DL, DB, LB, DL, WR. (assuming FB and TE are lumped into RB and WR respectively for their similar purposedness), there's 8 positions. to pick at a greater consistancy than 1/8 is a trend over 5 years. Whether or not the numbers mean anything is questionable, but as far as pure fact. Numbers don't lie. The man has picked OL first round more than he's picked QB's, CB'...
oh god.
i forgot mccaskey basically was the end all be all of the bears organization till 2003. i think we've all neglected this. JA's role has been negligable before then.
that ruins all my calculations i've been running to find a trend of any sort.

everyone. take note. pre-2003 he wasn't in charge. he didn't have the final say. dick jauron and mccaskey had the final says. it was part of jaurons contract. duh. i feel stupid for forgetting that.

i don't think he's averse to going OL first round. i don't think he's averse to anything first round either.

btw vote LS. props on the muse.

If you want to go with rates thats fine..more power to you. My point is he drafted lineman twice (one in the first and one in the 3rd for 2002). Then every year after (2003,2004,2005,2006) he didn't draft a lineman past the 6th rnd and decided to gather free agents instead (8 of them to be precise). None of his former draft picks are starters. All of his top FA's are. I'm done debating on this. I'm beating the dead horse. More power to the draft.

awfullyquiet
04-17-2007, 02:52 PM
If you want to go with rates thats fine..more power to you. My point is he drafted lineman twice (one in the first and one in the 3rd for 2002). Then every year after (2003,2004,2005,2006) he didn't draft a lineman past the 6th rnd and decided to gather free agents instead (8 of them to be precise). None of his former draft picks are starters. All of his top FA's are. I'm done debating on this. I'm beating the dead horse. More power to the draft.

he also hasn't actually drafted a OL.
which i was trying to note (at the end).

okay. so, he filled gaps with free agency because... why? oh they were the best players available. free agency this year hasn't lent itself to finding starters... and next year doesn't look too good with UFA talent. Mike Gandy? Max Starks? Next year doesn't look like a year where we'll be able to pluck a FA talent like we have on '04-'05. This year wasn't either. Last Year wasn't.

pellepelle_10
04-17-2007, 03:21 PM
You totally missed the point chief. You sound like a broken record. And I know all about Santonio's name being highlighted and blah blah blah. My point is you can't complain that Angelo has never done this or that, and then expect him to do what you want him to while you ignore that he's never done that either.

Nobody is complaining. What I am telling you is your idea of the Bears going Offensive Line in the first round is slim given Angelo has a streak of not doing it. That's it. You're concluding it will be addressed because it is a need. I'm concluding it will not be addressed because there is no track record of drafting this position when it was even MORE of a need in the past.

One is pure speculation. The other at least has some supporting evidence.

And I mis-spoke on the Holdman thing, just shut your mouth sometimes, you god damn ******. I was off by one season, shoot me.

If you would have listened to what I said the last debate I stated this then too. You just type. You don't listen.

VoteLynnSwan
04-17-2007, 03:29 PM
Seriously that's enough talk about this, it's completely stupid, you can not always use the past to judge what is going to happen in the future! Different year, different situation. Does that mean he's gonna draft a OL early? Not necessarily, does he's not going to draft an OL early? Not necessarily! Both of you should stop acting like you know what is going to happen and shut the **** up.

pellepelle_10
04-17-2007, 03:46 PM
he also hasn't actually drafted a OL.
which i was trying to note (at the end).

okay. so, he filled gaps with free agency because... why? oh they were the best players available. free agency this year hasn't lent itself to finding starters... and next year doesn't look too good with UFA talent. Mike Gandy? Max Starks?

Very true. You're on the ball with that.


Next year doesn't look like a year where we'll be able to pluck a FA talent like we have on '04-'05. This year wasn't either. Last Year wasn't.

