Alaskan Grizzly

In the grand scheme of things, not really a big deal. Heck Randy Moss openly admits to doing it and we see how things have gone for him. This will definitely set a tone on the new management/coaching staff and how they deal with discipline. And send a message to rest of the team.

It would seem to reason that you should want to appeal to the "common fan" not make it more difficult.

Add in about $500-600 airfare per person and I actually might one day see them live. ha ha. Thank God for Direct TV.

What happened to Louis in the big picture?

I'll be the first to admit that I don't pay much attention to the contractual implications and cap space issues but how would the acquisition of Marshall played into this. Had the team looked at either of the two players mentioned would they have still had enough to get Marshall? Of course hindsight being what it is, as I watch Joe Flacco emerge as the next elite QB, I ask 'what could have been'. In the 2008 draft the Ravens picked Flacco a few picks after the Bears made theirs. And im sure most remember who that was...I know you do.

Whats your take on this wise guy? I was going to say that Brian has never beat the Bears and I consider him a punk. Of course in jest. But you might actually earn the title in earnest.

Probably not. You must not know TT very well.

Yes Brian. Not sure where you're going with this, maybe I'll check my sources.

I think "he's a punk". You highlighted your own question. Why would i say that? He beat the Bears. Aaron Rodgers is a punk too (because he regularly beats the Bears) but I actually think he's an ok dude. His only major fault? He plays for the Fudgepackers.

I'll say SF because of the "positive" link to the Bears with Coach Jim. Although I could do without Humperdink - think hes a punk. I can't go with Balt because of the "negative" link to Graham (he dissed my man Lovie). That and I think Lewis is a cretin. I do have to say I like Coach John and Flacco. End result - SF 31 : Balt 28. (Yes it's decided by Akers - the anti Norwood if you will).

Heck having Jones on the team would just make sense if for nothing else because of his knack for levity and a fiery disposition when playing. The second characteristic reminding me of a young Olin Kreutz. Would be good to see an OL team leader like that again. That and Id still love to see he and Jay in a shoving match.

I think if you define your use of "fail" by assuming none of the four players will be on the team next season, then that would incorrect. At least one, maybe two (Louis and Scott) at least deserve back up roles. Carimi is a former 1st rounder that will be on his third year of a rookie contract, so he probably will be too. Despite if he is determined a "bust". And not sure how much Webb costs but like many have mentioned, he is "servicable". Maybe not start worthy...

So I was perusing a recent article in SI (and I believe Bleacher Report - OH THE HORROR!!) and saw a nugget about this kid out of Vanderbilt. Yes, that Vanderbilt. Anyhow "they" went on to say that he is a late round prospect (something like #18th rated in upcoming QB's). So the question to be asked, could he be a project QB that the Bears should/could entertain in later rounds...like 6 or 7? (Remember, Tom Brady was a 6th rounder). Anyhow, he is enticing not only because he is from Cutler's alma mater but also Aaron Rodgers little brother. And like the BR's article I read suggested, wouldn't that make for an interesting story line? http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/articl...s-NFL-potential http://www.vucommodores.com/sports/m-footb...ers_711885.html

Well if you're talking small schools vs "usually having poorer quality talent" and in the last 50 years; I think Jerry Rice (Mississippi Valley State), Barry Sanders (Oklahoma State), Jack Lambert (Kent State), Ed "Too Tall" Jones (Tennessee State University), "Mean Joe" Greene (North Texas) and even Mike Singletary (Baylor - pre RGIII) would disagree.

Concur. Just because tradition suggests pay a player "X amount" means you have to pay the player "X amount". Urlacher has contributed his lion's share to the organization and what it is today. The defense is and was successful because Urlacher was and is a part of it. Just because physically he's diminshed does'nt mean he's diminished in knowledge and skill (mentally). And the point you make about paying him around $4million is a very valid point. Why would the team want to pay a FA LB to take his place at probably more cost? What you gain in youth (maybe) you lose in experience, knowledge, familarity, leadership... And to go a step further, why would you want to draft that replacement to start now only to save a few bucks?

I was going to say that teams aren't looking at just the top level Division I schools as much. A few examples, Joe Flacco (Univ. of Deleware), Danieal Manning (Abileine Christian), Brian Waters (North Texas), Brandon Marshall (Central Florida), Pierre Garcon (Mount Union) and the list goes on. There is defintitely something to be said for good scouting now a days.

Didn't Kelvin Hayden play for Indy in a "similar defense" for a few years? Hmmm.

Now now...I'll give you the first two, but SMC's impact remains to be seen. What I envision for him is a reversal of the Sophomore slump. Whether they try him as a Pass rushing DE (with more bulk) or a stand up OLB in a 3-4 configuration, I can see him having a blowout year this next year. Heck, he might even be the answer for Urlacher's leaving the team someday (who knows?) If Emery is as good as everyone thinks he is, I believe this was more a pick based on his scouting more than anything, I think he'll (SMC) pan out.

