nfoligno

I think Butkis said it best when he said Urlacher's pride got hurt. It wasn't just that Sayers was criticizing the bears, but he also specifically mentioned Urlacher, mentioned his age, and questioned whether he could return. I think that is was caused Urlacher to lash out. Make no mistake, I am not defending Urlacher in this. When you are ticked off is not usually the best time to give the media quotes. With that said, let me ask this. If a Bears player from the 30's or 40's came out and ripped the Bears when Butkis and Sayers were playing, and specifically called out those two, how do you think they would react? Wanna bet Butkis would have had some harsh words for the old player?

Yes, Pace getting benched did make the OL better, as it created a bit of a ripple effect. As bad as Omiyale was, and he was bad, I argued all year how bad Pace and Williams were on the outside. IMHO, their horrid play would have been far more under the spotlight if it were not for Omiyale, who was simply so bad that he over-shadowed all the rest. Once Pace was injured/benched, there was a bit of a ripple effect. Williams was moved to LT. Williams played well, but what killed me was also how we changed our philosophy. While Pace was left on an island, against even Jarred Allen, Williams received a lot of help. The result was solid play from the LT spot. On the other side, Shaffer was in for Williams. While Williams did well enough at LT, he was freaking awful at RT. Shaffer was nothing special, but compared to Williams, he looked very good and again, the result was a big upgrade. Omiyale finished the year with some game where he was between average and even above average, giving some shred of hope for the future. But, Omiyale is now moving again to the outside, and while the hope is he proves that to be a more natural position, there is much to prove. I have said before that I actually have more "hope" for our OL than other units. While I do not expect our OL to be good, much less great, I do hope some of the changes make it at least average, which would be a HUGE upgrade over last year. Further, with the addition of a RB that can pickup blitzes and a TE like Manu, I have greater hope we could actually see holes opened for the RBs and time for Cutler in the pocket. I do have hope for our OL, but still simply would prefer to see Shaffer battle Omiyale outside. If Omiyale proves himself and wins the job, awesome, but I just do not want to hand him the job this year like we did last year.

Omiyale was mediocre? That may be a bit over stated. I hope he is better outside. In fact, I hope he is good. Look at Williams, who was absolutely awful at RT but solid at LT. Some players (like St. Clair) may be able to be at least decent anywhere, others (if not most others) have a position that fit at and others they do not.

I want a full draft as well, but with Sims netting only a 5th, I would say if the pick is low enough, I would have no issues giving it up. I am not saying I would even do that, as I know little about this OG, but in general, while I don't want to give up any higher picks, a 5th rounder for a starter doesn't seem like a bad swap.

Nfo - I have a problem with your assumption that if Shaffer is competing at LG, then he is not competing at ORT. I don't see why it has to be one or the other in voluntary workouts. The news that was reported was that they were looking at Shaffer at OG. Did they also say that he was out of the running at ORT? No. They didn't. One, it wasn't just reported that they were "looking at him at OG," but that he was competing for the starting OG position. There is a difference in those two expressions IMHO. Two, I have said numerous times in other posts that if this is just a mini-camp thing, then no big deal. If ever, this is a time to mix things up. I also said if this is really more about Kreutz' injury, and thus needing to move Beekman to center, fine. But Tice was the one that said Shaffer was competing for the OG starting job, thus it sounds like it is more than a mini camp thing. Again, as I have said, if this is just an early workout practice thing, no big deal at all. If this is a training camp thing, then i do think it becomes a bigger deal. I have a feeling that they feel they know what they would have in Shaffer at ORT and they know what Omiyale would have to achieve to surpass that. Totally disagree with this idea. One, players like Tait, Miller and many others show that what you get from year to year can be very different. It is pretty poor management to simply expect a player to play at prior year levels w/o even feeling the need to see him. Shaffer may not be as old, but he is 30 and no spring chicken either, and I would argue is less proven (consistent) than either Tait or Miller were. Two, OL is one of those areas where chemistry simply means so much. I disagree with the idea that Shaffer can spend much/most of camp working inside, and then just move him to OT whenever you want. I don't see how it could be anything but positive that they are trying guys at different spots to see what they might have. Really? Ask Daniel Manning his opinion on that, among others. I know it is a novel idea, but how about having our players practice and (are you ready for this) play at the positions they are best suited for. Lets see. Last year we signed Omiyale, a player who had developed since joining the NFL at OT. His play at OT was good enough for us to give him a pretty nice contract (considering the lack of experience). Where do we play him? OG, where he has no experience or development. Oh, and how about we take this kid we drafted to be our franchise LT, and play him at RT, the spot few scouts felt he could handle. Go back and read his draft/scouting reports. Well suited to play LT, but lacking the strength to play RT. Now, we take Shaffer, who I believe has always played OT, and we are going to move him inside to OG. It sounds nice in theory when you talk about practicing guys at different spots, but have you ever heard the expression "jack of all trades, master of none?"