You never know whose going to be available until the June 1st cuts. Again I'm not anti-offensive lineman. I think Chicago "could" go Grubbs in the 2nd. Grubbs is a solid lineman but getting him in the 1st is simply wishful thinking. True offensive line is a need. I'm not arguing this either. I do see a lineman getting drafted past the 1st. Just not #1. If I'm wrong I'll eat my crow.

pellepelle_10
04-17-2007, 03:53 PM
Seriously that's enough talk about this, it's completely stupid, you can not always use the past to judge what is going to happen in the future! Different year, different situation. Does that mean he's gonna draft a OL early? Not necessarily, does he's not going to draft an OL early? Not necessarily! Both of you should stop acting like you know what is going to happen and shut the **** up.

None of this has been fact and for you to sit here and come up with this just flat out wrong. This whole debate is our opinions. Nobody is sitting here saying thats that. Its going to happen. End of story. If you're getting that from this debate then maybe you need to kick back. Grab a brew or something. Your getting overworked from typed words. Calm down man.

Hurricane Ditka
04-17-2007, 09:42 PM
Nobody is complaining. What I am telling you is your idea of the Bears going Offensive Line in the first round is slim given Angelo has a streak of not doing it. That's it. You're concluding it will be addressed because it is a need. I'm concluding it will not be addressed because there is no track record of drafting this position when it was even MORE of a need in the past.

One is pure speculation. The other at least has some supporting evidence.
It wasn't addressed in the past because it had been addressed in Free Agency, this year it hasn't been addressed in Free Agency so it's more likely to be addressed via the draft. And Grubs isn't the issue, personally I'd like Ryan Kalil or Tony Ugoh at 37 then Grubbs at 31 or 37. But I can still see Grubbs going 31, and if Joe Staley falls, which is still possible, he'd be the immediate pick in my mind. Theres still the possibility of us trading Briggs, when we trade Briggs linebacker will probably be moved up the need pecking order. Although the coaching staff likes Jamar Williams, who is more likely to step in and start than Tyler Reed.

Smokey Joe
04-17-2007, 09:50 PM
eh... you guys wrote way too much, Im not reading all of that.

regoob2
04-17-2007, 10:02 PM
I personally wouldnt like to see a lb drafted with the first 2 picks because i feel jamar williams already knows the system and i would take a rook probably until around week (10 give or take) to over take williams and thats when briggs said he'd come back if hes not traded. and if we chose to draft a lb in round 3 or higher will he be any better than williams will be as a 4th with a year under his belt.

regoob2
04-17-2007, 10:05 PM
ben grubbs would be a huge improvement over any OG we have. All I can remember from the Super Bowl is Garza getting made a fool of. And especially in a draft trends dont really matter cause if your trend is drafting Oline early and you keep having to do it, then you aint doing it right.

Smokey Joe
04-17-2007, 10:38 PM
yo HD... why did the Mike Williams thread get closed?

regoob2
04-17-2007, 10:46 PM
better question, why was it started. if he sucks with them why would he be any better with us

VoteLynnSwan
04-18-2007, 12:24 AM
None of this has been fact and for you to sit here and come up with this just flat out wrong. This whole debate is our opinions. Nobody is sitting here saying thats that. Its going to happen. End of story. If you're getting that from this debate then maybe you need to kick back. Grab a brew or something. Your getting overworked from typed words. Calm down man.

you know what... the truth is i was tired of reading your posts because you were saying the exact same things... it gets really annoying if you hadn't noticed... In your many posts that said exactly the same thing... you acted as if just because Angelo hasn't drafted OL in 4 years that he won't draft one early this year... i'm just trying to say that NO ONE KNOWS WHAT JERRY ANGELO IS GOING TO DO. you can't predict this guy's moves...

last year it was obvious to everyone but the bears execs that we HAD to draft offense early... this year it seems as if everyone thinks we need to draft LB early because of the Briggs situation... and with Jerry you never can tell... that's my only point, the draft is a crap shoot and it all depends on who is going to be available when we pick, it has nothing to do with the past.

