'TD'

I don't have it, but you can find all of the players stats here..... http://sports.ign.com/madden09/bears.html It looks like Grossman is 79 overall with 66 Awareness 95 throwing power and 84 accuracy.

They were both just stating facts. I have more of a problem with Moose. He didn't have to go there about the stat I hate seeing all the time. Plus, it looks like Moose was talking to reporters, while Tanks was talking with his teammates.

I think the team is just that bad. It was impossible to run behind this line last year and it definitely didn't improve and it got thinner in depth. Last year the Bears were 3rd last in rushing yards per game at 83.1. In comparison, the Vikings, who were first, they had 164 rushing yards per game. The passing game did nothing to upgrade at it's main position, QB. With no one to get the ball to them, it really doesn't matter what is at receiver. I personally think the loss of Berrian vs. his possible replacements majorly outweighs Booker over Moose, but it doesn't really matter with no one to get them the ball. I don't see how any writer could rank the Bears higher.

i figured i'd bump it to the first page

If he could stay healthy behind this horrible line, he would be the ideal fit for the Bears. He's a smart QB, with what has to be one of the NFL's bests career passing percentage of 65.6%. He would give the WR's a chance to grow and make them look better. Not to mention, he is only 32 and still has a few more good years left in him. Most importantly, his game would keep the O on the field and keep the chains moving, while letting the D rest.

That's why Chris Carter was always my favorite WR to watch play. Those sideline catches for a first down were a thing of beauty. Speed is overrated in comparison to hands and smarts like dragging your feet.

I was thinking Hunter or Gould myself, even though a natural answer would be Brown or Urlacher. I'm going to go a different direction tho, to the Offense. Marty Booker would be my favorite current Bear at the moment. The guy set all kinds of team records for receiving, then he gets traded. As soon as he gets free from the Dolphins, he says he wants to be in Chicago. If that guy isn't a true Bear at heart, I don't know who is.

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/blog/shutdown_...l?urn=nfl,95401 Wednesday, Jul 23, 2008 9:31 am EDT Brett Favre might want to invest in his own cell phone By MJD It's not as poetically idiotic as Chris Henry getting arrested while wearing his own jersey, but this one's in the same neighborhood. Remember those tampering charges that the Packers filed against the Vikings? And remember how I thought it would be difficult for the Packers to prove that Favre had made inappropriate contact with the Vikings? Well, that assumed that Brett Favre wasn't using a Packers-issued cell phone to make those calls to the Vikings. As it turns out, Favre may have done exactly that. From the Minneapolis Star-Tribune: ...Bob McGinn of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel had an interesting bit of information in a piece he wrote about the quarterback today. McGinn writes that a source said Favre had continued to use a Packers-issued cell phone and that when the team checked the phone records it found “repeated calls to coach Brad Childress and offensive coordinator Darrell Bevell.” The possibility of Favre having used a phone issued by the Packers had been speculated on last week after the Associated Press reported that Green Bay informed the NFL it felt “an investigation of the phone records would show more than ‘normal contact’ between the Vikings and Favre, even before he formally asked for his release to play for another team.” In fairness to Favre, it should be mentioned that any phone calls he made to the Vikings were made in a gunslinging fashion, and through the entire conversation, he looked like a kid out there, just having fun. Say this turns out to be true, and tampering by the Vikings can be proved. And say that the Packers do what they're expected to do, and block Favre from playing for the Vikings. Favre could end up costing the Vikings draft picks and fines while never playing a down for them, while also putting the Packers in this miserable position. Give him a couple more weeks, and he might just find a way to tear down the entire NFC North.