Gotta say I agree with your side on things. Someone else here proposed the idea of a "transitional" type of contract. Where Urlacher is signed on for an additional 2 years and in that time the team can find a player (this year or next) that can learn from Url. Then at the end of the deal, Urlacher moves on. Hopefully with two rings on his hand. Realisitically though, earlier this year Url was asked about the potential of his retirement. I believe it was near the end of the 7-1 run. And he said that if they get to the Super Bowl he was done. So in his mind he's thinking about it. Obviously if he comes back its because he wants to try to get back to the Super Bowl one last time. I would much rather see him (and I would bet he too) stay in a Bears uniform and do all the things he still can do, like you mentioned. Otherwise the alternative is him playing for a team like the Patriots where his chances are even better.

Actually Lucky L addressed sorta what I was going to say. I agree that the "talent pool" is getting diluted. And what we did "20+ years ago" is a whole lot different than what we are doing nowadays. Gone are the days of "traditional" team building where players make a name for themselves with one team and they stay with their team throughout their career. A few factors because of this are, like Urlacher, eventually a player gets old and not able to perform like he did when he was younger. Yet still has the skill and knowledge a lot of teams would give anything for despite it not being what it once was. Then there is the almighty dollar that can be used to lure a player away from a team after only being with that team for 3-5 years. Both models of OL building can fall victim to the "needing constant attention" as with the FA signed solution obviously the player ages out of the system. Where the second (drafting) can find the player look for a higher paying offer from another team once their rookie contract runs out. Not as likely, but still a probability.

Well not to be technical with you Brian but all (or most at least) good OL's and the men within were probably drafted. But we don't really agree..per se. Using our own Bears as an example: 2006 team (the one that last made it to the Super Bowl) made up of OLmen including Ruben Brown, John Tait, Roberto Garza and Fred Miller. All of which were not drafted by the Bears but signed as FA's. 1985 team (the last team before '06 that went to the Super Bowl) actually two (LT Covert and RT Van Horne) were drafted in round 1 and the other three were not; LG Bortz (drafted round 8), Center Hilgenburg (not drafted) and RG Thayer (drafted round 4). The example of "crabs" I gave was in deference, not in agreement, to the anology of the "sex" one earlier offered up. Like Terra Tor I'm a little skeptical at drafting OL in the first round....Unless you get that Barret Jones from Alabama.

Hindsight is always 20/20. Pre-draft information on both Williams and Carimi. (Which were 1st round draft talent...pre-draft). Williams: http://www.nfldraftscout.com/ratings/dspro...8&genpos=OT Carimi: http://www.nfldraftscout.com/ratings/dspro...1&genpos=OT The analogy used previously does not correlate to what happened here. It should be more 'You got laid twice and caught the crabs both times, so should you try it again?'

So this article caught my attention yesterday: http://www.twincities.com/vikings/ci_22440...r-bill-callahan Although I'm not quite sure what happened in reading this article Trestman's silence is worth noting. That and stories that have circulated that Trestman has been difficult to work with in the past could gain traction and especially explain why he didn't get his chance in the big time until as of late. I can tell you that Callahan is in fact a pile of dung. Being a follower of Nebraska football I can tell you between he and AD Peterson in the early 2000's they knocked Nebraska football back a few years by tinkering with what worked for decades. Callahan was hired because he was an "NFL guru" that understood the new and exciting West Coast offense and some alums were hoping to make it big time after spending big bucks on Memorial stadium upgrades etc in Lincoln. However after a few years of sub-mediocrity, Callahan was fired (thankfully) by former coaching legend and new AD Tom Osbourne. Anyhow the damage that Callahan brought (to include some of his recruits ) had been done. Since, it seems that Nebraska has never been quite the same. At any rate, didn't mean to prolong this, but I hope that Brown and Rice don't have dirt that includes Trestmans implication and this becomes a "non-story".

Yep, you're right. Time and again, many have said the Lovie 2 (or Cover 2 in general) was outdated and needed to be replaced. And I believe Lovie's reply many a times to those that questioned it was something to the effect of; 'We do what we do and you just have to beat us'. Most announcers would say that their scheme was such that it didn't change dramatically from game to game. But what made the difference in the schemes were the players playing them. So where was the defense rated this year? And the fact that four of the starters on Defense were named to the Pro Bowl should be indicitive of something. Now if the team were to go to a 3-4 would the defense necessarily drop off? I can't believe that Tillman and Jennings are going to be any less lethal at CB nor Wright and Conte as Safeties. But I would almost bet that Urlacher (although he thrived in a Cover 2 - mostly due to his past Safety experience IMHO) would benefit in having another LB covering the other half of the middle that he couldn't. The biggest drawback to the 3-4 (again, IMHO) is the vulnerability to short gains, mostly on the ground. Where the Cover 2 is vulnerable to the short West Coast style passing so too is the 3-4 in that regard. Obviously each scheme has its pros and cons but you're right, ultimately it comes down to the player(s) buying in and performing.