AZ54

I don't think it's as simple as just give a guy more reps. How then do we explain the bottom half of the league's starting QBs for which teams are always looking for replacements? I truly believe if a guy has talent he'll very quickly rise to 2nd string player. There he gets enough reps to show what he can do. Maybe not enough to be as proficient as the starter but if he truly has starting potential you're going to see it especially if you're starting QB is struggling. Every offseason we find backups and a couple starting QBs available. In 2016 it was RGIII, EJ Manuel, Kap, Chase Daniel, Drew Stanton, Fitzpatrick, Osweiller. Fitzpatrick has shown he can be a decent starter/backup yet he's still on the market. Despite many starter reps among that group nobody was kicking the door down to get one of them signed except for Osweiller. 2015 had: Jake Locker, Mallett, Mark Sanchez, Matt Moore, Hoyer, Shaun Hill, Josh McCown, Tebow, Clausen, Ponder, Tarvaris Jackson, Matt Schaub, Gabbert, Colt McCoy, and others. Once in a blue moon someone finds a 3rd string guy who can be a starter (i.e. Warner, Romo). Despite that there are far more big money failures when signing backups to be a starter: Matt Flynn, Charlie Whitehurst,

There were times last year I don't think Cutler even knew the WR who were in the huddle. Handing the ball to Forte even on a 3rd and 6 might have been the best option. Often stats leave out things that are needed to frame the game situation. 3rd and 6 on your own 25yd line is not the place for a mistake, especially when WRs on the field might be wilson, Mariani, Meredith, Bellamy. I don't have an issue with playing it safe and taking my chances with Forte or Langford to avoid the big mistake in that area.

SI.com put up a list of top 10 slot defenders and surprisingly Bryce Callahan is ranked #7, just one spot behind Tyrann Mathieu. http://www.si.com/article-list/nfl-positio...ide-cornerbacks

The NFL can't find enough decent starting QBs, many teams have serious questions at backup QB. By the time you get down to the Connor Shaw type of players no amount of development time will make a big difference.

I've been reading some of the stories about Buddy today. One of my fondest memories is being at the '85 playoff game against the Rams. It was cold and I still remember those guys walking around with no shirt on that are seen in the video. You can't play defense the same way today (watch Wilbur Marshall destroy Henry Ellard at 3:25) but back then Bears defenders were all in on every play and that came from Buddy's leadership. There have been other great defenses since then but none have had this combination of an attacking style, physical dominance, and tactical superiority over what an offense wanted to do. The 2000 Ravens came closest in my mind but they were not an attacking front with just 35 sacks. Put another way, the '85 Bears D under Buddy Ryan changed the way offenses played the game...forever. No other defense since that time can make that claim. http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap300000063...ses-of-all-time

He does a very good job breaking down McPhee's game. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCYzfVBuCfGz-oF3aOCGgO5g To reference Jason's post about concerns with Floyd keep in mind what you see McPhee cannot do (as compared to Von Miller in video) and what we know Floyd can do as he gets upfield quickly. Where Floyd will really need added strength is holding himself upright as he bends around the edge. I think that's the component of his game he'll have to work on the most.

I think what you were told is largely correct based on how he played in college. I wasn't too hot on picking Floyd in the 1st Rd because there is so little on tape of him beating OTs off the edge. It was also obvious he was only used as a part time pass rusher and otherwise ran all over the field in different roles so he never had time to focus on edge rushing. He does have the physical traits you want in a speed rusher off the edge. On film he has an explosive burst and covers a lot of ground with long strides very quickly. I was critical of his 3-cone time but after learning he was sick that day and unable to finish all the drills there is reason to believe that was far from his best. The best evidence that poor 3-cone time was an aberration is the fact the Bears brought him in for a 2-day visit during which he ran a full set of drills. I wasn't aware of that prior to the draft. Coaches, scouts, and GM all saw up close what he can do so they have a better idea of his ability than we were shown. Overall Pace and Fox have done well identifying talent in the last two offseasons so they get a little benefit of the doubt. Then there is Fangio, a coach who proved to me he can best utilize a players talent last year. Given how well the defense played last year with so many misfits and lack of talent was impressive. Fangio watched Floyd run those drills at Halas Hall so he knows what he can do and how to use him. And Fangio wanted him drafted. Nor is Fangio that concerned that he's a guy who excels at converting speed to power. That was a bit surprising as Fangio generally prefers bigger OLB. Floyd will get stronger but he'll never be like McPhee who is just plain violent and the point of attack. OTOH McPhee will never be like Floyd either and lacks upfield burst and bend around the edge. There's a lot of wait and see, but Floyd, who can cover TEs, could develop into a great chess piece around the LOS. It will take a couple seasons for us to see that potential. I see that as his floor but you don't draft a guy 9th overall for that role. He has to justify his draft position by developing into a double digit sack artist. That's Floyd's sole focus now. Unfortunately neither of our OTs will be the best challenge for him so I'll be skeptical of positive reports out of training camp. I believe we have the right staff to help Floyd reach his potential but I'm still in wait and see mode.

