BearFan PHX

No, I just don't agree with you. Actually, I toss out rebuttals because I don't agree with you. You are assuming that if I understood your jealous and judgmental point of view that i would have to agree with it, but I don't is all. Well I don't disagree about some spoiled athletes. Benson and Briggs come to mind. Of course I said so in earlier posts, so maybe you're not the one reading and understanding? All of the above. Everyone works for money, don't you? More money is better. Money isn't everything, but it isn't nothing either. Have you ever turned down a raise? But if they know that these things happen going in, then surely planning for such eventualities must also be included in the first deal? If everyone knows it happens, then why are you so upset that it happens? Didn't we try to do this with Darwin Walker before we cut him? I hear stories every year in the paper about players that the team wants to ask to take a pay cut or else they will cut them. But so what? Even if you're right about this, if it is the norm, then it is included in the understanding when the first deal is made. Why can't you understand this? And why does it make you so angry? So because a majority of fans on this board don't agree with the professionals doing it for a living, I must be wrong? Does it occur to you that the GMs of the league might know better than the majority of the folks on this board? To be clear, i don't think I know even 10% of what it takes to be a GM. I don't think any of us do. The difference is that I admit that, so if that makes me arrogant, I think you are a little too in love with your own point of view. I think THIS is the heart of the matter. You're jealous because you don't get star treatment. For the record, yes some high ranked working folks DO get paid more after performing well, and they DO play hardball with their employers. Lawyers and executives do it all the time. And the raise can be a lot more than 30 or 40%. You think that someone who has the position to demand more is a slap in the face to you because you don't. Well, I didn't do that to you, and neither did Urlacher. Maybe you should have paid more attention in school, or grow a pair of balls. The world is a competitive place, and winners get paid. A guy who is a fast talking CEO is a bigger asshole than a guy like Urlacher who works his tail off. I respect the hell out of Urlacher, and I hope he gets paid big. I also think that mid April is a fine time to make contract demands. If you misuderstand the leauge, money, negotiations, contracts and business as greed, then yes, you don't understand it Again, just because the majority think something doesn't make it right. And just because I think you're wrong doesn't mean that I think I am the smartest guy on the planet. After this discussion, I do think I might be smarter than you though. But that isn't arrogance, you're just flying off the handle in an internet discussion, and saying a lot of dumb stuff, so you'll pardon my inability to notice how bright you are in that context. As for being arrogant and superior because I think I'm right, isn't that exactly what you're doing too? Is it possible to stand up for your side of an argument without being seen that way by the other side? Is that possible with you? Seriously, you need to calm down. Its mid April, and Biran is just trying to get paid. Its about as natural a thing as there is, and you're WAY overreacting.

That's fine. I didn't really see the distinction, so i have no problem with apologizing for calling some a selfish jerk. I can just as easily make my point by saying they are acting like a selfish jerk. I mean, I have no personal beef with anyone on this board. My gripe is with the knee jerk reactions. I don't wish anyone here anything but the best. I extend that to Urlacher too, BTW, which is the entire reason I've posted what I have. I hope we all make tons of money, and I don't blame someone for doing that within the rules. I happen to think that renegotiation IS part of the rules. It is a defacto part of the way business is done in the NFL, so you may not like it, but don't blame Urlacher. Were you all screaming that we shouldn't have used a poison pill in our offer sheet to Tait? No, we were all thrilled that Angelo found a loophole in the system and exploited it for our gain. So this isn't about being moral, its about winning within the rules, which IS moral. Is it enough to knock the ball out of a receiver's hands coming across the middle, or do you want our safeties to hit a guy hard to make him think twice about the next short route? All that's necessary is for THAT pass to be incomplete, but we want our guys to hit him anyway, right? That's part of the game. Hitting a QB in the knees isn't part of the game, so we frown on that. We all know the rules, written and unwritten, and we want our guys right on the edge of what's fair. Deadly competitive, but still fair. Well, renegotiation is fair. It happens all the time. I don't hear our team complaining about it. They know its part of the landscape. Hearing the rants against it is kind of like reading a post that says "in the last game the QB for the Vikings looked like he was going to hand off the ball, and then at the last second he took it back and threw a pass instead. No fair!" Hey - play action is part of the game, it isn't a lie, its a part of the landscape, just like renegotiation, holdouts and all the rest. Hate the game, folks, not the player.

