Archuleta Traded to Bears

[princefielder28]

Here's a thought: read the thread before posting in it.

That's an interesting concept. :)

[bearsfan_51]

Very true statement. However, you cannot discount the familiarity factor.
Lovie helped develop Arch into the playmaker he is. He knows exactly what he's getting and how it will fit in his system. Arch didn't play a lot in 2006, so he's also moderately fresh as well. I like the fit because of Lovie's familiarity with Arch. If they can get him at a bargain price, it would probably be a good deal. I would imagine the asking price is not high. Well done, Redskins!

Not to mention that despite his faults in coverage, Archuleta has been a very productive safety. He's a great tackler at the line and if used properly can be effective in blitz packages as well.

We really don't run a standard cover 2 because Urlacher drops back so far in coverage on passing downs that we essentially have three safties back there.

[bsaza2358]

Exactly. If you deploy him in a way that fits with your team's scheme, Arch will be a very productive player. He will never be an all-pro, but he will be productive and potentially pro-bowl worthy in his very best years. He's a bottom of the second-tier safety in the NFL. Not a bad place to be, and certainly he is good enough to start for the Bears.

[bearsfan_51]

Exactly. If you deploy him in a way that fits with your team's scheme, Arch will be a very productive player. He will never be an all-pro, but he will be productive and potentially pro-bowl worthy in his very best years. He's a bottom of the second-tier safety in the NFL. Not a bad place to be, and certainly he is good enough to start for the Bears.

Actually he wouldn't start. We just need someone to replace Todd Johnson as our backup SS and serve as insurance in case Mike Brown gets hurt (again).

[bigbluedefense]

Not to mention that despite his faults in coverage, Archuleta has been a very productive safety. He's a great tackler at the line and if used properly can be effective in blitz packages as well.

We really don't run a standard cover 2 because Urlacher drops back so far in coverage on passing downs that we essentially have three safties back there.

Technically thats Tampa 2. I use both terms loosely myself and often say Cover 2 in reference to Tampa 2.

The thing with Arch is, if he does go to Chicago, that puts added pressure on Manning to hold the fort at FS, something he had a little trouble with at the end of the season.

[bsaza2358]

With the pressure the Bears are able to put on the passer, usually rushing only 4, Arch is a good mid-range cover guy and a very good run stuffer. With the upfield pressure from the DLine, some draws and screens can hurt the Cover 2/Tampa 2 D. Power running and good run blocking is also useful agaisnt these schemes. Adding a true run support safety could help the Bears significantly.

[KBear]

The Bears would probably move Brown back to FS where he will probably have a better chance of staying healthy. Manning then could stay at safty or they might move him to CB to help ease the eventual loss of either Tillman or Vasher.

[bsaza2358]

That doesn't really make sense to me. They invested a first day pick and handed the safety job over to Manning last year. That got them to the Super Bowl. While he did wear down a little, moving him or platooning him will only stunt his development. I don't like that course of action at all. To me, the injury-prone Brown could be out or relegated to a reserve role. He is getting older and has not been as effective due to injury.

[KBear]

There was not a lot of competion for him to beat out to get the starting spot. The Bears could still keep him at safty. Brown is often injured, and Archuleta wont last long before he would be a finacial burden for the Bears.

[bsaza2358]

Stunting the growth of a second year player by benching him after an acceptable rookie campaign is really not a good idea. That's something the Redskins would do. The Bears are a better run organization, and I would expect them to keep Manning in the starting lineup. If Arch comes over, I would foresee Brown becoming a reserve or being released or traded.

[bigbluedefense]

Stunting the growth of a second year player by benching him after an acceptable rookie campaign is really not a good idea. That's something the Redskins would do. The Bears are a better run organization, and I would expect them to keep Manning in the starting lineup. If Arch comes over, I would foresee Brown becoming a reserve or being released or traded.

The thing is, Manning was a CB in college, and I honestly thought that CB was his better position coming into the NFL. I think he can make the transition rather easily. Plus his versatility and teaching him how to play both positions can be beneficial in the long haul because it provides more versatility in the back 4 during times of injury.

It can work, he can play both positions. Having a rotation back there is probably ideal. Especially with the possibility of losing one of their underrated CBs, it won't be a bad idea seeing what Manning is made of at the CB position.

[bearsfan_51]

Technically thats Tampa 2. I use both terms loosely myself and often say Cover 2 in reference to Tampa 2.

The thing with Arch is, if he does go to Chicago, that puts added pressure on Manning to hold the fort at FS, something he had a little trouble with at the end of the season.

No I meant cover 2. We only use the cover 2 about 20% of the time. We're often in some sort of hybrid or variable coverage that requires more man coverage from the corners with the linebackers (especially Brian) playing deep.

[bearsfan_51]

Stunting the growth of a second year player by benching him after an acceptable rookie campaign is really not a good idea. That's something the Redskins would do. The Bears are a better run organization, and I would expect them to keep Manning in the starting lineup. If Arch comes over, I would foresee Brown becoming a reserve or being released or traded.

Woah woah woah WOAH!!

Mike Brown will never be a backup on the Bears. Ever. And this is coming from someone that thinks he's slightly overated. He's still leaps and bounds better at SS than Arch would be. He just needs to stay healthy.

[KBear]

Well, the Bears benched Chris Harris, the guy Manning replaced, after a solid rookie year. So it is something the Bears could do.

[bsaza2358]

Woah woah woah WOAH!!

Mike Brown will never be a backup on the Bears. Ever. And this is coming from someone that thinks he's slightly overated. He's still leaps and bounds better at SS than Arch would be. He just needs to stay healthy.

If Brown will never be benched, and dropping Manning out of the FS slot is not an option, why are they willing to take on Archuletta's large contract for him to play a part time role with the team? Signing him after he's cut is one thing. Trading for him to get that horrid contract is completely different. Could you explain that to me?