Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

If I was Ron Turner....

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by BeerBaron View Post
    i think all the hype around ryan stems from one play vs. virginia tech...i dont want him.

    you say oh, hes got all the right size and arm strength and leadership, but every year theres guys who are perfectly sized with cannon arms who dont even get a whiff of the nfl

    the more i think about it the more i think maybe QB is a bad choice early in the draft. why not give 66% career winning percentage kyle orton a chance and use those picks to get him some more help
    The reason Orton has a 66% has nothing to do with Orton and everything to do with our D. We need to bring in some competition at the qb position and Matt Ryan is a good qb. Matt has that "it" factor and is a good leader which is something that won't have.

    Comment


    • #17
      would Matt Ryan really be worse than Kyle Orton or Rex Grossman though?


      Sig by me... Hold the applause.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by regoob2 View Post
        The reason Orton has a 66% has nothing to do with Orton and everything to do with our D. We need to bring in some competition at the qb position and Matt Ryan is a good qb. Matt has that "it" factor and is a good leader which is something that won't have.
        hmm...orton has won 2/3 of the games hes started in the nfl and matt ryan has....not started any games in the nfl.

        orton: 6'4 217
        ryan: 6'5 218

        and btw, his rookie year you may have been right with the "D" comment. but last year he went 2-1 (66%) at the end of the year when most of the worthwhile defenders were hurt.

        also, why couldnt that same D do wonders with rex in there? while he was busy throwing picks and making ******** looking fumbles, that defense was getting mighty exhausted marching back onto the field time and time and time again. orton, for what he has played, has held onto the football worlds better than grossman.

        now i dont think orton is anything close to a franchise QB but guess what, he wont cost us a first rounder to give a shot at starting to.

        plus, why not give him a shot. if we bring in a rookie QB, we're basically accepting that at least the next year or two are going to be a waste getting him ready to play. if orton doesnt work out, thats just 1 year down and if he does work out, we could be right back in contention.

        i cant justify the taking of a first round QB now.

        Comment


        • #19
          Hahah....66% win percetange Kyle Orton is like saying 66% win percentage Terrance Metcalf. Just because he was on the team doesn't mean he had **** to do with those wins.

          Orton has a career passer rating of 62.2. That's a lot more important to me than how many games the defense won for him.


          Nobody cares about your stupid fantasy team.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by bearsfan_51 View Post
            Hahah....66% win percetange Kyle Orton is like saying 66% win percentage Terrance Metcalf. Just because he was on the team doesn't mean he had **** to do with those wins.

            Orton has a career passer rating of 62.2. That's a lot more important to me than how many games the defense won for him.
            metcalf doesnt touch the ball on every offensive play.

            and like i said earlier, why wasnt the defense winning all of those games for grossman? when he throws a pick on 2nd down and gives the other team the ball on the bears 35, well that all the sudden makes it damn hard for the defense....

            orton takes care of the ball a lot better than that. even if its just a three and out followed by a punt, it puts the defense in a much better position.

            also, 5 of his 13 picks as a rookie came in one bad game against the bengals. that means over the other what...17 games hes played hes got a 12-10 TD-int ratio

            now like i said, theres probably very little chance hes ever going to be a true "franchise" QB but a guy who does enough to win 2/3 of his games paired with a tough defense is certainly worth a chance in my book. bringing in a rookie, especially in the first round, will only detract from whatever chance he gets as pressure to play the young guy will only mount

            Comment


            • #21
              The not using two tight end thing was what bugged me for much of the year on his offensive playcalling. I like our fullbacks, but when you have Olsen and Clark, that offers a lot of advantages in the passing game. There aren't many teams with 2 LB's that can match up well enough against our TE's. It's a nice mismatch situation. Add in some speed on the edges with Berrian and a solid WR on the other side, there's the potential for a diverse passing attack that we've never really had (assuming we keep Berrian).