Urlacher is a competitor, and he wants as much money as he can get - what's more American than that? What I hear is jealousy here. You won't make millions so you think Urlacher should be happy with what he has. Why? Also, the point is that the money is being spent. Why should other inferior players make more? Teams do renegotiate deals too. In any market, what is possible defines what happens. Teams and players both understand and accept contract renegotiation. Why do the fans on this board think they are more informed than the entire league? Its just arrogant, and ignorant grandstanding. If the team could just hold them to it, then they wouldn't be able to strongarm them. You don't understand the basic workings of a marketplace. Both sides have leverage, and so both sides will wrestle until a fair middle is found. Besides, how is Urlacher strongarming anyone? All you've heard is second hand quotes from sportswriters. Urlacher himself came out and said it was trash. What if he's simply saying "you know, when I signed my deal it was a pretty good one, but the salary cap has exploded and lesser players are getting more than me, and I'd like a raise commensurate with my value to this team?" Do you know what Urlacher is asking for? Are you sure it isn't taking this into account? Given what I know of Urlacher's competitive spirit, I think he would have to be A, except for the 'not that great' part. How can you know that Urlacher's not asking for 90% of what he's worth - a raise, but still giving the Bears room to sign other guys? Seriously, all I read on this board is that Angelo is an idiot, and our star players are greedy jerks, and I think to myself, what an arrogant bunch of fools there are on this board. Does anyone here run a business, and feel this way about contract renegotiations? Has anyone bought a house, and made a good deal with the knee jerk negotiating tactics that people on this board routinely display - i.e. sign the guy for whatever it takes in the first day of free agency? Guys, trading away Urlacher, Harris and Hester is the dumbest thing I've ever heard. Sure, trading any player, even all three for an overvalued deal is always something to look at, but the proposition here is to do it because they're greedy. Where are you going to find the superstars to take their place that aren't "greedy"? Do you think your draft class isn't going to want to get paid if they play well, and we start winning? Do you have the faintest idea of how to manage a football team and a salary cap? It just sounds to me like you want to complain about everything - play self important armchair coach and GM. That's OK, its common amongst sports fans. But it isn't very informed about how the NFL actually works.

And if a "joe" like you brought in a big client that doubled your business income in a year, you'd accept just a 3% raise? Do you think that when Hester signed his deal, they were taking into account that he would score as many touchdowns as he has? If you seriously improve your firm, you get a new deal, not just a 3% raise. That's true in business, and its true in sports. The problem here is that you never performed like Hester does, so you can't understand it. And by the way, this goes both ways too. The Bears should do whatever is in their best interest, and not worry about loyalty to players. If they think 2 #1's are possible and worth it for Hester, and they want that deal, then they should make that happen too.

You know, it isn't really name calling when its substantive. I'm saying that people who think that highly competitive folks who compete at the highest level of a lucrative market will somehow not reach for everything they can ar deluded. And if they think that these athletes SHOULDN'T try to get everything they can, just so that they can enjoy their team during the OFFSEASON without having to worry, are being selfish and jerky. When Benson held out without a valid reason, I was right there with you guys. It was ridiculous to think the that 4th pick should get paid more than the 3rd just because of the abberant Eli Manning issue the year prior. But for a guy like Urlacher to want to renegotiate is natural. The team is talking to him too, they know its natural. Its just this board of judgmental people who think its wrong. Bottom line is its normal in this market, and you can whine about it because you'd rather not have to worry about it, but Urlacher should make as much money as he can, and believe me he will. IF you truly think that Urlacher should care more about you worrying IN APRIL about your team than his own financial future, then you are selfish, and a jerk. That isn't name calling, its descriptive of an incredibly naive and twisted view of the world. You want to say that Briggs is being a jerk, complaining after just having signed his deal? Fine. I'm with you on that. But the idea that a player should just honor his deal because you can't renegotiate yours at work is silly. If you were as good on your job as Urlacher is at his, you'd be getting a raise too. Lastly, who do you think SHOULD get all the money flowing into the NFL? Are you in favor of Mike McCaskey keeping it all? Shouldn't a class act like Urlacher be getting his fair cut? Do you watch the Bears because of McCaskey or because of Urlacher? Which one has a bigger impact on the wins and losses? Players are the workhorses of the league, and if lesser players are getting paid more, if Ulracher's % of the salary cap is shrinking quickly, then he should get a new deal. And its not like the Bears are held hostage. They have leverage too. Both sides do. This is called a negotiation, and the market will sort it out fairly. Now, if Urlacher is holding out into the preseason, or opening day, then we can talk about this. But for God's sake people it mid April. Let the guy try to get paid. Those who know me know that I'm not a habitual name caller. I said what I said because I think it describes the situation, not to be inflammatory.