pellepelle_10
04-18-2007, 12:24 AM
It wasn't addressed in the past because it had been addressed in Free Agency, this year it hasn't been addressed in Free Agency so it's more likely to be addressed via the draft. And Grubs isn't the issue, personally I'd like Ryan Kalil or Tony Ugoh at 37 then Grubbs at 31 or 37. But I can still see Grubbs going 31, and if Joe Staley falls, which is still possible, he'd be the immediate pick in my mind. Theres still the possibility of us trading Briggs, when we trade Briggs linebacker will probably be moved up the need pecking order. Although the coaching staff likes Jamar Williams, who is more likely to step in and start than Tyler Reed.

Well put. Although I don't agree it sounds logical. I agree that Chicago will address offensive line in the draft due to not going FA but I don't see it being as pressing of a need compared to other positions. This is simply difference of opinions. Fair is fair. O-line is an issue for the future. I think we can all agree on this. If Grubbs can last until the 2nd round then I'm not going to be livid. Its a good value selection. In rnd one I have issues. I think OLB is a need due to the fact Briggs is good as gone. I don't thnk HH is a viable replacement nor a viable 3rd linebacker. I wanted to see him replaced last year when Briggs wasn't a problem so you already know what I'm feelign now that he may end up being the #2 LB. Jamar Williams would be fine with me as long as we have a legit #2. If they want to try him out while we have a solid #2 thats fine. I just don'e want to see Urlacher suffering because nobody else can pick up slack and read coverages correctly. He deserves better than this.

pellepelle_10
04-18-2007, 12:59 AM
you know what... the truth is i was tired of reading your posts because you were saying the exact same things...

What do you expect me to do when people make comments without reading?

(the Holdman comment I posted about in our FIRST debate).

I'm being a broken record for a reason. The picture cannot be seen even though its been painted over and over and over again. He's either going to get it or I'm going to have to keep sinking it in until it does. Period. If you don't want to keep seeing it don't read it. Very simply my friend.


it gets really annoying if you hadn't noticed...

Why don't you voice this opinion to the ones who are asking questions that have already been answered. You're speaking towards the wrong person.


In your many posts that said exactly the same thing...

Correct. Because questions were asked that were already answered.


you acted as if just because Angelo hasn't drafted OL in 4 years that he won't draft one early this year...

I think its highly unlikely yes. I do think that Angelo has shown that he prefers different avenues of addressing o-line concerns yes. Is there a reason I believe this? Yes, because when the offensive line has always been a concern he didn't go to the draft. He went to free agency. I don't think I'm out of line to believe this. What else do you base opinions off of? There has to be something that leads you to believe..I'm not pulling this #$&* out of thin air. This is what he's done over his career. *shrugs* what else you want me to say? It's my formulated opinion.


i'm just trying to say that NO ONE KNOWS WHAT JERRY ANGELO IS GOING TO DO. you can't predict this guy's moves...

We all try to. We all make opinions on what we "think" Angelo may do. This is what boards discuss. We discuss possibilities of what our team will do. Goods bads of what has allready happened, etc etc. What else do you want us to talk about? Geez.


last year it was obvious to everyone but the bears execs that we HAD to draft offense early...

Yes but who is everyone? Fans and media? Apparently it wasn't management because they apparently felt a different way. (Bears didn't go TE..kept Des Clark and he had the best year of his career, didn't go WR...Berrian FINALLY stayed healthy and became a major offensive threat for Chicago, Rashied Davis had a stellar pre-season made some nice contributions in the slot for Chicago in a few crucial games.) This is exactly what I'm getting at about this whole o-line debacle..people feel it should be addressed first..well guess what..it sure doesn't seem that way from bears management..or at least what we have seen from them. the draft has always been put on the backburner..am i wrong?


this year it seems as if everyone thinks we need to draft LB early because of the Briggs situation...

you're absolutely correct. thinking is all we can do. None of us are psychic. We express what we feel. Some think were going to go o-line, some think olb, some think other positions. Scott Wright makes mock drafts along with millions of others who "think" teams are going to select certain people. Whats the problem with this?


and with Jerry you never can tell... that's my only point, the draft is a crap shoot and it all depends on who is going to be available when we pick, it has nothing to do with the past.

