AZ54

We're not even close to thinking about getting rid of Ogun. Last year we benched Brown so Anderson could and we were all excited about it (myself included) and then he shot a blank. Remember that crappy run D we had on the right side of our D? I haven't seen anything at all about Anderson becoming more than a situational pass rusher this year. He might step up but he might be the same guy. Then we have Bazuin who has never taken a snap for us. We have no clue what he can do. In this light I think the extension for Brown was JA's way of hedging his bets. It wasn't so much money that it hurt us capwise yet it made Brown happy enough that if he stays our starter for 2 or 3 more years he's set contractually. If JA waits a year knowing Brown wasn't happy with his contract last year then the demands could go way up. On the other side if Anderson puts up another 10+ sacks this year we'll be talking about his new contract next offseason.

If he gets reinstated, and I think the Packers will force him to do that, then they will hang onto him and try to trade him. If they end up releasing him it won't be right now. If he's going to wind up in Minn or Chicago (I don't want that) I have to think the Packers would try to deny him as much practice with his new team as possible.

Briggs got far less than what he wanted.

Hate to burst your bubble but Garrard isn't going anywhere anytime soon: David Garrard cashed in on his 2007 success with a shiny new contract (6-years, $60 Million) making him the highest paid Jacksonville Jaguar in the team’s history. How do you give these guys whatever they want? Briggs, Harris, Hester, Urlacher, etc. Or is it just Urlacher and Hester than can get whatever they want? At what point does a budget come into play? At what point do you consider the long term implications of giving him whatever he wants? At what point do you consider the quality of players you can surround Urlacher with because less money available means lower quality at other positions.

He is right on this. Get the emotions out of the way and tell me what does Favre know of our playbook? Nada. Has he been working with our receivers during the offseason to build timing? Nope. Now he's just going to walk into Halas hall and totally revise our offense with our young WR corps. I don't see it. All I see is the Favre that threw 6 INTs in a playoff game showing up for us. We've already got a QB that can do that for us and he isn't making $12million. There's a reason Green Bay kept the same offensive playbook for years despite different head coaches. If this were a different type of QB (i.e. cerebral type like Tom Brady) I'd be more inclined to make a decision like this. Adding a veteran QB for depth to the roster is a different story because he can come in and compete. Favre would be handed the keys before he got off the plane and it would be hard to take them away no matter how bad the performance. For all our QB question marks I just don't see this scenario helping us.

Rex doesn't fumble because his hands are small, he fumbles because in traffic he keeps the ball out away from his body. He does this, IMO, because he continues to want to make a positive play even when it isn't possible. He has to learn to just protect the ball when it isn't there. Rex INT to Jason Taylor was not on an out route, it was a lousy attempt at hitting a guy on a check down route. I'm not trying to argue over little details, my point is that he attempted to do the right thing (which he had been criticized for not doing) and still got burned. I compare Rex to a point guard in basketball who has good ball handling skills but just can't make passes in traffic. Some guys have an ability to read where everyone is going and pass the ball to an open guy even while double or triple teamed. Other guards can make nice open passes, hit some jumpers for you, drive the lane occasionally but when double teamed they rush their passes and things don't flow smoothly. Steve Nash is not the best athlete on the floor but when you watch him he makes things seem easy. Same goes for QBs like Brady, often what he's doing just looks easy. I don't see that ability in Rex and I haven't seen it in Orton either. When Rex first played for us I thought he had some of that ability to just feel his way around. After his leg injury I haven't seen it again. I haven't seen it in Orton either. I don't know if this is something you can develop or do you just "have it". Rex can do the footwork practices all he wants but if I were Pep I'd be devising some way to replicate a pocket collapsing around the QB and making these guys throw from a different spot than where they first setup in the pocket. Even then it won't compare to reality because they'd have to make the right read based on the pass coverage.

I'd be very happy if he did that for us. I can say I'm not expecting him to hit 4.4 ypc behind our Oline but if he does that's great news for us. Add in the receptions (which I think is a reasonable expectation for him 2/game) and our offense has a different look than when we had Ced in there. One thing about Forte is that some of his receptions might be downfield versus on a quick swing route out of the backfield, or the usual dump-off underneath route. When your RB can catch well you have a different way to beat a blitz besides keeping him in to block...let him run into the void created by the LB as long as ReOrt (Rex/Orton) can make that read.