One. Your assuming Omiyale is one of our top 5 OL. Based on last year, that is a pretty huge assumption. Two. Has Shaffer ever even played OG? Maybe he has, but I have only known about him playing OT (RT and LT). Maybe he can play OG, but to me, his value is more at OT, and until Omiyale proves he can play OT, that is where Shaffer should be working out. Beekman is definitely a player I would like to upgrade over, but I am more confident at this moment w/ Beekman starting than Omiyale. W/ Beekman, we pretty much know what we are going to get. It isn't great by any means, but he has not been our worst OL either. Omiyale on the other hand is a total unknown at OT. He was freaking awful at OG, and the hope is a move to OT will improve his outlook, but that is such an unknown, it is there I think we should focus Shaffer.

Gremlin. Always did like the movie, so may as well have a car of the same name.

Exactly. Every offense will use such routes/plays, but Martz uses them far more. While such precise timing routes were part of Turners system, those sort of plays essentially ARE Martz' system.

1) It could be this is a smokescreen to push Beekman to be better since he really has no competition. Not sure this makes sense. If anyone needs at least the appearance of competition, would it not be Omiyale? When has Beekman ever been given anything? Beekman doesn't seem to need the smokescreen. Hell, the way he has been treated, if told he would compete with Louis, that would appear legit to him. Omiyale on the other hand, w/ his contract in place, I don't see him feeling legit pressure from a 7th round rookie. 2) There is another side to this too that just came to mind: The Trib reported today that we are likely to carry more than 4 WR on the active roster. That means some other position has to give up a roster spot on game days. Could it be the coaches want that spot to come from the Oline and thus they are asking Shaffer to get some practice at OG even though the reality is he might just be the emergency backup on gameday? Meanwhile they throw him a bone about possibly being the starter there if he's better than Beekman and conversely Beekman gets some competition. He could fill that role regardless of being the starting RT or backup. In this case Tice is saying that Omiyale is NOT an OG and he doesn't want him there even in a backup role. If this is the logic then I say Tice and Martz and doing what they'd be doing anyway but also finding a way to setup a competition at LG...nothing wrong with that IMO. I never have issue w/ competition, and do not have issue with competition for Beekman, but even the way you write it up, it still seems like in order to (a)get competition at OG and ( give Shaffer reps at OG, they are at the same time taking him out of the RT competition, where I would argue we need the competition much more. At the end of the day, this may be much ado about nada. Maybe this is 100% due to Kreutz injury, and thus Beekman playing center. Maybe this is about getting Shaffer early practice reps and looks inside, even though the plan is for him to compete with Shaffer. Until camp, we really just do not know. The only reason I brought this up is the talk that Shaffer is actually part of the OG competition. I guess we will find out once camp rolls around, but tell me this. Would you not be a bit sick if Shaffer were soley in the competition at OG and Omiyale's main competition was Marten or Webb?