Again you're correct. Scott Wright even admitted he could get nothing out of the Bears camp. His draft was totally off last year. We're all guessing.

I decide to guess with what has been performed and what is needed.

What has been performed is no o-line draft selections above rnd 6 since 2002. What is need is not a starting O-Lineman as of now but a guy who could take over this year but most likely start next season. In addition we have starting players who also need to be "replaced" this season. Lance Briggs is good as gone. There is a void now.

Chicago really liked McIntosh last season..apparently he didn't drop to them..which makes me ask something..were they planning on replacing HH? Briggs wasn't an issue at the time..depth was a concern but McIntosh would have been a very good possibility of unseating HH. We could go rnd 1 for an OLB. It could be rnd 6. nobody knows. We're all guessing...

pellepelle_10
04-18-2007, 01:08 AM
I personally wouldnt like to see a lb drafted with the first 2 picks because i feel jamar williams already knows the system and i would take a rook probably until around week (10 give or take) to over take williams and thats when briggs said he'd come back if hes not traded. and if we chose to draft a lb in round 3 or higher will he be any better than williams will be as a 4th with a year under his belt.

You may want to take a look at the history of LB's performance for their rookie seasons buddy. Many LB's perform well their first year. MANY. This is not uncommon. Take a look at rookies around the league and you'll see exactly what I'm getting at. Jamar Williams could be surpassed in a heartbeat.

awfullyquiet
04-18-2007, 02:28 AM
You may want to take a look at the history of LB's performance for their rookie seasons buddy. Many LB's perform well their first year. MANY. This is not uncommon. Take a look at rookies around the league and you'll see exactly what I'm getting at. Jamar Williams could be surpassed in a heartbeat.


Jamar Williams could be that in a heartbeat.

pellepelle_10
04-18-2007, 02:30 AM
Jamar Williams could be that in a heartbeat.

He could..he also could not. That is the magical question...lol

NYmoney
04-18-2007, 08:56 AM
What do you expect me to do when people make comments without reading?

(the Holdman comment I posted about in our FIRST debate).

I'm being a broken record for a reason. The picture cannot be seen even though its been painted over and over and over again. He's either going to get it or I'm going to have to keep sinking it in until it does. Period. If you don't want to keep seeing it don't read it. Very simply my friend.



Why don't you voice this opinion to the ones who are asking questions that have already been answered. You're speaking towards the wrong person.



Correct. Because questions were asked that were already answered.



I think its highly unlikely yes. I do think that Angelo has shown that he prefers different avenues of addressing o-line concerns yes. Is there a reason I believe this? Yes, because when the offensive line has always been a concern he didn't go to the draft. He went to free agency. I don't think I'm out of line to believe this. What else do you base opinions off of? There has to be something that leads you to believe..I'm not pulling this #$&* out of thin air. This is what he's done over his career. *shrugs* what else you want me to say? It's my formulated opinion.



We all try to. We all make opinions on what we "think" Angelo may do. This is what boards discuss. We discuss possibilities of what our team will do. Goods bads of what has allready happened, etc etc. What else do you want us to talk about? Geez.



