AZ54

I know the point of this thread was "are we better at LB" but as was pointed out above, if you are going to compare the business decisions at LB you will also have to add in the other players we signed (or didn't have to cut) with the extra $3-5mil we saved over Roach/Urlacher. From a LB evaluation perhaps it's a wash, some good some bad and each of us weight different variables as we see it (leadership, experience, etc.). Those who really valued Urlacher's leadership will likely fall to the negative side. Those who put more weight on his injury prone body and slowness probably see it the other way. For the overall roster I think it's a big positive.

Better. These guys have just as much experience in Tucker's defense as Urlacher and Roach. In terms of years of experience they have more than the two who departed but in general I'd say the experience is a wash. We definitely lost in terms of leadership but improved in the athleticism department at both positions. Then there is this: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2013-02...ive-coordinator Tucker also was noncommittal on where Shea McClellin may play in the future, but he was firmly committed to a 4-3 defense. “We don’t have any plans to switch at this point,” he said. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- That is a month old but the fact is we really don't know what our defense will look like. I don't expect SMC to change positions in part because if we were thinking of that I think we'd be more clear about staying at #20 hoping to get one of the better DE's (probably won't be there anyway) rather than trying to trade down. Then again smoke screens run rampant this time of year.

I read somewhere that he's been helped out by the talent surrounding him but yeah if he's there in the 4th bring him in. Again, those reports say he's stout at the point of attack that isn't in question, it's his lack of athleticism that is. Personally I've never watched the guy so I can't say, just trying to figure out the who/what/when/where of the draft.

I think the Bears backed off Louis after they signed Scott. It appears they are moving Carimi inside. I still expect an OG in the draft and in the later rounds a Center. Not so sure about Jones as the more I've read about him lately the more it seems his lack of athleticism will make him an average player. In day 3 he's a yes but Rd 2 not and I don't think I'd draft him in Rd 3 (if we end up with a pick) as there will probably be better value in taking a WR, LB, or CB there.

With all the players Emery has been able to add I've been wondering if we might go that route with our first pick. If somebody falls and the talent is too good to pass up I think he will do that but priority 1 is to trade back and grab at least one more pick.

The previous offseason was all about giving Lovie one year to prove it and for most part I think Emergy gave him what he said he needed. Brandon Marshall and drafted a DE in first round, got another WR in Rd2. And we ignored Oline in the draft again and drafted a safety in Rd3...a Lovie trademark. Plus Emery didn't have much time to scout the Bears players before the draft. Certainly not as much as he knows them now after being around them one full season. Add in that he has significantly increased the size of our scouting department and this offseason we are seeing the results. For better or worse we do not know but clearly the plan has changed. Webb demoted, possibly gone from roster depending on how or where Carimi competes for a job. I think a lot of what happened with the coaches and their commitment to our existing Oline players had a role in Lovie's firing. Cutler not extended...no commitment has to earn it. Urlacher gone. Tillman contract not extended. A little bit surprising here but I think he doesn't want a long term commitment to an aging veteran, possibly will let market settle and then see if there's a 1-2yr extension they can agree on. Or just deal with it next year. Tillman is not a great cover guy. Jennings...I expected something here before FA began to give us more flexibility especially given how well Jennings played last season. He sits and waits and again the market is dropping so comparisons with other CB will bring the price down. Or is it because we are considering a scheme change where Jennings might not fit as well? Right now it's clear he is interested in getting a younger roster and gaining cap flexibility for the future.

No but I think more weight is being given to Urlacher's situation by fans than what the vast majority of players consider. I'd say a winning organization carries far more weight than how one player was treated at the end of his legendary career. I'll use a single data point here: New England regularly dumps key veterans by refusing to give into large contract demands (they just dumped Welker after refusing to give him a long term deal) yet each year are considered by many veterans to be a solid destination spot. IIRC Urlacher mentioned them as a possibility.

50 years?

There are plenty of players around the league who can find millions, or at least hundreds of thousands of reasons to sign here. The Bears gave Urlacher over $60million during his career, that's bad treatment?

No surprise here as the team has openly courted Scott to return, thus signaling their intentions of Carimi finding a job at OG, maybe LG is the most logical since he's had more time playing on the left side in college than he's played on the right in the NFL. Just had to wait for the market to bottom out. Now Lance Louis has to get serious about finding work! I think his best chance to make a positive impression for a long term contract is a 1yr deal with Chicago and that's what I expect will happen.