Come on people. You really are a bunch of spoiled fans. These athletes bust their ass in an extremely competitive market. No team hesittes to cut them, and that says nothing of the thousands who just barely miss the cut at all. No, I say players should get paid as much as they can, and if threatening to holdout is the leverage that they have, the God bless them. its a market, the teams have their leverage too. They do the dance, and something fair comes out of it, or both suffer. As far as 'being a man of your word' and playing through a contract, no that's not reasonable. This is a market where renegotiations are part of the landscape. Everyoe knows it going in. When a player and a tema sign a deal, they both know that if the player outperforms it, they will have to renegotiate, and if a player underperforms it, he will get cut. I root for the Bears, but I also root for the players. Brian Urlacher didn't sit out last year because his back was screwed up, he played in pain, and gave what he had, even though the team was going nowhere. This IS a team guy. he deserves to get paid. Where should the money go if not to the players? I just can't understand people here who just want these guys to jump like monkeys, put their health on the line, and do it with a smile on their face when they could be making more money. I wouldn't. I hope Brian Urlacher gets PAID. I like that guy, and I want to see him succeed on the field and off. Anyone who disagrees is a selfish jerk who doesn't understand that these are human beings who have ascended to the highest ranking a very competitive and lucrative market. There is no profit sharing for them as there is for CEOs, no stock options that allow them to share in the increasing television revenues. So if the market allows them to renegotiate, if you are a fan, you should root for them. I do.

Welcome back LT! I'm SO glad you haven't left for good. Hey BearSox, there's no need to attack people out of your ignorance. Good luck to whatever YOU do next, given your judgemental attitude, and willingness to make quick decisions on less than all the facts. Don't be an ass.

I agree. I'm a BIG LT fan. I agree with almost everything he wirtes, and I even agree with his stance on some of the overmoderation that goes on (I'm speaking mostly of the spat just before we moved sites - this thread moving issue is just reminiscent of that, alone it probably couldn't have driven him off). Obviously I personally haven't left over it, and I'm not trying to open up a discussion about it - I'm just hoping he reads this and understands that he is not alone in his beliefs. I really hope he comes back. there are some of us (or maybe its just me?) who think he is one of the best parts about this community.

I've always liked KJ's hustle. He works hard for the yards he get, like TJ did. Sure, why not go get him if the price is right?

Me too. I thinkl there are things, like Spygate, which are properly in the NFL forum - there is no possible connection to the Bears. However, if a topic even mentions something like "Did Angelo have a hand in this" or similar, then it could be fair game for the Bears forum. I was one of the original complainers, and I hope I was clear that it was not a big deal to me - I have a preference, but I certainly wasn't hot about it. In that spirit, I would like to add that whatever the final outcome of this, I REALLY appreciate the moderator taking a poll about this. My feeling is the less moderation the better. That unless something is really agregious, its better to let folks work it out themselves. So when you go the extra step to ask our feeling about something, it really does help engender trust. I've made my opinion known, do whatever you think is best, but thanks for the poll!

I enjoyed reading your post. I wouldn't have read it at all if it had been in the other forum.

Nah, if what I wrote seems like strife, then I've overstated my feelings, and I apologize. I just prefer a more hands off approach in general. On a scale of 1 to 10 (10 being really bad) then this was less than 1. Sorry if it seemed otherwise. I agree. Personally, I don't read the other forums, so for me, if there is any Bears tie in, even if its a player we were discussing wanting, and he got signed by someone else, then I'd like to see it here I guess. Your point about things being dead is a fair one. Maybe that's an argument for keeping as much that's possibly Bears related on this board - its not as if it intereferes with other traffic if things are light. Again, this is a small issue, and not a big deal either way. Also, keep in mind that even when things are dead, there are some like me who lurk and read, but post less often. I do read this site at least once a day, but as you can see by my post counter, I have yet to equal my 800+ posts on the last site.

I agree with LT2_3! Also for what its worth, I prefer forums with less moderating rather than more. If its an awful thing, then by all means, please step in and moderate, but if anything is questionable or even just harmless, less oversight is better than more, in my opinion. This has been a really good and civil group in the past, so the need for proactive moderation is less than most groups. I hope that the moderators agree and act accordingly. Just my 2 cents...