Reading an ESPN mailbag, it was talking about the open competition at LG, and spoke about Shaffer working there. I know this has been touched on, but hey, its slow Two things that standout/bug me about working Shaffer at LG. One. If Shaffer is in the competition at LG, that means he is not in the competition at RT. I personally hope Omiyale can play RT, but why would we simply put him there w/o legit competition? Based on his play last year, I would think he was (at minimum) have to earn a starting job this year. Some had previously said Shaffer was at LG in workouts only due to Beekman playing C while Kreutz was hurt, but it sounds more like we plan to allow Shaffer to compete at LG, which means he is not competing at RT. And I don't want to hear about some 7th rounders or undrafted rookie FAs competing with Omiyale. If Shaffer isn't in the RT battle, I think that is a mistake. Two. This is an old issue of mine, but I hate when our top backup for one position (or multiple) is also the starter at another position. If Shaffer does start at LG, and then either Williams or Omiyale need to be replaced, that means we have put ourselves in a position to need to make two changes rather than one. I liked the idea of Omiyale moving to RT, but at the same time, I liked the idea of his having to compete with Shaffer. Shaffer is far from great, but he is decent/solid enough that if Omiyale won the job, he would have earned it. If Shaffer is not at RT, then Omiyale doesn't have to earn the job. While it would not be a great competition, based on what we have, I would just as soon have Beekman compete with the Louis at LG while Shaffer and Omiyale compete at RT. Especially in Martz system, there is a priority on the OT play, and I think we should be more focused on that, rather than simply handing the job to one of the worst OL players any of us have ever seen.

First, can I just say it is great just knowing I am not the only one who still believes in Iglesias. I was super high on him in the draft, and thrilled we got him. I really expected more last year, and do not know if his lack of PT was due to how we brought him along (see Bennett) or due to his not really stepping up as quickly as I personally expected. Either way, I still see him as a very talented kid, and he was part of the reason I didn't want to go after a WR in FA. Part of the reason. Honestly, I have a hard time just looking at the group of WRs and simply putting them in a 1-5 order. To me, the WR position is simply not broken down that way. It does not always workout that your top 2 WRs are also your starters. You break it down by looking at your X or Y wrs, slant, etc. As fans, so often we talk about having the two fastest guys at the X and Y, but how often does that playout? Maybe it will be different with Martz, but many coaches (like Turner) sort of pigeon hole WRs into a certain WR position. So at one spot, I see DA and Knox. On the other side, I see Bennett and Iglesias. In the slot, with the ability to move outside also, is Hester. I think DA has the edge over Knox. Knox really excited a lot of fans last year with his speed and a couple big games, but he really lacks consistency. Fans need to remember that he came from a small school, and was expected to be a bit of a developmental/project WR. We did well in limiting the amount he had to learn, but as a starter, he will have a far greater burden, and the need to be a much more consistent player. I like Knox, but simply do not think he is ready for that, and thus I see DA on one side. On the other side, Bennett played well. Not great, but well. He was a good route runner and displayed solid hands, making some tough catches in traffic. But Bennett while solid, that may be the limit of his ability, while I believe (as do you) Iglesias could be considerably more. The question will be whether Iglesias can take that jump in his 2nd year. If there is a legit competition between he and Bennett, I believe that could happen. To me, DA and Iglesias on the outside w/ Hester inside would be a hell of a threat. Knox, to me, is a real wild card. I think he works in as a situational player, but if he develops faster than expected, this could get very interesting. I can not remember the last time I felt this way, but I really do like our WRs. They have a LOT to prove, but I just love the talent/youth combination we have. No, we do not have a Fitzgerald in the group, but not many teams do. I do however believe we have a considerable amount of talent, and for once, we have a QB who can utilize that talent. I am skeptical in many areas of our team, but this is one of the few where I believe we could excel. When I look at our OC/system, QB and WRs, I think we can have a hell of a passing attack.

