Alaskan Grizzly

From the "sound" of things, I think an offense with a two TE (pass catching variety) is on the horizon. And if the Bears don't go that route, despite the 'rumors' I'm fairly the other Bennet, Earl, should still be considered in the SR position. He's more than reliable over the middle. Not so much outside...but capable.

Have to say beyond C. Johnson, this list is totally out of whack. The case for Fitzgerald is a simple one, he would easily be #2. Me thinks he would be as good maybe better than Marshall, had he been in Chicago. Andre Johnson definitely deserves about #3/4. Where is Julio Jones? Where is Boldin? The guy has shown over and over his reliability and ability.

Yeah right, 'the ground' caused him to black out. No more like Corey "the purple person eater' Wootten put a lick on you. End of story...figuritively and literally.

Not so great with Hayden or Bowman. But McManis I'd like to see more of and Frey I haven't seen play yet. What do these guys have to offer. I think with what (who) is available the team doesn't need to pick CB that high.

Tillman's not exactly a young man anymore. How much longer could he go? I still think the team should consider moving him to Saferty (probably FS) to extend his playing career. I'm interested to see what Frey (injured last year) and McManis (a FA pickup last year with potential) can offer before the team drafts high at CB.

I think (philosophically at least) what this discussion is about is 'what if' Cutler doesn't work out despite all of these adds in the last two years...in what essentially is to cater to his ability? The first question is should we (as fans and as a team) continue with him if he falters? Should we then prepare ourselves 'post-Cutler'? On the other hand, if he comes out gangbusters, how do 'we' deal with that? Is it because of the new regime/scheme? Is it because he's in a contract year? All things that need to be considered for not just management but we as fans to be able to swallow whatever number appears on his new contract. A lot of factors will need to be considered another of which is his age. If he doesn't 'go Flacco' on us but still gets the team to the playoffs does he deserve a long term high dollar contract? If the team does it are we prepared to live with it?

I don't care what you say, Romo doesn't deserve what he's getting. He's way too inconsistent for that type of money. All the contractual language and cap hit issues make sense though. And with Flacco, the point I'm making is had Baltimore negotiated with him midway through the season (rather than at the end) they would have probably spent less. But, as I mentioned they may not have because their season wasn't looking so good at about midway. They probably thought they could wait and determine whether it would be worth their while to sign him on or franchise him; depending on how the season progressed. With Cutler, and as a few have suggested, the Bears would probably be better of trying to get Cutler resigned before the season is over.

Romo's ridiculous agreement doesn't help for sure. But, the Bears need to be careful and not do as the Ravens did with Flacco this last year. I think they (Balt) weren't sure how the season was going to play out, especially when they hit the slump about mid-season. We saw what happened and the price they had to pay (literally) for Flacco's continued service.

I agree that it is tacky to allow Anderson to wear the jersey, I am glad to hear he was going to "ask permission". But truth be told, half of the numbers listed above will be available as the team isn't going to be carrying that many LB's into the start of the season. IE: Trahan, DiCicco (esp if the team drafts an LB in the early rounds) and Franklin - who is he? And as a side note there are other numbers available. Believe Hunter Hillenmeyer wore 92 when he was with the team.

Well TT at the risk of being called a 'moron' I think that Emery has plans for SMC. I have a strong suspicion it's in the LB corps somewhere. Maybe he's the 'one'? At this point and the more I think of it, I'm leaning towards the team drafting BPA regardless of position...at least in round one.

Or....they could bring back Urlacher this year. And draft a new shiny LB next year.

My gut instinct tells me are ANY of the top contenders at LB necessary for the Bears to consider at this point? First the team needs to establish what type of scheme its going to run; 4-3 (cover 2) this year but possibly convert to 3-4 next year(?) Are any of the top prospects fit for one or the other or both? Is the team at a necessity right now to draft an LB at all? Personally I can't see a 'need' for an LB (especially in round 1 or 2) if the team is working on trying to get itself into more an offensive mindset. How will Wlliams and Anderson work out for the team? What about the other LB's already on the roster from last year; Costanzo, Diccio, Thomas? Instead the team should concentrate on what they need in offense. WR, OL maybe a decent QB at backup who could be developed..IF...Cutler doesn't work out. Heck if the team is going to look at defense, maybe they should look at DL, that rotation is pretty shallow. Just because Urlacher is gone doesn't mean the team needs to panic and "draft his replacement" right now.

I didn't really say that I would have "brought him back", just negotiated. The part of what went on behind closed doors none of us know. In fact you agreed that Urlacher probably wasnt aware every minute what was going on in negotiations. Sure I personally would have preferred having Urlacher back, so would Mike McCaskey, but I don't know all the intricacies of the money game. As far as saying "5 against and 2 for" that is based more on what is done. What if he had been picked up by another team (still an option). And plays all 16 games, and is on a team that goes to the Super Bowl, and is chosen for another Pro Bowl? All this in his swan song? Then the choice COULD prove the wrong one. Understand the word "subjective". At this point thats all this is. The 5-2 mark doesn't prove one side right and the other wrong....not yet. And do you mean 'valve' or 'value'?