I don't like Minter at 20 either. Too slow, has good skills reading the plays but he seems like the type of you can find in the 2nd Rd in most drafts.

I'll support that line of reasoning. When Bruce Arians took over he fired the DC, who had done a very good job. Said he didn't want anyone from the old regime on hand to undermine the positions of the new staff. There is no way he is the only person in the NFL thinking that way. Overall I think the Urlacher position comes down to the fact they wanted to pay him solely for what he could do on the field but there was no added value in their minds for his leadership. That's simply because the potential positives were outweighed or at least offset by the potential negatives of him not liking the "new system".

The final calculation of this will have to be based on the fact he wanted a 2yr deal. We know he wanted $5mil/yr but for sake of discussion we can assume he'd have agreed to something in the $3.5mil/yr range. Of course we'll be able to see how he performs for whichever team signs him, and for how much over these two seasons.

I think at this point AZ just grabs whichever QB remains at their 2nd Rd pick. Can't say there's much difference between the few who will go in the first round and those who will be available in Rd 2.

Probably the first time anyone has used the phrase... DIII steal.

Agreed

Best available in Rd 1 now and I don't even mind if that's a CB. Tillman isn't getting any younger.

"Career high 19 receptions last year" Not gonna miss that.

After digging around a bit it seems he had a $22mil deal with Carolina in 2011 and his stats are pretty good. That kind of money doesn't get tossed around for nothing so he must have been good. The back injury is a big concern and likely is why he signed a 1yr prove it deal heavy on incentives (that can take him near $1.75mil for this season). All in all it appears Emery went out and for Urlacher's money (seems he wanted at least $3mil/yr) definitely filled two spots with equal or better talent than we had last year. Net savings equates to what we'd have paid Roach. We gained more flexibility in the draft for our first pick as well. This is why the team gave Urlacher an ultimatum or "best and final" offer. Emery knew the market had come down for some of these available LBs and he had to act fast to get the players he wanted.

What does that have to do with the amount of muscle he has on his frame?

I don't hate Hester, I don't like what we've paid him versus what he's done lately but if moved back to strictly return duties hopefully he'll focus on losing the bulk and get some of his quickness back. Hopefully he won't run scared either. I won't be upset if the Bears trade him or cut him, he's no longer a must have IMO.

Let's hope they'd like to move up to #20.

I like your plan but I believe the staff feels we have options. With the team stating they'd like to re-sign Scott it seems they feel Carimi will be at OG and so I see him at LG. He used to play LT so changing back to the left side should be a no-brainer for him. -------------------------------------------------------------------- If we stay at 20 I can see us taking Fluker for RT simply because the wish list OG are gone by then. In this case Scott gets cut and Webb ends up as our swing OT. Or Webb gets cut, don't care either way. Rd 2 goes to LB. Rd 4 goes to rookie C. Bushrod,Webb Carimi/Brown (best man wins the job) Garza/rookie Louis/Brown Fluker/Webb -------------------------------------------------------------------- If we trade back and Fluker is gone I see LB in Rd 1, OG in Rd 2, and C in Rd 4. The 3rd Rd pick we get is used to draft a safety.....(just kidding Lovie's gone but wait didn't Emery draft an injury plagued S in Rd 3 last year?) I'd say we draft our WR there. Bushrod/Carimi Rookie/Brown Garza/Rookie Louis/Brown Webb/Carimi (best player wins starting role) ...and yes, I said the staff feels Carimi is best suited for OG but his versatility to backup either OG/OT does add value over a player like Scott. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- From an overall team standpoint I'd like to see us trade back as it helps us out tremendously. I don't know college players that well so I'll let others fill in those blanks but there are several good options for OG in Rd 2, several good WRs available in the 3rd that fit what we need, and finding a C in Rd 4 should be no problem either.

1) Chad Johnson has been inspired to earn a decent multiyear contract for several years, it ain't happening. 2) Don't need him running his mouth on the bench. That's a spot for a rookie who can play some special teams and be groomed to take Bennett's place. 3) I can go to Fit Speed and work my ass off, be in great shape, and I'll still run a 5.5 forty. So it will be for Chad Johnson: Faster than me, but he's still going to be slow by NFL standards. Conditioning has not been his problem, the film doesn't lie.

I like it. I don't see Brown as a MLB but talent is there and soon we'll need to replace Briggs. DJ can man the middle for a season (or two if he behaves).