Sure it does. He's asking about Angelo's success in getting a player, and wondering what folks think about the idea that the Bears might (or might not) have been interested.

We've had a problem with our FB for a while now. It part of our woes in the running game, and the staff has known it for a while. Three years ago, they brought in Bryan Johnson from the Redskins to supplant McKie, but he got injured. last year they drafted Runnels, and he got injured. They tried Ayanbadejo too. They've tried Gilmore at FB, and even talked about using Benson that way in a two back set with TJ. They have tried all kinds of ways to move on from McKie, they've just been incredibly unlucky. Aging OL and a bad FB makes for poor running. Look at Walter Payton and his OL and Matt Suhey. Or Emmitt Smith behind those road graders AND Moose Johnson. The fact is, FB is one of the real sleeper reasons why our running game has been stalled. I hope Runnels comes back with a fury this year.

Right. Miller. I had forgotten - thanks. Well, our pass protection might be iffy (or excellent) depending on who we replace these guys with, but we ought to be able to run the ball better next year. Both Brown and Miller were lacking last year in that phase as they declined physically. FA OLs or even young guys on the Ol ought to be able to run block. Maybe we'll all be wearing Benson jerseys come December 08? I'm nowhere near that now, but I would welcome it.

I guess I missed something. Rueben Brown is gone - who was the other?

He had his best year this season, and I don't see how you can guarantee that he will retire after the next one. The conversation about trading him for the incredible value he would bring is a fair one, despite the fact that it seems like heresy to most around here. Just because I think the conversation is a fair one, by the way, doesn'teman that I support the idea, just that its OK to discuss ANYTHING, a good GM looks at every possibility. That said, I think you are way out on a limb assuming that this is his last year.

For me, this is an easy question. MY favorite Bears moment (as opposed to the BEST Bears moment objectively) was watching Jim MacMahon come off the bench after having been hospitalized in the third week of the 1985 season on Monday Night Football against the Vikings. MacMahon had been sick with flu or something, and had been in the hospital. Ditka, knowing that he had a special team that year (although not yet knowing HOW special I'd bet) knew that risking a MacMahon inury while sick was less important than winningn that particular game, and so he told MacMahon that he would not play him no matter what. MacMahon was upset by this, ever the competitor, so he stood next to Ditka with his helmet on asking to play during the entire game - making Ditka visibly angry on national TV. By 5 minutes left in the 4th quarter, the Bears were down something like 20-0, and Ditka - not looking to win the game, but rather to let Macmahon fail publically, since he had been pissing him off all game, put MacMahon into the game. The first play was a safe dump off - a screen pass to Payton on the left side. Remember, a screen pass is not one where you read an have options. You throw the ball to the RB, period. Or, if he's truly covered, you throw it away. part of the play is that Willie Gault streaks down the left sideline to take coverage with him, to open up space for Payton underneath. Remember, Gault is never getting the ball on this play. So, MacMahon steps back, and on his first play fires a 70 yard pass to a VERY surprised Willei Gault, who takes it in for a touchdown. The defense holds and gets the ball back, and Mac Mahon goes back in, hitting a 50 yard touchdown pass within a few passes. Soon thereafter, Macmahon throws his third TD in under 5 minutes to put the Bears ahead. Macmahon wlaks to the sideline, and hands Ditka his helmet to say "NOW I'll sit down". It was at precisesly that moment that the Bears knew their destiny. macmahon had established that it was HIS team on offense, and that they would be every bit as agressive as Buddy Ryan was being on defense. The team had swagger after that - they barked at opponents, and intimidated them. it was the moment the '85 team was born. There were other great accomplishments that year - holding two teams to NEGATIVE TOTAL OFFENSIVE YARDS FOR A GAME - which is insane. Walter Payton capping off his amazing career, and so much more. But this moment was, for me, the microcosm of everything that team became. This doesn't diminish the greatness of players like Gale Sayers, Willie Galamore, Dick Butkis, Sid Luckman, Red Grange or so many others. There are SO many great moments and players to cherish in the history of this franchise. But this one moment is the moment I fully swallowed the bait, and becaome a lifelong fanatic - so for ME, this is the best Bears moment ever. Its so good in fact, that i have probably embellished some of the details. Correct them if you like - the true history is probably good to knw - but this is my MEMORY of it, and I cherish it!