Yes but who is everyone? Fans and media? Apparently it wasn't management because they apparently felt a different way. (Bears didn't go TE..kept Des Clark and he had the best year of his career, didn't go WR...Berrian FINALLY stayed healthy and became a major offensive threat for Chicago, Rashied Davis had a stellar pre-season made some nice contributions in the slot for Chicago in a few crucial games.) This is exactly what I'm getting at about this whole o-line debacle..people feel it should be addressed first..well guess what..it sure doesn't seem that way from bears management..or at least what we have seen from them. the draft has always been put on the backburner..am i wrong?



you're absolutely correct. thinking is all we can do. None of us are psychic. We express what we feel. Some think were going to go o-line, some think olb, some think other positions. Scott Wright makes mock drafts along with millions of others who "think" teams are going to select certain people. Whats the problem with this?



Again you're correct. Scott Wright even admitted he could get nothing out of the Bears camp. His draft was totally off last year. We're all guessing.

I decide to guess with what has been performed and what is needed.

What has been performed is no o-line draft selections above rnd 6 since 2002. What is need is not a starting O-Lineman as of now but a guy who could take over this year but most likely start next season. In addition we have starting players who also need to be "replaced" this season. Lance Briggs is good as gone. There is a void now.

Chicago really liked McIntosh last season..apparently he didn't drop to them..which makes me ask something..were they planning on replacing HH? Briggs wasn't an issue at the time..depth was a concern but McIntosh would have been a very good possibility of unseating HH. We could go rnd 1 for an OLB. It could be rnd 6. nobody knows. We're all guessing...


wow! that's amazingly long. i don't know how the hell you can find the time to post that freaking much.

Hurricane Ditka
04-18-2007, 03:08 PM
Scott's new mock is much better. Bowe, Grubbs, and Quincy Black.

regoob2
04-18-2007, 05:56 PM
You may want to take a look at the history of LB's performance for their rookie seasons buddy. Many LB's perform well their first year. MANY. This is not uncommon. Take a look at rookies around the league and you'll see exactly what I'm getting at. Jamar Williams could be surpassed in a heartbeat.

first off was it necessary for the buddy? ok now. If a rookie can perform well why cant williams? I love the new mock and black in the 3rd cause hes a stud athlete and will add depth and could play all 3 positions.

regoob2
04-18-2007, 05:58 PM
Scott's new mock is much better. Bowe, Grubbs, and Quincy Black.

i dont think it can get any better

awfullyquiet
04-18-2007, 06:00 PM
first off was it necessary for the buddy? ok now. If a rookie can perform well why cant williams? I love the new mock and black in the 3rd cause hes a stud athlete and will add depth and could play all 3 positions.

booger.
i think you just completely reiterated what i said, and what pelle just agreed too.

VoteLynnSwan
04-18-2007, 06:01 PM
i would prefer Jarrett to Bowe, but that's just nitpicking really... either one would be a nice addition, except Jarrett doesn't and never has had any questions about his hands.

regoob2
04-18-2007, 06:08 PM
booger.
i think you just completely reiterated what i said, and what pelle just agreed too.

how did I reiterate what pelle said he was talking about drafting a lb in the first 2 rounds. i dont think we need to do that this year. im not a huge fan of any of these guys. give williams the job if he cant do it draft someone next year

awfullyquiet
04-18-2007, 06:34 PM
i would prefer Jarrett to Bowe, but that's just nitpicking really... either one would be a nice addition, except Jarrett doesn't and never has had any questions about his hands.

i would too. he's got better technique anyway.

awfullyquiet
04-18-2007, 06:38 PM
how did I reiterate what pelle said he was talking about drafting a lb in the first 2 rounds. i dont think we need to do that this year. im not a huge fan of any of these guys. give williams the job if he cant do it draft someone next year


lets see. we have a few things to look at.

You may want to take a look at the history of LB's performance for their rookie seasons buddy. Many LB's perform well their first year. MANY. This is not uncommon. Take a look at rookies around the league and you'll see exactly what I'm getting at. Jamar Williams could be surpassed in a heartbeat.


Jamar Williams could be that in a heartbeat.