What I mean is, the QB throws the ball to a spot which at that moment is empty, but by the time the ball arrives, the WR should arrive too. Not every offense does this. It is one thing to throw ahead of a WR in order to lead him, but this is different. In this system, the QB is often throwing the ball prior to the WR even making his break/cut. So much has to be right. WR and QB have to be on the same page. Timing has to be perfect. If all goes right, this play is nearly impossible to defend. If it goes wrong, it could have the QB throwing right into the hands of a DB. Again, it isn't just a matter of 'leading' a WR, which you see in any system. It goes beyond that as the QB actually starts his throw expecting a WR to (for example) break inside and throws to that point prior to the WR even making his break.

One thing I remember from Martz' offense was Holt running loads of slant routes, and I don't mean deep ones. Yes, he could fly, but I just recall him running tons of quick slants. I remember one of the keys to stopping this offense was to jam the WR at the LOS, than use LBs over the middle to make any WR making the catch pay dearly. Point is, I would think Iglesias would fit very well into this role. Iglesias lacks the straight line speed, and thus is not going to be a deep threat, but at the same time (based on college) he is a precise route runner with GREAT hands (he was considered to have maybe the best hands in the draft class). He has quickness more than speed, but that combo of quickness/burst and route running can get him open in a hurry. To me, this would seem like a good fit for Martz. Martz likes to throw the ball to where the WR should be in order to elevate the YAC, and sending Iglesias on slant routes would seem a solid fit.

I am a big supporter of Iglesias, but I am not sure I would say he is equal in talent to all the rest, or at least, I would say he has some very different skill sets. Iglesias is more of a possession receiver, or maybe you could say possession plus receiver. To use the player so often used as a base for comparison, he is similar in many respects to Engram. While he is a bit faster (40 speed) than Engram, it was that 40 speed which really reduced his draft grade. He does has burst and quickness though, so he can get open, but it would not be a shock if he is run down from behind on a long catch. Iglesias is similar somewhat to Bennett, though I think Iglesias has more quickness and speed. Iglesias doesn't really compare though to Knox or DA. Both have more speed than Iglesias, and thus downfield, big play ability. DA also has better size. It may only be 2 inches, but DA also plays big as he does a good job going up for the ball. Anyway, I too am very high on Iglesias. I think he was "developed" as a rookie the same way Bennett was. Now that we have changed schemes, and to one i think really fits Iglesias, I can see him stepping up. But it is Bennett who I think he would push, and not really DA or Knox. Between DA and Knox, I think the edge right now goes to DA, and not simply due to the way he finished the year. Knox was a rookie, and he was developed different than other rookie WRs. He was given a very limited portion of the playbook to learn, and it worked out well. Now he will be asked to learn much more though, and while I am not saying it isn't possible, DA is more developed and I think has a leg up here. I also wonder about Knox's size. 6' is not the problem, but 185lbs is pretty light. I hope to see Rusty and Co. work with him to add some weight w/o zapping his speed.

Yea, at the end of the day, much will depend on whether we see the Forte we witnessed as a rookie, or the Forte of this past season. While the OL, playcalling and other "issues" hurt Forte, at the same time, I just never thought he was playing well. Some point to the injury, and that may be true, but I also look at his blocking, which his injury should not have been a factor. As a rookie, I remember talking about how solid he was as a blocker, but his second year? Frankly, he stunk. So I think much of the faulk w/ Forte's struggles were due to Forte. Heading into 2010, it will be interesting to see which Forte we get. If we get the Forte of his rookie year, I think he could hit near 1,000 yards, but even then, it may be difficult to reach due to how much Martz likes to throw and how much we are likely to rotate RBs. If we see the Forte of 2009, his touches could dramatically drop.