Pep has had one year to fix Grossman's struggles which aren't related to throwing mechanics. Give him time and he's fine. His issues are his decision making under pressure. He got 3 games at the start of the year to show improvement and he failed. IMO the coaching on those decisions comes more from Turner than Pep. I certainly questioned a lot of what Turner did last year.

I understand that aspect but the point of this thread is who is the "key" to the defense that we can't afford to lose. We've gone so long without Mike Brown and at times have still been outstanding on D so while I want him out there I just don't think if he goes down again it's all going to fall apart. I think Harris is the key to making Dline play well and without him the rest of the line becomes very average. When we don't get pressure up the middle all the other groups (LB, DB) struggle as well. I'm hopeful too that we finally have some more depth at the DT position with Harrison, Dusty, Adams etc. but much like safety we haven't really seen that. Harris played hurt most of last year and rarely practiced. As far as lining guys up I think Urlacher does a pretty good job of it but if he puts the safety in the right gap and he whiffs on the tackle it didn't make matter. That's why I included the points about the quality of the players we put on the field year after year when Brown went down. It wasn't just his leadership lining up guys that we missed, it was his tackling ability. I think we finally will have some better tacklers at S this year among McGowan, Payne, Steltz. We all know DManning can't tackle well, Chris Harris used to dive in and either got a big hit or caught nothing but air. I always like McGowan in the box but he wasn't very effective once he got hurt last year. By the way, he's now listed at 207lbs, didn't he used to be below 190lb? I'm not saying there won't be a dropoff if Brown goes down, I just don't think we're going to fall apart. Overall I think we might finally have solid depth all the way around the defensive roster. Much depends on the rookies but we've picked a lot of good talent over the last couple years Safety is still the weakest overall but if the other units are as good as I think they can be that will reduce the reliance on them.

Harris and I think Urlachers contract demands aren't indicative of a team first attitude. Nor do I like the way he's gone public with his request. Urlacher is without a doubt one of the leaders of the team but I think the torch is passing to Harris, rather I think Harris is going to take the torch.

Didn't we read the same story last year? This is good to hear but I agree with the author in that none of it will matter until there's a blitz on. Then can he make the right read?

I think the torch has been passed to Harris. Sorry to say but at some point a guy has to be on the field to be considered key and Mike just hasn't been there enough the last few years. The players have all learned to get along without him. It's not that he's not valuable, a big contributor, and one of the leaders but if he goes down again this year nobody is going to be surprised by it. We have other guys in our defensive backfield who provide leadership now in Tillman and Vasher. Not in the same league as what Brown contributes but it's not the huge dropoff we had years ago when those guys were in their first and second years. I also want to add that part of the reason we have this same discussion every offseason is that the players who replace Brown are below average. DManning, Arch, McGowan, Chris Harris. I'd say three of those guys have all improve over the years but when they first hit the field it wasn't pretty. If that dropoff hadn't been so big I don't think so many would rate Brown as the key to our D this year. Pixote said he felt we had poor depth again this year but I don't think it's as bad as other years. Last year wouldn't have been as bad if we didn't trade Chris Harris (I agreed with that deal). I'm mixing SS and FS in this discussion because I think it's been weakness at both positions that's made Mike Brown's loss even more painful. I think McGowan will be improved this year at SS. I think Steltz has the instincts and attitude needed for the position; not the athleticism but Mike Brown isn't that athletic either. I still like Payne and felt he'd be a contributor last year (special teams and possibly 3rd safety in that one scheme) but got hurt early. I don't know what to think of DManning; I love his athleticism but he's just lost out there and sometimes tackles like a girl. Oddly he is the only player on our roster listed as FS, everyone else is listed as S. It seems we've just drafted around him and will try to find a spot for him in the nickel of dime package. So for the combo of the two factors 1) nobody will be counting on Brown this year and 2) better depth than what we had on the field last year (how bad was Arch?) that won't make his loss as big a factor if it happens. Then the third factor in that Harris is going to be the locker room leader and the leader on the field. Brown may well lead the Safeties but the entire D is no longer looking toward him IMO.