I would be one happy Bears fan if Brohm was brought in. Brohm's the top QB in my book this year, and I'll be very disappointed if he isn't brought in some fashion. Whether it be through drafting at 14, trading down in the first, or trading up from our second. Let's face it, the 2 quarterbacks on this team are not even average as you say, atleast no average starters. They are below average starters, and maybe average QB's when you consider all in the league including 3rd stringers. Since, at this point, we are stuck with Grossman or Orton starting this year, I feel this offense will be a failure no matter who we draft this year. If we draft Brohm this year, he will be ready to start next year, hopefully. If we settle for another QB, we are going to put ourselves in a bad position. I see most the other QB's as a wasted pick. Either A) we will be held hostage for years again by the team being handcuffed to a subpar player ala Grossman, in a year or 2 we will be drafting a QB again and waiting for him to develop another year before he can start, or C) I'm wrong and we have a QB. As much as I am a staunch supporter in building a line, I was a little ticked off we didn't pursue the FA's available, I am sickened more at the prospect of seeing a Grossman/Orton lead offense for a few more years. Don't get me wrong, I'm not against OL in the first, if we find a way to move up from the second to first to get Brohm. I think he is a solid pick at 14. I think as far as team need goes, I think the favored tail of Bears QB starters that broadcasters like to show says it all. It's time to get on the ball and fix the position. I want a real prospect. I don't want to see a subpar one or one just going off physical attributes like Flacco. I don't want to waste another 2 or more years, only to have to go back to the drawing board again and wait another year after that to see what that player has.

I hated last years draft myself. I brought up 2006 mainly because of how bad the offense was then and how we didn't address it. You always read how good teams build through the draft. Well this team is historically bad on offense, and sadly we don't have much to have hope on from past drafts. I'll list the players below that we have drafted for offense since JA's hiring. 2002 1st Marc Columbo- T 2nd Terrence Metcalf- Gaurd 6th Adrian Peterson - RB 6th Jamin Elliot - WR 6th Bryan Fletcher - TE Well Columbo appears to be a good pick now, he was injured while he was here and gone now. Metcalf is a starter at the moment, but shouldn't be. Peterson is loved in Chicago, but isn't a starting RB. 2003 1st Rex Grossman-QB 5th Bobby Wade-WR 5th Justin Gage-WR 6th Brock Forsey- RB 7th Bryan Andersen- Gaurd Grossman has had a history of injuries and erratic play. He is loved by some fans, hated by others. The fact he only received a one year dear this year makes it seem like more of a bust pick. The rest of the guys aren't here. While some are making contributions on other teams, there's no hop for our future there. 2004 3rd Bernard Berian - WR 5th Craig Krenzel - QB Berrian was starting to shine as a WR. The Bears did not franchise him and couldn't bring him back. 2005 1st Cedric Benson - RB 2nd Mark Bradley- WR 4th Kyle Orton -QB 6th Areise Currie - WR Benson played behind TJ and showed flashes. The flashes combined with the investiment made on him lead to a TJ trade and Benson starting last year. The line was bad and it's hard to tell if that hindered his play or he was just a bust. Bust or not, he has been plagued with injuries and the last of which could be a devastating one to his career. Not endearing himself to the fans and his stats from last year have fans screaming for a replacement this year. Mark Bradley was a surprise pick in the second round. He was the third WR in college, but has the measurables that NFL teams love. Early in his caree, he showed great potential. Injuries put an end to this. Last year he was relegated back to the 5th WR. Kyle Orton is loved by fans in Chicago due to his rookie year. He was a 4th round pick that was thrusted into the position of starter just a couple weeks before the seaon started. He didn't play well as expected, but he did not lose games for the team. He seems to be a solid back up, but I doubt he can be a starter in this league. 2006 6th J.D Runnels - FB 6th Tyler Reed - Guard Nothing worth speaking about the players listed here. I did leave Hester off this list. He was drafted to be our returner and a back up CB. Last year he was switched till WR, but he struggled to pick up the offense and players had to show him where to line up a little too often. His game breaking skills gives a little hope for the future. 2007 1st Greg Olsen - TE 3rd Garrett Wolfe - RB 4th Josh Beekman - Guard 7th Aaron Bryant - T The fans wanted a TE. They got it. He shown great potential at his position. Years to come will show what he has to bring to the table. Good value pick when drafted, but I questioned the move do to the needs in other areas of offense. Garrett Wolfe, too small. Beekman couldn't get playing time when the season was over for the Bears, and the line was horrible.

It's really near impossible to have top WR's when your best QB is from the 60's. WR is so dependent on another position that the Bears has never been able to find an above average fix for more then a couple years like Kramer.

I agree. Most of the reading I ever do is news and maybe press confrences if the video isn't available. Most of which, I read off of posts on here. I get most of my opinions off what I see on the field.