Here you go...long term contract talks opened up again... http://bearswire.usatoday.com/2016/06/21/l...alshon-jeffery/

Jeffrey was pouting a bit last year but he will collect at least $14.5 mil this year. One day he'll wake up and realize he wouldn't have that if Brandon Marshall were still here. I don't see any way the team would have put $10mil/yr into an aging Marshall with his attitude and signed Jeffrey to a long term deal. One way or another Marshall was never in the long term plan for the Bears once Pace took over. They made the early decision to move Marshall but it was going to happen last year or this year to make room for Jeffrey's new contract.

Yes, that would be nice but at this point what other options are there? Seems like a low risk/ and perhaps low reward scenario. At best I'd say he's being looked at to replace one of Housler, Lee, Braunecker, and on the outside perhaps the FB Lasike. Lee sounds like he's installed as the best blocking TE and that's not Moeaki's strength. This may well have more to do with special teams performance than TE skills, assuming those are relatively equal. We committed to Miller as our starter with the money we gave him and outside of the rumored offer to Gresham we've done little else to pursue replacing him as the starter. I don't count the TE from NO we gave an offer to as a serious effort at finding a starter. I agree that having Miller as our #2, or least having two TEs capable of being a decent #1 would be great to have. We're stuck waiting another year for that to happen. However, I don't think this story will be complete until after training camp and all the final cuts around the league are done.

There is a clear impasse in perceived value of Jeffrey's contract. Jeffrey held out of all voluntary workouts and practices, and of course the Bears held off on improving their offer. I think that was a wise thing for Pace to do. Jeffrey refused to be here then the club can't know what kind of condition he is in. That has to be a major concern when determining value, and especially with the guaranteed portion of a contract. Now that Alshon showed up for the mandatory part of camp and was in good shape, perhaps the best conditioning he's even had, will Pace be more comfortable increasing the contract offer and try to get a deal done before July 15th? I think so but there is no way to know how big the divide is, and how hard Jeffrey will stick to his requests. I'm sure there are a lot of personnel discussions and evaluations following the minicamp. If Pace and Fox were happy with what they saw in two days of practice and are willing to make a significant increase in their offer then we should hear some rumors of talks picking up within the next week or two. If not, I expect more silence until both parties make a final push for a deal just before the deadline in mid-July.

All we have at TE are either journeymen or rookies. How is this not adding competition among the journeymen?

I'm with you here. He's not worth getting into a negotiating battle if some team really wants him. If he's still around in a week or two bring him in and see how he is physically.

http://bearswire.usatoday.com/2016/06/13/f...ight-end-group/ I'm a little surprised to see Braunecker settle in as the #2 TE this early. Housler and Lee have much more time in the offense. Neither of them would be considered elite competition but knowing that Braunecker has shown up so quickly is good news for a team desperate for another receiving option behind Zach Miller. We still have to see them with the pads on and that will be a big challenge for Braunecker.

Another FB will show up for a test drive at minicamp... http://bearswire.usatoday.com/2016/06/12/b...ng-to-minicamp/

It appears Loggains wants to keep a FB on the roster. If so, this likely means we keep 3 TEs. Considering the other thread about Moeaki and the other TEs they took a look at recently I'd say they are trying to figure out which way they want to go with this last position on the roster. http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/footb...0612-story.html

Exactly, he's a good pick for competition at the bottom of the roster. Sanzenbacher was a 4.6 forty WR who played like a 4.6 WR. Braverman ran 4.47, which isn't stellar but seems to fit his playing speed. Against Ohio State he never ran away from players but he certainly made them work to stay with him. Sanzenbacher killed the 3-cone drill with a 6.46 while Braverman ran just 6.86. Nothing elite there from Braverman but his play speed indicates to me he's quicker than that. I've seen a lot of talk about Braverman replacing Eddie Royal but I don't see that happening at all. Royal understands the game well enough to hold an undrafted rookie who doesn't have as much athleticism as he does. At best Braverman replaces Mariani as the last WR/PR on the roster. That said I like the pick because Mariani is too slow and can (and should) be replaced by someone better.