Yes, except Favre himself knew the offense. Let me add that I was only speaking from a logical standpoint. Emotionally I couldn't stand seeing him wearing a Bears uniform. Even if the Bears won the Superbowl all I'd ever hear from Packers fans would be "yes you won but you needed our Hall of Fame QB to do it". I don't want that at any cost.

I totally agree.

As much as I like Urlacher he had his big payday with an early extension years ago and it's still a relevant contract. His bitching and moaning bothers me when we have other key players that deserve their early payday (i.e. Hester). Anything the Bears offer is just courtesy but they in no way should feel obligated to pay him all this money again just a few years after the last deal. Isn't this the same guy who said he'd take a pay cut to help sign Briggs?

Not at this point. He hasn't done anything all offseason to learn our playbook. I see more headaches than answers especially given our inexperienced WR and RB.

If I see Metcalf starting at LG I'll know they only polished part of that turd.

Whether or not the numbers are perfectly accurate the fact remains many NFL teams have held cities hostage demanding new stadiums or threatening to leave. If the NFL stadium fund money isn't throw in that one list I don't know why and I didn't want to spend a ton of time on every detail. In this respect having no team in LA has been the NFL owners best friend. Put a team in LA and their leverage drops dramatically. NFL fans won't feel quite as put off by this mess but other citizens who don't follow football don't like these deals. Your thoughts about hotel taxes and rental car taxes, well it's still public money and in that sense it's a worse deal for the everyday citizen. If someone from Phoenix visits Chicago they have to pay for their new football stadium. I realize that's all part of the deal whenever you leave your home state or country. Another problem I have with some of these deals is that in some cases I'm willing to bet the citizens didn't get to vote on the new taxes or the stadium deal and I think that's wrong. I'm still pissed off about having to pay for Colangelo's baseball stadium, I'd have voted for it but he and his cronies hijacked the system and found ways to skirt the law about voting for the tax increase. It is the #1 reason I've never attended a DBacks games, not even when they play the Cubs and even to the point where I've turned down free tickets. The bottom line in all this for me is that it's a bit hypocritical for the league to talk about how much money they are losing on their new stadiums when they aren't even financing the majority of the bill, and in some cases none of it. In the majority of these stadiums deals I'm willing to bet the owners frequently stated how they couldn't afford to kick in money. Then when they do kick in money they demand all the advertising rights during games, they demand the naming rights to the stadium (ala AZ Cardinals), parking receipts, etc. to guarantee them a revenue stream to get their money back. I'm sure they don't always get everything they want and often these items are split among the taxpayers and team. I think Goodell would do better to stick to crying about the high operating expenses and the outrageous signing bonuses they are forking over. I think the cap is tied to operating revenues. Does that count the money teams make when, like Jerry Jones, they sign a deal with Pepsi to make it the official drink of the Cowboys? Yet despite the big bucks flying around I realize not all owners are incredibly wealthy, like the McCaskeys.

70 draft picks league-wide have signed so far. We have 11 of those. That's excellent work by the front office.