I disagree, sort of. My opinion is Brohm is a better prospect at his position then the 4th or 5th tackle at theirs. His value, however, very well may be lower then theirs. Every team is in need for an OL man of some sort. If the LT prospect doesn't pan out, maybe he can be a RT, or LG, or RG, or C. QB isn't as flexible of a position. Most teams have their future prospects or set with current starters. I don't think Brohm's "Value" is dictated by his talent. I personally think it wouldn't be a reach if he was drafted in the top 10 or even top 5. There's a strong possibility he could slip to the second round tho, lowering his "Value" as other teams have more pressing needs.

I hate to go 2000 or 2001, but if it wasn't for the injuries Marcus Robinson would be on the list. He was pretty nastey. He's probably the best Bears WR that never was. Also, I think Booker should definitely be on the list. While his time here was cut short, he holds a lot of the Bears WR records in that time.

This is the draft following the 2005-2006 season. To set the scene, the Bears had just finished with the best defense in the NFL with only 12.6 points allowed per game. They were also 2nd best in total yards allowed per game and 11th in rush and 5th in passing yards allowed. The Bears had the 2nd most int's of any team that year. They were tied for most Defensive TD's and in the top 10 in sacks. The offense wasn't quite as productive. The Bears were 27th on points per game (16.3) and 29th in yards per game. The defense was good, the offense was putrid, so lets draft a lot of offense right? Well, not exactly. The Bears draft that year was as follows: Trade down from the first.. 2nd round Danieal Manning, a safety that may look like a good pick if you saw his number of games started, but a horrible pick if you've seen him play. Devon Hester, a special teams ace, but not so special on offense. He maybe a decent WR in future years, but as of now he has a hard time trying to figure out where to line up on offense. Third Round Dusty Dvoracek, the only thing that's not Dusty on him, is his seat on the bench. At this point in his career he's been in 1 game and has a solo and assisted tackle, singular. Fourth Round Jamar Williams He's shown so much potential that yet another LB was drafted the year after. Neither of which have seen playing time, and with the resigning of Briggs, probably won't. Fifth Round Mark Anderson After a stellar rookie year as a back up, he was promoted to starter and earned a new contract. The new contract he earned was for Brown and not himself. Sixth Round J. D. Runnels He may be in contention for starter on the practice squad at FB. Tyler Reed He can't start on this VERY offensive line. Screw starting, is he even on the team? Now I know, I was a little rough on some of these picks, but it is what it is. This draft showed it's share of over confidence as in the trade down to reach for small school D. Manning in the second round and the Bears feeling they could draft for luxury in the Hester pick in the second. While the Hester pick did turn out better then anyone could have hoped, the offense was almost totally neglected in this draft. His pick might be the one to keep it from being the worst draft ever. This year would be the boom or bust year for the offensive players we could/should have drafted that year. Instead we are going into the draft this year with the only person set at his position being the ever present Kruetz. I understand that it's nice to have competition at positions, but it's not so nice when you are trying to just find someone who won't blow too much at their positions. The only other guy who will definitely start on this offense is Tait. It's still up in the air as whether he will be a LT or RT as their is clamoring all over for the Bears to draft a rook LT in the first. So here we are, we are looking at the 2008 draft and fastly approaching the 2008/2009 season. Were the Bears A) Over confident in the draft above, Are they just plain ignorant or C) was there a legitimate method behind the madness. If C please explain why to me, and feel free to comment if you think A or B. With the Bears offense in it's current state I figured it'd be a good time to revisit this draft.

Oh geez, NFO is on the roster. 6 years of him getting named the starter without competition, before we consider moving on.

I'm not trying to be an ass, but I don't understand your argument. Brohm is considered the second best quarter back in a weak QB class. He would be the 3rd QB chosen other years. Otah considered the 4th LT option this year. He didn't start playing football till his senior year of high school, spent 2 years in college playing at Valley Forge Military Academy. He's 4th best due to his potential, so he most likely would have never been the top LT in the draft in recent years either. Either way, you are drafting a player higher then he is projected and no, neither would have been drafted first in their position in recent years.