I'll double down on what Jason said. And add, had I been in the position and known truly what was going on behind closed doors, I would have attempted to negotiate more. Probably not his 'final' asking price but somewhere in the middle...but closer to the $2 million. From my understanding there wasn't much negotiating and that can send a bad message. Part of the reason I feel it would have behooved the team to negotiate further was due to the additional loss of Roach. Granted a new twist to the scheme with Tucker so scheme familiarity is a moot point but a significant loss (if you count the current hold out in Idonijie) in player familiarity. All that considered, what's done is in fact done. Urlacher is gone and it "appears" the team made some value pickups instead. But all of these moves, to include the decision to not keep Urlacher, are subjective. In other words opinions, not facts, that it will work. All that remains to be seen.

I don't know about Brown but what about the Baylor QB Florence? This video seemed more a highlight film for him. He available?

Well at least I'm consistent, if nothing else. And you're right, if someone does make "ridiculous posts" it should be pointed out. Please tell me where the errors were so I can correct them? All of this, especially the bolded section remains to be seen. IF Williams doesn't manage to stay out of trouble, then who is erroneous? My comment is simply that you cannot guarantee anything. Just like I could not guarantee that Urlacher would have proven better for the team this year....until after the season was over. Your statements are bold and COULD be proven right. My point of the responses in this thread were not necessarily to revive a discussion on whether or not the team made an error in letting Urlacher go. That ship has sailed. I was simply using the comparsion between the most recently 'let go' LB's (Urlacher and Roach) to the newly acquired LB's (Williams and Anderson). I'm still going into it with an open mind...more or less.

Well for one the season has to begin. And I didn't realize that Urlacher "retired". Considering your history of bet making I would caution you against making a bet on those assumptions you just posted.

Maybe you haven't seen where I posted in the past of my viewpoints of stats. My thoughts are they can be translated any which way you see them. For example, you compare Roach to Anderson. In the numbers I see that Anderson actually underperformed Roach last year as opposed to the year prior. I assume your intent was to support the release of Roach and the signing of Anderson. But those numbers don't support (in my viewpoint) a wise move. Although to be honest with you, I didn't have a problem with Roach leaving. I'm just supporting the thought that although "numbers don't lie" they can be skewed to how the reader looks at them. So the fact that Williams was suspended can be viewed in a positive light? Interesting. And fairly enough if Urlacher was able to rebound in 2010-11 what's to say that he wouldn't / couldn't 2012-13? At least being suspended isn't a concern with him. The 'good' (IMHO) of what Emery has done so far is bargain shopping. To this I will agree. Whether that translates to the defense (or the rest of the team) being better, remains to be seen. (Hence the bold on "should")

Sure like Urlacher to Williams: Urlacher - 84 and 53 Williams - 70 and 10 And wasn't that a part of the reason (at least speculation) that Urlacher "fell off" last year? Even though until that point he was leading the team in tackles?

Considering these are 'highlight' clips you are seeing both players at their best. What I see in Anderson is a player who is around the ball for a lot of fumble recoveries. Not so many solo tackles. In fact last year he totaled 39 compared to the previous year of 98. (Compared to Urlacher's 53 and 84 respectively). Why the fall off? Most of the comments to the You Tube video seem to be from Carolina fans one of which describes him as a "solid" player. That and he seems like a good "character" but I'll reserve judgement on his addition to the team. On the other hand, Williams' off field issues aside, he seems to be more the dynamic player. Good solid tackling...when he's on the field. His solo totals for the last two years; 10 and 70. So just lookiing at stats and again considering these clips as "highlights" I'm still going to have to wait and see if in fact the Defense has improved.

I think it definitely remains to be seen. This will in fact be a 'make or break' year for Cutler. I fear that his "gunslinger" style will become more prevelant this year as the excuses of poor OL protection won't be as legit. And that style of play will be his waterloo. I hope to be wrong. If Emery is concerned too they will draft a stronger QB candidate as insurance.

I saw that DT Tommy Kelly was released by Oakland yesterday. And I believe Richard Seymour is still an FA? With Kelly, I believe the Bears made a minor run at him a few years back but lost out to Oakland. Both (Kelly/Seymour) might still have enough to be 'rotational players' as you suggest. Don't know the Bears would need both but maybe one or the other.

Darn. He was about the only OLman worth a darn last couple years. So maybe now the plan should be to draft someone like Barrett Jones (who can do both C/G) and have him replace (if not this year) Garza at Center? Garza should go back to playing Guard.

Bfan4ervr: What's your man Orton doing these days?

OR