I think Aromashodu's a huge question mark. He had a great game against Minnesota (going against a significantly injured Antoine Winfield) and a solid game against Green Bay, but he wasn't very effective against the Lions or the Ravens, two teams with VERY beatable secondaries. Against Det, I would point out that he had 5 catches, tied for the lead w/ Olsen, who was having a huge game. I actually thought he had a very solid game against Det. He didn't play great against Baltimore, but don't just call him out. The whole team was awful as Baltimore's D had their way with our offense. Our only score points in the game was due to special teams (punt return). Cutler had 3 picks and Hanie 1, as each had a QB rating below 10. Forte was running in mud, and the offense was just bad. DA was part of that, but don't just call him out. He's clearly got a lot of ability, but he needs to demonstrate way more consistency before he can be counted on as a starter. I think Darryl Drake nailed it: he basically said that talent-wise, there's no limit to how good Aromashodu can be, but he still needs to work on consistently playing up to his talent. If he can do that, the Bears could have a poor man's Miles Austin on their hands, but whether he can do it is anybody's guess at this point. I do agree here though. Does DA have ability and talent? Yes. Does he need to bring more consistency to his game? Yes. But so does every one of our WRs. DA is no different. At the end of the day though, DA did more in his 4 games than any other WR for us. Yes, he needs to do that over a 16 game season, but I think there is enough evidence at the end of the season to have elevated expectations. To me, the argument for DA is similar to how we talk about Chris Williams, who finished the year looking very solid at LT. Does that mean he is a lock to be a solid or better LT heading into 2010? No. But there is reason to have such an expectation. I could actually see Knox rotating with Bennett at split end like he did last season. Since they bring such different skills to the table, it makes a lot of sense to have situational packages that swap one out for the other. It could be a matchup-based rotation, too - if a team's playing a slower corner on Bennett, you rotate Knox in and force them to adjust. No question Knox will rotate in. My only question is, what if he is good enough to be more than a situational or rotational player? What if both Knox and DA step up. I am not sure I can see the two playing in the base package as starters. Frankly, it may depend a lot on Hester and the OL too. Traditionally, we need to have one starter who is a possession WR, but if Hester can provide that consistent under threat (slants) and the OL can sustain blocks better, maybe we can better afford to not have a possession WR on the field and go with more speed on the outside. As for the slot, Martz's offense goes 4-wide a lot, and I could see a lot of interesting roles for Knox in those situations. You could line Knox up at SE for those sets, then move Bennett into the slot with Hester, since Bennett is pretty well suited to work those short and intermediate routes over the middle. On the other hand, you could leave Bennett alone and have Knox and Hester be your slot receivers, hoping to get one of them matched up on a safety on a deep route. This will be something to watch this year. While it is true Martz has often used 4 WR sets, at the same time, he has never before utilized the TE as a receiver, which he swears up and down will happen this year. If he really does utilize Olsen, I am not sure how often we see 4 WR sets, at least not with 4 actual WR.

The WR I am pretty curious about is Knox. Assuming, as many do, that DA and Bennett start on the outside, and Hester in the slot, how does Knox fit in. I do not think Knox would challenge Bennett, as the two play very different WR roles. That means Knox would be more likely to battle DA or Hester. I think DA has the advantage over Knox on the outside. I think DA simply has more all around game, taking advantge of both size and speed, while Knox seems a bit more like a one trick pony. I actually thought Knox might look good, particularly in Martz system, in the slot, but is he going to really take snaps away from Hester? I also really want to see what Iglesias does this year. I still believe he has a lot more ability than what we saw his rookie year, and would not be surprised if he ends up replacing Bennett at some point. Similar skills, but simply a higher ceiling IMHO.