I'm from Ohio, he played at Michigan....

Ignore that I broke it up into a triple quote. I was going to reply to each, but then decided all at once. I didn't want to put them together because I deleted parts. I think this year Brohm, as Quinn last year, is worth a top pick. I think they dropped (dropping in Brohm's case) because of team need vs. players available at other positions. This year, with all of the second round picks last year, the need for a QB on other teams has dropped. If you look at the teams that need a QB this year, I think you are looking at the Ravens, Falcons, and Bears. Of course other teams could jump in the mix, Chiefs or Jets, and other teams who took a flyer on a second round QB last year and didn't like him. I remember you making an argument recently in the situation Otah is the best LT available at our pick. I'm going off memory here, you basically said if he is there draft him. It may be considered a reach, but it's worth it to get the player you want/need. I agree with that applied to QB. A team could trade up and get him before we do. In a perfect world, we get our OT with the 14 and trade up to get Brohm later. I would love that if it happened, but you are also gambling on losing Brohm to another team with the same idea.

There's needs everywhere on offense. That's why I'm so hard core on wanting a qb in the first. This offense won't be "Fixed" this year, and a QB takes a couple years to develop. By the time we fix the positions, we'll have a new QB ready to take over. I hope it'll be Brohm they make a move on. I think he is our best bet, even if his stock has fell to the later part of round one because the teams behind us do not need a QB. Later round quarterbacks have a higher failure rate, and I have a feeling Flacco will be a huge bust. When's the last time a player was elevated so high in the draft because of physical attributes and turned out? Michael Vick could run, but could never get down the passing game. Alex Smith has physically what you want from a QB, but never had what it takes mentally and jumped up in the draft. That tall white dude in Jacksonville was a qb in college, but they wanted to make a WR because he would physically good never turned out. We drafted small school D. Manning because of physical stuff, but he never caught on. Mark Bradley was like our 4th or 5th WR last year, and was drafted on his physical attributes as well, and to this point hasn't turned out. I know this has nothing to do with RB/OT, but I see QB as the most important position on a team and we have a gaping hole there. You put a good QB behind an average line and you'll get production. If you put a bad QB behind a great line, your offense is still going to lose you games. Grossman and Orton are just bad. If we don't get our QB for next year in this years draft, then we are looking at one of them again or a castaway from another team starting next year. Grossman had a 66.4 QB rating last year with 3 fumbles lost too boot. The guy only completes a little over 54 percent of his passes. I know, some feel people feel the benching had an effect on him last year. I don't think it was that good. He had 3 td's and only one int in that time. He also had 5 fumbles and 3 fumbles lost. I also don't think that 3 TD's in around 4 games is that good. Orton is what he is, and that is a back up. With the emergence of later round RB's lately, and imo QB and OL are more important, then RB shouldn't be an option in round one to me.

Lol, I just showed a perfect example of what I was talking about. I accidentally replied down below you, making another branch instead of being after your message

Thanks alot, I tried it out when i first got here, but forgot how you did it. It's still not the same in a couple aspects tho. The person commenting on your post may not have commented in reply to your post., and you may not read that part.. Also, I miss how one thread would spawn like 5 discussions. Each branch being a different one, I suppose with people using different lay outs respectively it's harder for that to happen. It probably looks odd to people when you are commenting on one part of the discussion, but they are seeing it after something completely different.

I guess I'll throw in my two cents, if it's even worth that much. I would like to say that moving the threads never bothered me much. It was more of an annoyance then anything having to chase threads around. I sort of saw this becoming an issue before it became one. I'm actually surprised the retitling threads never became an issue. The posters from Bearstalk are/were very passionate about their posts, and did't like to see them edited/moved. Who from there will forget the edited post debate there. I hate to see the "community" or "family" or whatever you want to call it lose more members. That includes the people that I definitely don't get along with from the old board. We lost a lot in the transition, and hate to see more lost over changes in policy from our old board to the new one. I'll be here either way till the board thrives or dies. I just don't post as much now due to the format. I haven't figured out the nuances, and miss being able to pick and choose who I read.

I found them but don't want to ruin it for the guy, ill see if i can find a way to send you a message on here with the link.

You're wrong on all 6