              Of course, Ron is from the old power school with a lead fullback. Moreover, I do understand to an extent that, in an effort to help Cedric get it going, we did need a fullback. Cedric needs that lead blocker. I'd love a well-rounded Joseph Addai type, or to go a little more zone blocking and have, say, Jamaal Charles operate out of single back sets with the two tight ends. I don't buy Adrian and Garrett being able to operate out of single back and produce consistently.

              It's times like these that I wish we had a Parcells/Belichick disciple, a guy who valued the usage of TE's and knows how to take advantage of them. That's our one big offensive personnel strength, heck, maybe our biggest personnel strength in many respects.

              Comment


              • #22
                would be nice...i think how the WR situation shakes out will alter plans for the TEs for sure.

                i think if we got berrian back and add in hester/bradley off an on with 2 big TE's in the middle.....ooo thatd be nice

                it would eliminate our need for a possession WR in the wake of cutting muhammad as well, so we could draft a...idk....hardy, sweed someone like that if available after the first round and let them develop until we get more of the offense figured out

                Comment


                • #23
                  The problem is, I don't really see Turner going consistently this route. He's old school in many respects, and he's not going to phase out the FB that much, IMO.

                  I don't think there's a need to draft a possession wide receiver in the first 3 rounds. My personal dream would be Jerome Simpson in the 4th, although I think there's a shot he goes in the 3rd. Don't rule out a Jordy Nelson or Adarius Bowman in the 4th either. I'd take a chance on both of them if they fell that far. Keenan Burton, Paul Hubbard, Adrian Arrington, Edward Williams are all day 2 guys that could be intriguing. Josh Morgan could be value in the 4th, and I'd be mildly intrigued. Steve Johnson, Decody Fagg and others could be intriguing later.

                  Short of it is, I wouldn't draft a possession guy in the top 3 rounds. If there's a playmaking WR, that's worth it. Now, granted, maybe I am nitpicking here, as I'd hardly call Limas Sweed a possession guy (there's some talk of a low 4.4 number, but many are thinking sub 4.5). In general, I wouldn't take a WR in the first 3 rounds unless the value was absolutely off the charts, and even then I'd only consider it in the third round. I'd rather add a Marty Booker to go with Mark Bradley, Devin Hester and hopefully Bernard Berrian.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by toonsterwu View Post
                    The problem is, I don't really see Turner going consistently this route. He's old school in many respects, and he's not going to phase out the FB that much, IMO.

                    I don't think there's a need to draft a possession wide receiver in the first 3 rounds. My personal dream would be Jerome Simpson in the 4th, although I think there's a shot he goes in the 3rd. Don't rule out a Jordy Nelson or Adarius Bowman in the 4th either. I'd take a chance on both of them if they fell that far. Keenan Burton, Paul Hubbard, Adrian Arrington, Edward Williams are all day 2 guys that could be intriguing. Josh Morgan could be value in the 4th, and I'd be mildly intrigued. Steve Johnson, Decody Fagg and others could be intriguing later.

                    Short of it is, I wouldn't draft a possession guy in the top 3 rounds. If there's a playmaking WR, that's worth it. Now, granted, maybe I am nitpicking here, as I'd hardly call Limas Sweed a possession guy (there's some talk of a low 4.4 number, but many are thinking sub 4.5). In general, I wouldn't take a WR in the first 3 rounds unless the value was absolutely off the charts, and even then I'd only consider it in the third round. I'd rather add a Marty Booker to go with Mark Bradley, Devin Hester and hopefully Bernard Berrian.
                    hmm...if bowman can get back to the potential first round form before his injury, he would be an amazing pickup in the 4th or later.

                    and also, when i say "possession WR", i usually just mean someone bigger than your average WR. i always like having a guy like that around. i know you could consider a 5'10 (maybe) wes welker a possession WR so i need to stop using that word, lol

                    another guy whos name i would throw out, though he likely wont be drafted, is danny amendola of texas tech. hes not particularly big or fast but in the TT games i saw this year, he was making the key drive sustaining catches more often than even crabtree. after i saw him a couple of times, i looked at scotts rankings and he wasnt even on there which made me think he might not be draft eligable....but no....he was a senior. now hes on there at #40.

