Lucky Luciano

all in all we traded a starting GOOD+ wide receiver for a third string tight end who can maybe *block. *wow, that is really a rare commodity that you should draft in the 2nd or 3rd round to get you over the hump in a superbowl run year. cap relief? good teams can manage it. why can't we? so, here is the NFL website evaluation day 2: Analysis:The Bears sent DJ Moore and a fifth-rounder to the Bills for a second-round pick earlier this offseason, but they were able to recoup a fifth-rounder by trading down on Friday night. Jones was my favorite center in the draft. He’s an athletic zone blocker who can anchor despite lacking ideal size. Roush met the Bears' need for a tight end who can block and be effective as a receiver, if he cuts down on drops. They took Thomas later in Round 3. He’s an after-the-catch threat like Luther Burden III, but Thomas isn’t the most natural pass catcher.

we didn't win because of poles. we won because we drafted a no brainer QB who the world told poles to draft. we won because we hired a competent coach for the first time maybe in its entire history to run this idiotic franchise because other people SAID he was the best out there. we had ONE offensive linemen he bothered to draft in wright and nobody else. NO defensive linemen he bothered to draft and filled ONE side of the ball with competent FREE AGENTS to appease the NEW coach we hired. nearly every defensive sided free agent was a joke that ate up our cap number. his 5 year plan may have taken a competent GM 3 years to fulfill?

just how many TE's do we need??? how many WR's do we need??? how many of these fabulous 2nd day picks can we place on the field along with the starters we now have?? how many targets can our QB have on the field to pass the freaking ball to?? offense gets you to superbowls. good or better than good defenses to go along with it WINS superbowls. if you keep drafting the same position guys in the money rounds you are neglecting team needs for a lopsided joke of a team. if the difference maker players you do need aren't there when you are slotted to pick, you move UP to draft them. we had 2 second round picks and a 3rd round pick. in a freaking WEAK draft you use these to move UP not down for lesser quality players you especially do NOT need. even backup CB's or LB's would have been better picks than third and fourth string TE's and WR's.

didn't we JUST have him renegotiate his contract so we could get more cap space? yea, sure as f' makes sense to me.

"Isn't this what we need for this 2025 NFL draft?" Poles was quoted as saying tonight before drafting a Tight End and then a Wide Receiver. oh that's right, it's 2026 and we did this last year. it's de' ja' vu all over again. why not keep drafting the same positions over and over and over and over for the rest of our lives? 1. poles gives a contract to a center who wants to retire (and he talks him out of it?) and 'surprise' he retires after ONE season. then drafts a center, that was a third round projected pick, in the 2nd round. all this after trading our f'king 5th round pick to the Pat's for this wonderful center a month ago. if this is even close to being sane, please explain it to me without mentioning how we needed to bring in a veteran center as a sure thing before the draft so we didn't draft for need. 2. a f&$#!ng 3rd string TE in the freaking third round?? i don't care how good this guy is projected. that's not even a luxury, that is stupidity. how many TE's do we really need? this off season we signed TE Qadir Ismail to a reserve/futures contract and we signed TEs Stephen Carlson and Nikola Kalinic to our roster. there are a hundred blocking TE's we could pick up after june 1st. 3. we sign a WR/kick return free agent from the lions. then we take our third round pick we traded our other 2nd round pick for to draft a WR kick return man. but, oh yea, we got an extra f&$@!%^& 5th round pick for trading down. makes complete sense to me after someone jabbed me in the jugular vein with a syringe full of scopolomine and LSD. what is our top priority this season? any guesses? DEFENSE!! oh that's right, we drafted a defensive tackle last year who was freaking INJURED. a good safety this year who FELL INTO OUR LAPS and was a NO BRAINER pick. that should turn our 24th ranked defense completely around. yes-sir-reeebob we are there now!! who the hell needs defensive linemen or linebackers when we have a plethora of third string tight ends and receivers? third day picks anyone? maybe a right tackle? or a guard? how about another quarterback or a punter just to round off a draft of stupidity. anyone guess at how we are going to keep this many same position players on our roster after the final cut? do we cut the recent veterans we signed or just the new draft picks? after all we can draft those same positions again next year. and yet again (year after year) i can truthfully say.... why in the H E L L is this guy still our pretend GM? there is nothing this guy does that makes any sense. his judgment in the draft and free agency is beyond mind boggling. but then again, who just gave this idiot an extension? one guess only.