Absolutely. Look at the situation. All the first round DTs will be long gone before 14, and another doesn't project in the first round. That means that if we were truly looking DT, we'd be looking to trade down out of 14. But if we're thinking about an OT, we're right on the edge, getting the last of 4 to go in the first 14 picks, with #2 and #3 going in the two picks ahead of us, so we'd be looking to possibly trade UP a few slots to get ahead of those teams. So how do you make calls around the league to teams ahead of the the two right before us who are also looking to get OT without getting them spooked into outbidding us, or leapfrogging ahead of our new position? You get 'em thinking that we're making the calls to trade DOWN for a DT. Realize that these are the same teams (picks 1-11 in the first round, also pick 1-11 in the second round) that we would be looking to trade down with to get a DT in the early 2nd. So speaking with them would be in sync with the smokescreen. Nice! Its not like its really going to work, but you can't blame them for trying. And hey, taking a value DT is never a bad idea, but there isn't one before we pick in the 2nd.

You don't understand. You are arguing that Angelo was afraid of a holdout, and so he made the "just one more year, please" weak comeback? This is not the case. Its more complicated than that. When you have a player making more money at the same position, with a contract that won't end for several more years, everyone KNOWS that the team has already made a decision to make the change. Even if TJ had been willing to play here for his fair market value, and I'm betting he WOULD have, we simply couldn't afford to pay both him and Benson what they are worth. You can't carry two starting caliber HBs under the cap at market value. So, even though we found out that it was a poor decision, we made the commitment when we drafted Benson that he would be the starter within a couple years. Finanically. And this is the only reason TJ wanted out anyway - he wants to start, and he wants his payday. This is reasonable given a #4 pick overall, no? When the writing is on the wall like that, and the decision to go with Benson is already far past the decision point, and Benson is flagging, you ask yourself - can I get TJ to play one more year while we develop Benson? That's all that was possible anyway. So Angelo did that in a gentlemanly way. Now I don't think he did it that way because he's weak. he had no problem tagging Briggs when Briggs wouldn't accept a similar offer. No, he did it because it makes for better relationships with Free Agents and players down the road AND he gets what he wants - another year of TJ, and the chance to get some draft value for him after that - the best move possible. This team has also decided that they only want Briggs back at a certain price, and it isn't the value of tagging him again, or what he will make in the open market. So it stands to reason that we would try similar moves with him. We ended up having to tag him, but if he goes, its because we didn't want to tie up so much money in him. We all bitched that Briggs (a 3rd rounder) could NEVER fill the shoes of Rosie Colvin. Now Briggs and his attitude are indispensable? Give me a break. The guy's stats are overhyped by his role in the cover 2, and we can get another guy to play for him without killing our cap on LBers. You see this as the team losing guys they want to keep. I see it as the team making mature decisions not to overpay for talent, and staying cap healthy. The one problem here is that Angelo guessed wrong in 2005 that Benson would be better than he has turned out to be, and secondarily, perhaps that TJ would not turn out to have been as good as he was. Based on the data at the time, it was a good play. It didn't turn out that way though. That's too bad, and fair to criticize him for. The rest is just a result of that decision though, not more errors. The real truth is that Benson, even having failed to live up to his potential, would be FINE if we had an OL that could run block. He'd get his 1,300 yards, which is really all you were going to get from TJ anyway. The real problem in all of this is that the risk on the OL DIDN'T pay off, and they got old a little faster than we hoped. We didn't feel that revamping the OL last year on the heels of a Super Bowl loss was the way to go - we opted instead to continue the run with what we had that was working. Had Angleo given up, and revamped the OL, you would have been screaming about rebuilding when we should have been trying to get to the next level. Had the OL stayed good, and Rex progressed, the running game would have been fine, and we might even have had the offensive rhythm to make Hester and Wolfe look good as situational role players to counter the kind of things that New England does. It was a good play, it was like betting big with three queens - a good move, but not a guarantee. The other guy just drew his straight is all, and the right play didn't pay off. Angelo is making good decisions, they just didn't pan out. Its fair to criticize him for it, but its hindsight, and at the time, they were sound moves. However, to say that he mishandled TJ, or was weak in the face of a threatened holdout is to misunderstand the situation he was in, and the move he had to make.