He could..he also could not. That is the magical question...lol



ok now. If a rookie can perform well why cant williams? I love the new mock and black in the 3rd cause hes a stud athlete and will add depth and could play all 3 positions.

and that there is the answer.

regoob2
04-18-2007, 06:48 PM
lets see. we have a few things to look at.









and that there is the answer.

i commented on what pelle commented on to what i initially said. where do u come in?

awfullyquiet
04-18-2007, 06:55 PM
i commented on what pelle commented on to what i initially said. where do u come in?

ignore it. it's not a big deal.
the fact of the matter is, both you and I agree that williams can be that man just as easily as any draft pick. and could be not it just as easily as any draft pick.

regoob2
04-18-2007, 06:57 PM
ignore it. it's not a big deal.
the fact of the matter is, both you and I agree that williams can be that man just as easily as any draft pick. and could be not it just as easily as any draft pick.

exactlyyyyyyyyyyyyyy

bearfan
04-18-2007, 08:58 PM
Bearfan like new mock
Jarrett or Bowe be nice
Bearfan like

pellepelle_10
04-18-2007, 09:29 PM
wow! that's amazingly long. i don't know how the hell you can find the time to post that freaking much.

lol I like to write..lmaoo!!

regoob2
04-18-2007, 09:30 PM
i like bowe more than jarrett, i think hes more physical and will obviously separate easier. i think he'll improve his hands

pellepelle_10
04-18-2007, 09:33 PM
ignore it. it's not a big deal.
the fact of the matter is, both you and I agree that williams can be that man just as easily as any draft pick. and could be not it just as easily as any draft pick.

lmao you 2 are hilarious. lmao

pellepelle_10
04-18-2007, 10:00 PM
Scott's new mock is much better. Bowe, Grubbs, and Quincy Black.

I think this is something for once we can all agree on. Can I get an AMEN! lol

Hurricane Ditka
04-18-2007, 10:01 PM
I think this is something for once we can all agree on. Can I get an AMEN! lolWell I'd have preferred Brandon Jackson or Brandon Mebane over Black, so we almost agree.

pellepelle_10
04-18-2007, 10:02 PM
booger.
i think you just completely reiterated what i said, and what pelle just agreed too.

don't comment on that or we'll both get ripped for repeating the obvious..lol

pellepelle_10
04-18-2007, 10:03 PM
Well I'd have preferred Brandon Jackson or Brandon Mebane over Black, so we almost agree.

I would have preferred Rufus Alexander in the 3rd and possibly Jarrett over Bowe but its close enough.

Hurricane Ditka
04-18-2007, 10:09 PM
I would have preferred Rufus Alexander in the 3rd and possibly Jarrett over Bowe but its close enough.
I think Bowe is more of what the organization is looking for. Although not as big, he's more phyiscal than Jarrett, and a bit faster. I'd be happy with either, but I just found out I'm working all draft day, which kinda bums me out.

pellepelle_10
04-18-2007, 10:44 PM
I think Bowe is more of what the organization is looking for. Although not as big, he's more phyiscal than Jarrett, and a bit faster. I'd be happy with either, but I just found out I'm working all draft day, which kinda bums me out.

I had to request the day off..I'd cry like a baby if i worked draft day. there is just noway. I don't think I've missed draft ever..lol..*knocking on wood*

If the draft goes WR, OL, LB with the right guys I'll be fine. I'm hoping rnd 4 goes either CB or RB. Maybe we'll be lucky to land Darius Walker in the 4th.

I like Bowe Ditka but to me Jarretts talent is hard to find. Not to mention he's a bigger target. I'd be fine with either one but I personally think Jarrett is the more polished WR. JMO though.

Geo
04-18-2007, 10:55 PM
I'd gladly take Bowe over Jarrett. The only question would be how fast could I turn in the card with Bowe's name on it if he's available.

jj45
04-26-2007, 10:06 AM
When I put that up there, I was not spreading rumors or anything. I was simply putting my thoughts up. That is not something I heard or I am trying to spread around, it's just something I thought about.