                    i think he could be an interesting idea and we might not even have to blow a pick

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      On a whole aside, I'm curious how the Fontel Mines developmental project goes from two perspectives. The first being that I'm a UVA fan. The 2nd being that, it seems quite likely this will be Desmond Clark's final year with us. I'm hard pressed to see us spending to keep him in 2009. Thus, it'd be nice to develop a backup TE that can catch more than John Gilmore. In many ways, Fontel Mines move does somewhat remind me of Desmond Clark's, with the difference being that Desmond was a more productive collegian that has a bit better athletic ability. That said, if Mines can develop his blocking and show the receiving ability, then he'd be a solid number 2 to Greg Olsen. I see that Mines is listed at 244 now, which is a solid weight if he can maintain it, although I imagine his frame is probably close to maxed out.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by toonsterwu View Post
                        The not using two tight end thing was what bugged me for much of the year on his offensive playcalling. I like our fullbacks, but when you have Olsen and Clark, that offers a lot of advantages in the passing game. There aren't many teams with 2 LB's that can match up well enough against our TE's. It's a nice mismatch situation. Add in some speed on the edges with Berrian and a solid WR on the other side, there's the potential for a diverse passing attack that we've never really had (assuming we keep Berrian).
                        Good point on the two-tight end set. I like Des Clark, I wanted to see the Bears use him more the last 18 games or so. (If he's gone after this year, I'd love to see the Colts bring him in as their second tight end). Tight ends, and Clark in particular, really suit and help Grossman when he's on the field. Some guys are like that, take Drew Brees for example, where including the tight end does a lot for them in being able to produce sustained drives. And I really liked what I saw of Olsen last year, I think he's going to be great.

                        Of course, Ron is from the old power school with a lead fullback. Moreover, I do understand to an extent that, in an effort to help Cedric get it going, we did need a fullback. Cedric needs that lead blocker. I'd love a well-rounded Joseph Addai type, or to go a little more zone blocking and have, say, Jamaal Charles operate out of single back sets with the two tight ends. I don't buy Adrian and Garrett being able to operate out of single back and produce consistently.
                        I really like Charles, the biggest fault I think is his being quite raw as an all-purpose back. Give him a great runningbacks coach and some time, and he could improve though. I know I brought up a Portis comparison in another thread, and while I don't think Charles will reach the level Portis has as an all-purpose back, I think it's a similar case of a guy being able to improve from where he was as a prospect. And similarly, maybe some on-again, off-again concerns about fumbling and durability.
                        Pugnacity, testosterone, truculence, and belligerence.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by Geo View Post
                          I really like Charles, the biggest fault I think is his being quite raw as an all-purpose back. Give him a great runningbacks coach and some time, and he could improve though. I know I brought up a Portis comparison in another thread, and while I don't think Charles will reach the level Portis has as an all-purpose back, I think it's a similar case of a guy being able to improve from where he was as a prospect. And similarly, maybe some on-again, off-again concerns about fumbling and durability.
                          wow, i really like the comparison to portis for charles. like you said, probably wont reach the same caliber, but i never really thought about their similarities before.

                          however, if charles can go out and run like a madman in the 40 like some predict, i doubt hell still be around come the third round

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Depending on what we do in FA, I wouldn't be totally against dealing the two third rounders to move up to grab someone like Jamaal Charles if we are worried that he won't be there.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              If we resign Grossman, I think that would officially eliminate QB for this year... at least on the first day. However, if we don't, I could see us perhaps trading up into the later part of round 1 and drafting Flacco.

                              ^Thanks to Eaglez.Fan for the sweet sig!

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                I think we all saw the last part of that Joe post coming!

                                :) :) :)
                                Pugnacity, testosterone, truculence, and belligerence.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X

                                Debug Information