on the home page, is there any way to not have so much text under the thread link like it was before?

just this thread is split. on right half of screen: Top Posters In This TopicPopular DaysPosted Imagesnot sure why it's only one thread is like this. not a big deal but just curious.

question: the thread Free Agency News is only a half page wide with some other stuff on the other half. this seems like the only one to do this. is there a way to make the replies full page wide? i liked the old layout better too as some have said. too much text under each thread topic and small text headline. that said thanks for getting this back on.

site moderators: i am not going to continue baiting the village idiot after this post, but some things need to be said for those who get their information on how the world works by staring at their cell phone and what it tells them is reality whether it is based on facts and/or common sense or not. 1. for any living being with a brain living in indiana... the state politicians are proposing spending 2-5 BILLION dollars, or a good portion thereof, on a stadium for a billion dollar NFL franchise that is too cheap to build their own unless the state gives them tax breaks no average tax payer would get. hmmmm.... so how does that work? what goes with this building the stadium? it's not free money that indiana is printing, it's what the people/taxpayers of indiana will have to pay for... building not just the actual stadium structure cost, but buy the land (which isn't included supposedly in the 2-5 billion dollar cost), new roads, maintenance costs after the fact, transportation restructure such as airports or train to get to and from the stadium, security such as police and fire protection and probably much, much more. just with these costs alone, you could easily add another billion or two to the taxpayers burden. obviously the mccaskey family won't be paying for it with higher taxes so that leaves your average business and home owner in your state to foot the bills they won't pay. so where does this money come from? normal state expenditures for schools, road maintenance and infrastructure repair. rising costs of security costs for fire and police, normal costs to run an entire state. just how much in the black is indiana's coffers? i wonder how much more the average indiana taxpayer has to pay for this over the next 10-15 years? who is paying the bill? where is that money coming from? how much will this increase your tax burden? you are running your mouth about (and i quote) "Indiana is using it as an investment". show me your hard facts in dollars and cents how this investment works. show me the real money that is gained by your state. it should be not hard to find as you can use your colts, SOMEWHAT, as a springboard for this so called investment (although indianapolis is the LARGEST city in the state and it's capital so what is hammond contributing to the total influx of state money)? explain it in black and white what the actual cost is per citizen and put it on a voters ballot then let's see how happy the citizens are with this proposal. so who is really making the money besides the mccaskey family? the large corporations and realestate developers in indiana. the construction companies building all the crap involved including building roads and so on. the realestate investors selling the lands for the stadium and land used for all the upgrading of the infrastructure. the mega rich hotel magnets and the actual politions who for sure will be getting kickbacks and campaign contributions from the mega rich/corporations. all this at the expense of indiana taxpayers who some don't seem smart enough to pour piss out of their own boots. also, when this nfl franchise decides the stadium is old and they need another new one who pays for that if they even STAY in that state? "It's not the McCaskeys this time." are you freaking kidding? this BILLION dollar franchise owned by a mega rich family has not even paid to build ONE single stadium in the entire time the NFL has been in existence!!! they have used the state of illinois and the city of chicago along with renting out an existing structure from bill wriggley to create a cheap venue to play in all the while increasing their brand and the value of their team. yet they are so cheap they don't want to pay NORMAL tax structures to build one in illinois to help their actual fan base that created their entire value. 2. poor you. cry me a freaking river. the state and the city you hate so much (and the people who live there) built this freakin franchise. i don't remember indiana being involved in anything other that a place for another piece of garbage franchise to screw it's original citizens and fans by giving them a cheap place to move to.

