AZ54

"I prefer a balanced attack, but don't kid yourself, it was FAR from easy to gameplan against the Packers. They've been tearing the entire league a new ass for more than a few years." Although last year last year they ran away with it especially the last game of the season but other than that one I don't agree with your statement. Maybe scoring 10pts is getting torn up in your opinion but it seems to me one team has been right there holding their offense in check. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bears–Packers_rivalry 2009 Sunday, September 13 Green Bay Packers 21–15 Chicago Bears 70,920 Green Bay 2009 Sunday, December 13 Green Bay Packers 21–14 Chicago Bears 62,214 Chicago [edit]2010s (Packers 4-1) Year Date Winner Result Loser Attendance Location 2010 Monday, September 27 Chicago Bears 20–17 Green Bay Packers 62,179 Chicago 2011 Sunday, January 2 Green Bay Packers 10–3 Chicago Bears 70,833 Green Bay 2011 Sunday, January 23* Green Bay Packers 21-14 Chicago Bears 64,912 Chicago 2011 Sunday, September 25 Green Bay Packers 27-17 Chicago Bears 62,339 Chicago 2011 Sunday, December 25 Green Bay Packers 35-21 Chicago Bears 70,093 Green Bay

WR Chris Summers, seems like a good prospect. Seems clear there is going to be some competition for the last WR spot among Thomas, Sanz, and Summers. They had good words for Sanzenbacher but there really hasn't been anything of note said about Thomas as a WR.

Hester best PR?

Never heard of the guy and he's not even good enough to make it to a training camp with 90 players on the roster yet he's better than Webb? Webb is not that bad and I am not being generous in my evaluation of Webb.

Davis is still a big "if" after all these years. Spaeth is not a dynamic player at all but he can usually block in line. His problem is blocking on the move, isn't that right Matt Forte? Kyle Adams is a total question mark at this time although he reportedly looked pretty good in the OTAs. I think we had to add a player to the mix and create some competition. Are we going to be upset if one of these four players gets cut given the level of competition? Davis has $2.7million in signing bonus so he's not going anywhere but who are the next two on the depth chart? May the best two men win a job. Or could we keep all four and cut Clutts? If you're going H-back you probably don't need a FB. http://www.csnchicago.com/football-chicago...?blockID=669942 UPDATE: According to ProFootballTalk, Davis will earn a $2.7 million signing bonus, a $700,000 base salary and a $100,000 workout bonus in 2012. In 2013, he'll earn a $2.4 million base salary with a $100,000 workout bonus. Davis will roughly earn $6 million for his two-year deal.

Even my daughter knew enough to ignore Joe Flacco when she met him last summer but the national media?

Here's a little more insight as to why Emery made these changes: http://www.chicagobears.com/news/NewsStory.asp?story_id=8849 “We want the senior scouts to be in roles where they can see the bigger picture and see more of the better players in the country,” Emery said. “We want them to cross-check the best players so they can have a better overall take on the ability level of the best players in the country.” With a larger staff, more scouts will have seen the top prospects heading into pre-draft meetings. “In the past with six area scouts often you would go into meetings with only one evaluation on a player,” Emery said. “Now with our increased staff and their roles, we’ll have three and possibly even four evaluations of a player. That will give us a better feel for the players and put us in a better position. “Having four in-house Scouting Assistants will also allow us to do a deeper dig on background for character and medical incidents and will allow us to be more accurate and complete with our information.”

That is a huge increase in the size of the scouting department. There was a lot of loyalty as well rewarding many long time Bears scouts.

All that money and he can't afford to call a taxi? Rent a limo for the night?

I don't think Emery disregards the floor at all and nothing he has said indicates that. It appears his window of acceptability on floor-to-ceiling is probably a bit wider than JAs was. However, as MadLith said, Emery targets football players. JA always seemed to be more concerned with the floor in his first round picks than he was with the ceiling. The confidence in making these risk decisions comes from your scouting and Emery is going to be very involved in how that is done as well as doing some scouting himself.

As evidenced by our recent draft we are no longer looking for players with the highest floor. http://www.chicagobears.com/news/NewsStory.asp?story_id=8845 “I want the players with the high ceilings, with the largest capacity for growth,” Emery said in King's Monday Morning Quarterback column. “And I believe every aspect of that player is on tape. You can see him, you can read him.” I think this showed in our draft: Trading up for Alshon Jeffrey, taking Brandon Hardin in Rd 3. I can't see JA ever making the trade to grab Jeffrey especially if he had already made a deal to acquire Brandon Marshall. JA would have sat and waited to see who fell to him. JA might have taken Hardin as he took risks at DB with guys like Danieal Manning but with JA change on taking injury risks his last couple seasons I don't know if he'd have made that pick in Rd 3.

I'm sure the Patriots are worried about the exact same thing as they have a history of letting good players leave when they wouldn't pay their contract demands including the current battle with Wes Welker. Miraculously they still have good vet FA willing to play there, often bargain prices, just for a shot to win a ring.