Again, we are talking about Jerry freaking Jones. If Parcells were still the GM, this thread would have an entirely new meaning, but how many here can really say Jerry Jones is some great talent evaluator? Take a look at their team. The vast majority of their team is composed of either players Parcells drafted or FA additions. Very few players drafted since Parcells left are in the starting lineup, and of the few that are, most of those are players they are trying to upgrade, like OT Doug Free. Spencer finally played pretty well this past year, his 3rd. The only other rookie worth note is their CB Jenkins, who was taken in the 1st round and is pretty good, though far from great. Seriously. Getting to look at another teams draft board is pretty cool, but before we think too hard about how they evaluated players we drafted, take a step back and consider who their GM is and what sort of record he has in the draft. Jerry was pretty damn bad prior to Parcells, and has not done much since.

I think the key reason why the expectation for Forte would not be as high has more to do w/ Taylor than Forte. We paid Taylor a nice chunk of money, and I doubt we did that so he can ride the pine, or even to just spell Forte here and there. While I do not think Taylor starts, I do see him getting a significant chunk of carries.

Cool, but I should remind everyone who their GM is. Jerry Jones. Their drafting isn't exactly the greatest.

Congrats. Just remember. It is never too early to brainwash, er, I mean educate them. My kids and I sing the Bears fight song every night before bed. I love that my 4 year old knows the words to the fight song better than most adult Bear fans. Hey, when you live in Cowboy country, you do whatever you can!

When it comes to players returning to the field, you have to realize that the trainers have to go by what the players tell them about what they feel. These "toughed-it-out" stories play much better after a SB win. I'm not sure I can put ALL of that on the medical staff when all they do is advise. I have a feeling that if they were more assertive, they might not stay employed. (just had a thought of House as the team doctor. ) Sure, there are times when a player can simply lie to a doctor/coach. No argument. But doctors so often can see the way a player moves/performs and realize he isn't as right as he may want to make out. Look, I am not totally ignorant. I realize this happens all around and with all teams. If you look, you can find examples anywhere. For me, it is simply something I have felt for a while now. When it happens once or twice, you write it off. But when it just seems to happen pretty often or regular, you start to take more notice and look more into the reasons. I have said all along that it may not be the medical staff. It may be simply an issue of coaches who don't care about the health of players. Or maybe it is players who fear the loss of their spots so much they would rather give it the old college try. I am not saying it is the doctors, but have for a while put out there the question and wondered if they were part of the problem. Ok so we've kind of exonerated them for Adams. Let's talk about the other ones. Exonerated? I may not go that far. For me, it was just never so much an issue. For me, Angelo screwed the pooch. Adams was a bust and Angelo gave up a 2nd for him, and did so when we lacked a 1st. That was a horrible move, regardless of the medical issues that came about later. Chris Williams - My understanding was that all teams had pretty much the same risk factors assigned to him, but the teams that took him off their board hadn't needed an OT that high. I think the Bears interest was a matter of need. Sure, they would have taken Long or Clady if they were there, but they liked him with his injury risk better than Cherilus, Otah, Baker, or Albert. It looked bad his first season, but since his surgery, it doesn't look so bad now. We understand differently then. Two teams I seem to recall being tied to the "taken off their draft board" stories were Denver and Houston. For Denver, it may not have mattered as they liked Clady more, but as the story said (based on my memory) if Clady was not there, they would not have taken Williams due to the medical concerns. Houston was another OL needy team that was reported to have taken Williams off their board. I want to say Carolina was in this group too, but recall that one less than the other two. Who else? Mike Brown? He was injured here, and played a full 16 games for KC? Who else falls in this catagory? Um, which category? Player who we drafted despite injury red flags which caused other teams to avoid the player? Player who continued to play, despite injury, only to go down again? Or players who didn't seem capable of being healthy for us, only to find a fountain of health for another team? Which category are you talking about? You mention Mike Brown. The only category I think he would fit would be the last. No health with the bears but health w/ another team. Columbo would seem to fit that category. Mike Gandy was always hurt with us but found health elsewhere. I believe Rex Tucker the same. If you mean players who returned too soon from injury, the first that comes to mind, likely as it is so recent, is Pisa. Trying to think of who, but I recall a few players who tried to come back from high ankle sprains and muscle pulls too soon, only to immediately go down and make matters worse. If you mean drafting players with injury related red flags, come on. Do I really need to give a list. That is something we have done often. Look. Again. I am not saying the problem IS the medical staff. But I will say this. I do not believe this team has done a good job when it comes to (a) factoring injury history and risk when signing/drafting players ( preventative care or © injury treatment. It is possible we have the best medical staff in the game, but a combination of players, GM, scouts and coaches just make them look bad. It is also possible our medical staff is simply not doing a very good job.