from what i have read and what is out there for information in regards to facts, you are wrong on nearly every thing you sited. 1. Contrary to claims that stadiums generate additional revenue or create new jobs, study after study has found that the construction of a new athletic facility has little to no positive impact on local economies. One economist estimated that the contribution of a professional baseball team is similar to that of a “mid-sized department store,” while a professional football franchise “has even less” of an economic impact.8 Some studies found that publicly funded stadium projects have a detrimental economic impact on the surrounding area.9 The negative impact is magnified when municipalities choose to spend money on a stadium rather than public needs. https://www.cagw.org/fields-of-failure-the-scandal-of-taxpayer-funded-stadiums/ 2. This is an issue because, to an extent people may not realize, stadiums are not automatic cash grabs. Sporting venues "do not come close to generating enough economic activity to pay back the public investment involved in building them," said The Atlantic. This is especially true when they are "coupled with lease agreements that funnel revenue back to owners or allow teams to play in the stadiums rent-free. But "stadiums don't actually do these things," said The Atlantic. Especially for outdoor venues, the "jobs they create are seasonal and low-wage" and they "tend not to increase commercial property values or encourage much in the way of economic activity, besides a bit of increased spending in bars and restaurants surrounding the venue — which is mostly being substituted for dollars that were previously being spent elsewhere."" https://theweek.com/sports/taxpayer-subsidized-stadiums this is corporate welfare at it's worst. cities/states and their taxpayers are paying billions of dollars to shore up a multi billion dollar corporation in the NFL and each mega rich billionaire individual franchise. this ALSO generates federal taxes that would normally be collecting revenue which now they are exempt from tax free bond ventures. like i said before, there is no law for them not to move anyplace they want to go. just leave the name where you got it and let the suckers that want to give up their taxpayers money to billionaires reap what they sow.

1. so what? you believe closer justifies any franchise team leaving their home venue because some neighboring crap state will throw their taxpayers under the bus and bribe the franchise into screwing the taxpayers in the original state or leave? fine, then let them leave the franchise name where they came from just like baltimore did with the browns. chicago keeps the name chicago bears for the next franchise expansion and indiana can have the hammond hemroids or the hammond hamsters for all i care. they deserve the mccaskey family. 2. how are the jets and giants any different? just because they have been doing it longer? they screwed the state that conceived them and supported them so the mega rich owners can get richer. these aren't some mom and pop businesses but multi BILLION dollar corporations owned by millionaire/billionaires who want to squeeze the average taxpayers into paying for their business expenses, build them new stadiums and rework the city/state infrastructure at tax payer expense to accommodate them. why should they get tax breaks you or i wouldn't get? cause they are richer? corporate welfare seems alive and well.

follow the colts then. while you're at it, do the world a favor and never leave the state of indiana.

if i'm chicago and the state of illinois and they do this.... i say F'EM do what the cleveland browns did. go where you want to scumbag vampires but you ain't taking the names with you. if illinois can't take the name 'BEARS' away from them then surely take the 'CHICAGO'. give them NOTHING!! so welcome TRIPLE H to the nfl. Halas's Hammond Hemroids eat SHIT you bloodsucking greedy bastard mccaskey family. you have given NOTHING to this franchise or CHICAGO since mugs halas died.

again, you (or at least i do) have to take into account not just one play, not just a few plays but the whole body of work and also that of our entire receiving core, injury implications and i am sure a few other items. i would assume our new coach address's any problems like this if it is as you say. this is not player love, this is looking at the health of this franchise over the long run. absolutely nothing as been proven with these young players as to the final quality or longevity either. if we had relied on them only this season we wouldn't have even gotten in the playoffs due to injuries and untimely drops. this young WR core needs someone to mentor them that isn't just a coach. i have been watching this team for a long time and this offense has the potential to be better than anything in the our past since the modern age of the NFL came into being. i don't want to get cute and mess too much with that to save some cap money that can be absorbed creatively.

i think you could add to this factor he is a senior voice among the WR's due to age and experience. how much is that worth bringing up short time/rookie receivers in learning the game, playing through injury and how to perform on and off the field? also in my opinion only, how does it look for this organization's loyalty to free agents that are here or ones we want to bring in? to me it sends a message that you better get a very good contract upfront. this is a cap killer anyway with FA's but if you show them it's worth coming in at a discount on an up and rising team i can't see that as a detriment. people mentioned the pats and them turning over players... i seem to remember that brady always had at least one good receiver and gronk. i don't believe they compromised on the OL either very much. if memory serves they never put themselves as a organization at risk for the next season by cutting key components. good FA's gravitated to that franchise and gave the pats a discount because it was a chance for a ring. we aren't at that point yet.