I view this more as do the Bears (or we) think Forte will be highly productive for 3 years? More realistically if I take Forte's side on a 4 or 5 year deal can we get three of the four years at a high level of productivity, assuming one of those seasons will be marred by injury. Forte's arguing he will be the Bears don't want that commitment. I understand Forte's demands but from a business standpoint and that of what helps us keep the best team on the field long term I side with the Bears. If Forte is unwilling to accept less guaranteed than his reported demand of $20mil then I'd do the back-to-back franchise tags (if he's healthy and performing) and then move on.

Speed in the NFL is not a huge factor. You have to have it to compete in on the field but there are so many fast players in the league it doesn't guarantee success. If things go well it seems a player will get just a few chances to showcase their speed on a play. Then there's the whole team aspect of the game. How far from his coverage will Hester get before some DE runs past Webb into Cutler? That's where coaching and play calling comes into play....they have to scheme correctly to get more opportunities for players to use their abilities.

I never viewed Wootton as the type of quick twitch player we need at DE. He seems to fit more of a two gap style defense. I'd love to see him have a good year but I don't have high hopes. Izzy isn't either so I think the best we could expect is for Wootton to display enough to look like a solid 3rd DE for our roster and end up as a replacement for Izzy.

Bears concerned how 28-year-old running back's knees will hold up. http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/footb...,4014548.column I think this sums it up for the Bears. Why is this out now? Bears releasing information to soften Forte's stance? Or is this Haugh doing some research on his own to find out why the two sides are so far apart and have remained that way through two GMs?

Don't get me wrong, I like having Hester and too agree that he should be able to thrive better now with two serious threats on the outside. Teams will have to respect the fact that Jeffrey and Marshall can break one tackle and then they are gone. It's not necessarily their speed that causes defenses to align differently. That should open things up inside for Hester, or even make it easier to work underneath outside routes. IMO this just means Hester will be more effective for us on a per snap basis, not necessarily that he'll be the focal point of the offense. I am not surprised at the fact Hester is having a great camp. He's a workout warrior and the last couple years has found the right balance in strength vs speed/quickness. The fact he's making plays all over the field is not only good sign how hell be as a receiver but also for his punt returns. I also have to think some of the reason for this is Tice scaling back what he has to do. Over the years we've said we'll have Hester line up all over the field, now is it just scaled back so he has 10-15 things to focus on and do well? It's not just for Hester either, several offensive players have already spoken up about how things were simplified and it will be easier to play faster.

Hester having the best camp. Marshall is learning a new offense. Jeffrey (who I think some are anointing to a starting role bit too quickly) is trying to figure out why there are so many pages in the playbook. Weems is a KR. The dude from NY hasn't been much of a WR either in his career and both of these special teamers are learning a new offense. That means Hester in the first 2 (yes 2) practices is performing better than Mr. Utility Earl Bennett (and I like Earl a lot but that is what he is).

That generated a lot of excitement.

Can Winslow block? Serious question if anyone knows. If he's just another Greg Olsen I prefer to keep our Davis and Spaeth and let the new kid fill the downfield WR role. If Winslow is mostly just a pass catching threat then I pass at any price. If he can block decently then he might be worth a shot but with bad knees it's hard to invest too much into him when he can't practice. We'll have to offenses version of Tommie Harris....all "if". Oh and the reason for the blocking question is that I value Cutler's health and I don't trust our Oline to keep him that way.

Plenty of $$$ available to grab a good vet FA if one should become available.

I agree and I know it's not that simple but after working a 14hr shift I wasn't going to type out all the variations, just saying I'm not a big fan of putting all our apples in one RB basket and I think that extra money is better spend elsewhere across the offense's roster. By the way it's the same with the QB...you pretty much have to draft them and then you have to pay the going rate. Rarely do guys like Cutler hit the market.

Given the high injury risk and short "peak" career years I prefer to build a roster with the 2 RB approach and focus more $$ on the oline since they can do double duty in protecting the QB and opening the holes for RBs. Give me 2 Michael Bush types for $7mil/yr versus one Matt Forte and one Michael Bush for (based on current contracts) what will end up being over $11mil/yr. Reality is we still have to have depth at RB. I take my extra $3mil and apply it to one LT position and instead of getting an average LT at $4-5mil/yr I can afford a top 10 LT at $7-8mil/yr. Emery's approach to the roster and Forte's contract indicates to me that he feels the same. That's why I said months ago when it was clear Forte's demands for $20mil guaranteed likely meant the club would take him one season at a time on the franchise tag and spend the same money. If he's hurt seriously this season (I hope not) they have hedged their bets. I hate to say it but it's a business and that is how all GMs have to approach the product on the field. The way they'll have to find common ground would be wrapping in more pay in performance bonuses and significant roster bonuses payable early in the offseason. Team still has some way out without committing all that money upfront yet Forte still has reasonable assurance he'll get paid as long as he continues to perform. I don't know if they'll find that common ground, it doesn't appear they will.

SMC having 4 sacks in the preseason.

3rd Rd talent is different from 3rd Rd draft pick in the sense that the people who have to cut the checks and commit a lot of time and effort to getting them ready to play must consider the intangibles on the player. Will he work hard? Drug use going to get him suspended? A player is worthless when he can't take the field because he's sitting on his 3rd Rd talent at home. I like the idea of giving the kid a chance at minimal risk thought while we took someone else with a higher probability of helping the team in the 3rd Rd.