Well, we can evaluate one part of the deal, and that was that we were not going to be able to keep TJ anyway. With benson on the book, and impossible to cut as a cap casualty, TJ threatened a holdout before the 2006-2007 season. Angelo negotiated that if TJ played unselfishly for the 2006-2007 season, then we would trade or release him prior to this last year. Angelo needs to be able to make those sorts of promises, and then follow through on them, or we will be in much worse shape via Free Agents and cap management. I think that at the beginning of this season (2007-2008) everyone in the fron office would have taken TJ over Benson if the decision was simply to choose between them for the same cost. The problem was that Benson's cap hit was too much to take, and you could not afford to sign TJ to a new deal and keep Benson on the books. In other words, the decision was made the year they drafted Benson, and at that point, we didn't know what TJ was, or for that matter what Benson would become. So you may freely question the decision to draft Benson, but you must remember that TJ was not well defined yet at that point, and benson's college career looked fantastic. But you can't look at the TJ trade as a choice between TJ and Benson in early 2007. Ity wasn't. By then, the decision had already been made a year earlier prior to the 06-07 season. That we got anything for someone who was not coming back at all is a great thing. That is a good trade.

I don't mean to pick a fight with you, but I have to disagree vehemently. Without meaning to attack you, you must not really understand football. The offensive line is what allows the skill players to do what they do. Without a stellar offensive line, Tom Brady is ot a Super Bowl Winner. Check out Adrian Peterson of the Vikings - amazing talent yes? What about Shaun Alexander - he was league MVP and now is quiet. Why? Because Steve Hutchinson left Seattle and joined Minnesota. The truth is that YES a good offensive line WOULD make Benson a top 10 rusher. The right line would make him top 5. The Walter Paytonss and Barry Sanderses of the world, who can get yardage without holes are extremely rare. On the other hand, every RB in the league, and a few that can't even make the cut could get 4 yards a carry behind a great OL, and most if not all would do diddly behind our run blocking this year. You ask about dropped balls. If a WR gets time to get open, and the QB can deliver a nice catchable ball, most NFL recivers can make the catch. Both of those things happen when the QB has time. The most important positions in football are on the line. If you don't believe me, check out the Lions for the past decade. How many great WRs did they draft? How many did they put on the field at the same time? If the NFL were sandlot football, the Lions would have been the tops. But it isn't. There are running plays and pass protection, and the Lions have done crap with only skill players. The bottom line is the line in the NFL. It isn't sexy, and there isn't any (direct) measure of it in fantasy football, but if you want to win, you need to revamp the OL this year. If you want "stars" go root for Detroit, or the earlier versions of Snyder's Redskins. If you want to win football games, open some holes, move the chains, eat clock, rest the defense, make the opposing defense play you honestly, open up the play action passsing game and protect the QB on passing downs. All those things rest on the OL. I'd like to see Angelo grab a big name OL free agent, and make 2 of the top 4 picks on OL too. that's because I want to win more than I want to buy more rookie jerseys. But that's just me.

I voted trade down, and with the two picks gleaned from the trade down and the second rounder, I'd take two on the OL and a safety. So I guess I should have said OL, but honestly, I don't think we should take OL that high unless a true stud is available. The thing is, even true stud candidates sometimes bust in the NFL, so i like Angelo's usual tactic of picking multiple players for the same position, and letting the cream rise. This would be great to do with OL. I'd like to see THREE of them taken in this draft, two from the first four picks, and one later. Also, re: RB - There are only a VERY few great RBs, and you can't tell who is going to be one from the draft (see Benson, Cedric). From the fourth best back in theleague to the fortieth, they all share a common trait: without holes they will gain nothing, and with big holes they will get yardage. Therefore, leave that skill player alone, and pick on the OL.A good Ol will make any RB servicable - certainly good enough to keep the chains moving, and that will open up the passing game. plus, good OL help there too. OL is the obvious choice - the game is won and lost in the trenches, and our DL is pretty solid. Also, unlike QBs, and WRs who come and go, break ankles and have good and bad years, if you build a great line, it will help the team for a decade to come. Like it or not, a team with this OL and Payton Manning and Joseph Addai will win fewer games than Grossman and Benson would with a good OL. Of course a good OL, AND a new QB & RB would be best, but that QB is coming from Free Agency, and not the draft, and with holes, Benson will be good enough for another year.

I'm sure you're right, and I don't mean to suggest that the current software is awful or anything - it isn't. I just know that the vBulletin software is awesome, having used it for many years now, and I wanted to bring it your attention. I'm happy here, and if this is the software, then I will use it without complaint. I just wanted to be helpful!