Just to throw out there, this is not the first time our medical staff has been questioned. I questioned our medical staff long before these recent events, so I am not just "bitching" about the loss of a 2nd rounder. Frankly, when it comes to Adams, my "bitch" is that we gave up a 2nd round pick for a player who was declared a bust by his (at the time) current team and who was likely to be released at the end of the season. Considing how cheap it has been to obtain players this offseason, I bet Adams could have been had (if he were not cut) for a 5th round pick, if that. No, I have questioned our medical staff in the past for other reason. It may be Angelo flat out ignoring the opinion of the medical staff, but I have also wondered how strongly the medical staff warns/informs Angelo of players injury history. Further, we have seen several cases of players who came back from injury too soon, only to immediately go down again but for a longer period of time. Before a player returns from injury, they have to get approval from the medical staff. Then there are times like when R.Brown was playing with one arm (his statement after the season). Could the doctors not see this? No, I have questioned our medical staff long before these recent issues. I know FAR too little about heart issues to really know whether our medical staff missed something that should have been seen, whether they saw it but didn't think it was enough of an issue to fear or whether our doctors saw it and told Angelo but he disregarded it. Thus I have not attacked our doctors much for Adams, or now Freeman. But I have questioned our medical staff over the years for other issues, so I personally am not simply bitching about them specific to Adams.

That being said, I don't think I would say I feel better about the Oline than the Dline. We have no superstar there and no real solid performers. It might turn out ok, but then again....it could look like last year. Just to clarify, it isn't that I feel good about the OL, or really that I "feel better" about the OL than the DL. It is more simply that based on things witnessed, I see more "reason for hope." LT - Williams was a top 15 pick, and when inserted at LT, looked like one IMHO. He was solid, and I think there is ample reason to believe that continues. Further, consider who he is replacing. Williams could be average, and would still be a massive upgrade over Pace. LG - Beekman. Not saying Beekman is great, but he is at least decent, which again, is leaps and bounds better than what we got last year from Omiyale. C - Kreutz - Opinions vary. Most, at minimum, believe he is on the decline. He played through injury last year which zapped his strength, and there is reason to believe his play improves. Still, of all the OL, expecting improved play from Kreutz may be the biggest stretch as there is more reason (evidence based on past play) to believe the opposite. RG - Garza is an average RG, but there is no reason to expect less than what we have seen. Further, if the play at RT improves, there is reason to expect a slight improvement in Garza's play as well. RT - As well as Williams played on the left side, he was freaking awful on the right. IMHO, if it were not for the horrible play of Pace and Omiyale on the left, far more attention would have been drawn to just how bad Williams was at RT. I do not know if Omiyale or Schaffer will play RT, but the way I look at it is like this. Schaffer showed he can play RT at least on an average level, which is a big upgrade from Williams. If Omiyale starts, that means he beat out Schaffer. Thus, whoever starts at RT, there is reason to expect (a) at least average play and ( a huge upgrade to who we started last year. Make no mistake. I am not saying our OL is set, much less strong. My only point is, based on what we saw last year after positions changed, there is reason to believe we will have an improved OL. At DL, other than Peppers, I just do not see the past evidence to support similar beliefs. If may very well be our DL is lights out better than our OL, but I am simply talking about basing beliefs today on what we have seen of late.