What are we looking for here? Looking at our roster I think we want a better blocking TE because nobody really fills that void well. Of the TE names listed the best blocking TE is Moeaki, and he is more of a move TE. Then there is this article at the bottom listing Khari Lee as our starting TE, I presume our starting inline blocking TE. ----------------- On Moeaki... (I'm posting one comment but it is representative of the draft profiles I read) http://bleacherreport.com/articles/382607-...was-tony-moeaki "I think Tony's strengths line up very well with what teams are looking for from a second or third tight end. Tony's not going to be a Brandon Pettigrew type, who was the first tight end taken last year. He went in the first round because he was an excellent blocker and he could also be a factor in the passing game. Tony is what teams are calling a 'move' guy." - Paul Burmeister, NFL Network Analyst -------------- Ryan Taylor couldn't catch on with the Packers despite their TE struggles. http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/draft/players...torical/1117400 Negatives: Average size for the position, lacks strength and pop to be an in-line blocker. Not elusive after the catch and will not separate with speed from pro linebackers. Lacks athleticism to adjust to oncoming NFL defenders when blocking, also needs work on his cut blocks. Does not always find his target as a second-level blocker. -------------- Terenn Houk was 229lbs coming out of college he is not an inline blocker. ------------- The Suntimes article listing Lee as working with the 1's.... http://chicago.suntimes.com/sports/tight-e...duce-for-bears/ There are only 3 names listed in the original post but those prospects are all move TEs not inline blockers. I thought we had the move TE covered between Miller, Braunecker, and Housler. In general there is no problem looking at players like this during the offseason but we've been chasing TEs since we cut Bennett and we're still at it. Someone isn't making them happy in the OTAs...but who? It's not Miller since they knew what he could do before re-signing him, nor has there been any word of any injuries hampering him. I thought maybe Lee but if he's practicing with the 1's as the inline blocker and the team is bringing in move TEs then they are happy with Lee's blocking. That leaves Housler or Braunecker on the bubble, maybe both. Also, do we want to keep 3 or 4 TEs on the 53 man roster? That would make a difference as well. If the team prefers to keep 4 TEs odds are one of them gets a serious injury before the season starts and then we'd only have 3 TEs on the roster. Maybe we're just sniffing around for competition for that 4th roster spot. -----

Reading this article about Curtis Johnson and hearing about how Loggains is very upbeat and energetic it is clear our sideline is not going to be a quiet boring place like it often was under Trestman. Curtis Johnson brings the same meticulous detail that Trestman had but with a whole lot more energy and discipline behind it. http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/footb...0611-story.html

Impossible to know what happened here as a day or two earlier Ramirez was quoted as saying he was competing to be the starter. To go from that to retiring in two days is a massive change in mindset. Was it because he saw himself sliding too far down the depth chart? I was counting on having his experience in the locker room this season but if he was falling outside the top 8 then it's possible this is a good sign some of the others are starting play well. Or he was playing that poorly and we still have a depth problem. Shortly after he and Larsen signed we cut Slauson so the assumption then was that Ramirez was a better player. All eyes will be on the Oline vs. Dline workouts next week.

A little more insight on our rookie ILB. These guys do a good job breaking down Kwiatkoski's skills defending the run. I still like this draft pick and agree with the decision to move up to take him. He's got at least one year to sit behind Trev and Freeman and learn, more likely two or three. If he gets on the field sooner I think he's already better at diagnosing plays between the tackles than any of the ILBs who took the field for us last year. The outside the tackle stuff like pass coverage will take longer. http://bearswire.usatoday.com/2016/06/02/b...opping-the-run/

Amazing how far Jake Long has fallen. If he had anything left there's no way the Bears wouldn't have signed him over an unproven OT like Chandler. Chandler is an odd signing because he's got very little experience (none at LT) and is not what I want as a backup OT. At this point I have to assume the coaches compared his workout against Long's and he won but that's just blocking air. How he performs in the preseason, along with the others in the position battle like Kling, is something to watch because it's looking like we have a big talent drop off behind Massie and Leno. If the glass is half full I'd say this signing indicates the coaches are actually fairly high on either Kling or Becton filling this role. If the glass is half empty Hoyer better be ready to play.

I wonder if we're serious about signing him now or if we're taking an early look to see how his health is and then we'll keep his number handy in case some of the young guys don't develop as we hope. I'm not a big fan of signing him because he's done nothing in the last few years but if he's the backup plan there's a lot less risk than with the young players and his experience couldn't hurt. Tayo being cut now is either because he just wasn't close to doing what was required for his job so the coaches made an example of him, or he is performing the same as he did last year and we have players who are better. I hope it's the latter.

We can see physical talent when it shows up on the field but it always hard as fans to assess a player's work ethic. That was part of the question on Tayo when we drafted him. Whenever you get to late round picks there are always significant question marks. Throw your darts as best you can.

It's getting interesting (or scary) at the backup OT spot. Have to think someone like Kling showed something good early in the OTAs and Tayo did not.