What did Baltimore get from the Cleveland Browns to build that stadium? From what I know they basically built a stadium (had the deal in place) and then went shopping for a team. What deal did St Louis Rams? Here's one link: http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html...756C0A96F958260 SPORTS BUSINESS; Stadium Financing? New Twist for N.F.L. By RICHARD SANDOMIR Published: May 6, 1999 Imagine if George Steinbrenner volunteered to help pay for a new downtown Montreal Expos stadium. Better yet, think of the Expos agreeing to chip in for a $1 billion Yankee Stadium for the good of baseball. That is what the National Football League rivals of Robert K. Kraft, who owns the New England Patriots, will do if a plan to build a $250 million stadium in Foxboro, Mass., comes to fruition. Last week, after the league made public its ardor to keep the Patriots from leaving Foxboro, the team dumped a proposed $374 million taxpayer-paid stadium in Hartford because there was no guarantee it would be ready by 2002. and another link: I'm only posting the stadium data but the short article is worth reading IMO. http://www.detnews.com/2005/business/0504/30/biz-166888.htm What the people pay for stadiums A comparison of the public financing burdens for 10 recently built NFL stadiums (year is the first season that the team played in the stadium): Large markets -- Reliant Stadium (Houston Texans, 2002): 73 percent -- Qwest Field (Seattle Seahawks, 2002): 73 percent -- Lincoln Financial Field (Philadelphia Eagles, 2003): 39 percent -- Ford Field (Detroit Lions, 2002): 30 percent -- Gillette Stadium (New England Patriots, 2002): 0 percent Small markets -- The Coliseum (Tennessee Titans, 1999): 100 percent -- Paul Brown Stadium (Cincinnati Bengals, 2000): 94 percent -- Cleveland Browns Stadium (1999): 81 percent -- Invesco Field at Mile High (Denver Broncos, 2001): 75 percent -- Heinz Field (Pittsburgh Steelers, 2001): 56 percent Note: In most cases, costs listed are only for construction. Some Tennessee Coliseum funding is generated from personal seat licenses. -- Indianapolis Star reports A third link with data on stadium financing. I'll do my best to format it so it's legible but there's a lot of zeros in the Private$ column and you needn't go beyond Lake Shore drive to find a stadium funded entirely by the public. http://www.uta.edu/depken/ugrad/sports/section8.pdf Franchise Year Public $m Private $m capacity $/seat Atlanta Falcons 1992 214 0 71594 2989.07 Carolina Panthers 1996 50 248 73248 4068.37 Washington Redskins 1997 70.5 180 80116 3126.71 Baltimore Ravens 1998 220 0 68915 3192.33 Tampa Bay Buccaneers 1998 168.5 0 65647 2566.75 Cleveland Browns 1999 283 0 72000 3930.55 Tennessee Titans 1999 290 0 67000 4328.35 Cincinnati Bengals 2000 400 0 65535 6103.60 Denver Broncos 2001 273.15 90.62 76125 4778.58 Pittsburgh Steelers 2001 153.5 76.5 65000 3538.46 Chicago Bears 2002 365 0 70904 5147.80 Detroit Lions 2002 300 0 65000 4615.38 Houston Texans 2002 399 50 69500 6460.43 New England Patriots 2002 0 325 68000 4779.41 Seattle Seahawks 2002 200 100 67000 4477.61 Chicago Bears 2003 365 0 63000 5793.65 Philadelphia Eagles 2003 512 0 63352 8081.82 I still feel Goodell should shutup about the high cost of stadiums as it's more likely to generate negative press for the league.

LT, LEFT TACKLE, LEFT TACKLE by far is more important to the success of the team this year. Not to mention the fact that RBs just have to run to daylight and often can survive a holdout and still have an impact in the first year. Take Williams out of all (or most) of the training camp and he will lose a lot of valuable time getting his timing down with the Oline. There's a reason LT is where many of the smartest players in the NFL line up. The demands that make intelligence such an important asset for a LT also mean it takes more time for him to learn the role. In our situation I'll go one step further in that I feel St. Clair is likely to be our starting LG which will be somewhat of a new position for him. If Williams isn't there learning the LT role then St. Clair isn't learning the LG role and we have further reduced the Oline performance. You don't have the cascade effect at RB especially as AP has been in the system for so long and doesn't need many reps. Fix the Oline and we'll be able to find plenty of RBs who can run for over 1000 yards.

Losing Berrian wouldn't be that big of a deal IF we had any other receivers on our roster that we could count on. I think Berrian's numbers were inflated simply because he was the best option we had. It's not that I didn't want him on the team rather he's just not worth $8mil/yr. He will be a good WR for years to come but I don't think he'll ever earn that salary.

IMO our $40milllion dollar man Tommie Harris belongs in that group. I'd also argue that we can (and have) minimize the loss of one of these three players but when we lose any two of the three we really notice the difference. Put Harris on the field in the Superbowl and I think that's a totally different game.

Or maybe this is why weren't not interested yet: http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3465537 "Dr. James Andrews performed the surgery on Jones' right knee in January and told him it would take up to 10 months to get back on the field. Jones, though, expects to go through non-contact drills during training camp with the team that signs him."

Ah yes, the turnover factor. Ask Brett Favre how that works when Charles Tillman is covering his WRs.