nfoligno

Depends on what we are talking about with regard to a bidding war. Look at how much we gave Omiyale last year. That was an OL who had nearly zero starting experience. I think Sims is more than just an upgrade over what we have. I think he would likely be our 2nd best OL, and that is assuming a lot about Williams frankly. If we were talking about getting into a bidding war where he was being offered pro bowl money, that would be one thing. Or if we were talking about giving up a 1st, think twice. But we are talking about a starting point of a 4th round pick, or maybe we offer him a deal. Not sure that is wrong.

I read that this morning too. Seems like there are two ways to go here. One. Trade for him, which is sounds like others may be looking to do. As much as several teams want him, one thing that makes his valuable is the low one year salary you can get him for via trade, rather than simply signing him to an offer sheet. But, if (for example) we offer our 4th, and Det offers they same, they will win as their 4th is higher. No way we offer our 3rd, so if Det is willing to give up their 4th, we would have to offer another pick (unlikely w/ few picks to start with) or a player. Two. Pony up the cash and make him a legit contract offer. I have no clue what sort of money he may be looking to make, but this seems like our best option to get him. Hell, point out to him that if he doesn't sign an offer sheet with us, he could end up in Det. That should be an incentive right there.

Maybe the coaches who don't believe tackling is important enough to practice.

Hey, it is totally possible that Vasher just plain sucks, and no amoung of coaching will matter. It is also possible that all Vasher's finger pointing toward the staff were nothing more than excuses to avoid responsibility. Still, I think there are enough questions as to our staff to make it an interesting point. Vasher was never a stud, but was solid for us through our SB season, and then virtually tanked. Further, with few exceptions, it seems like many on our defense saw a similar fall from grace after the SB season. While there are plenty of reasons, I have always argued the changes in staff were part of the equation. Not just Rivera, but assistants too, like Don Johnson. Back to Vasher and the system, one point Vasher always made that simply made sense to me. Per Vasher, and this is supported by other analyists I have read, the CB in our system is expected to take away the sideline and essentially push the WR into the middle, toward either the LB or the safety, depending on depth. BUT, we would also screw around with how we lined up our LBs, often having them fake blitz playing on top of the DTs arce. This took the LB out of position, so when the WR would run a cross or slant, the LB was not where he was supposed to be. CB looks like he just got abused, but in our system, he was really doing what he was supposed to be doing, but the LB wasn't where he was supposed to be. Again, I have always said Vasher was over-rated. Going back to the day he was drafted, I said he could be a good nickel but little more. I just feel Rivera and others were able to get more out of him.

Well, Steltz was a later 4th round pick. He also had just played for the National Championship team, and had an incredible season. Look, I am not saying Angelo doesn't ever, or would never, draft players who are considered better football players than athletes. While not drafted by Angelo, Hunter Hillenmeyer would be the perfect example of a football player lacking ideal athleticism. My point is that we too often go after the athletes who look good in shorts rather than get the solid football players.

I don't recall there being red flags with Bazuin. He seemed like a reach, but I don't remember him coming with "flags". Harrison had several flags. He had several injuries in college (knee injury, concussion, torn ACL) as well as character issues (arrested for drugs and questions of his taking plays off). Williams came with injury red flag. Prior to the draft, it was reported he had back issues, and there were reports that several teams dropped him or took him off their boards entirely. I don't recall any red flags with Payne.

I actually kind of liked the idea of putting Melton at DT. He's built pretty short and squatty for a DE, and I'm not an expert or anything, but to me he looks more like a guy who needs to add 20 pounds and be a rotational DT. I could see him being a player like Anthony Hargrove was for the Saints this season: maybe he gets some reps on the outside, but he makes his money as a nickel rusher on the interior line. Melton's quickness could be a big problem for your average guard. I don't know. We are talking about a guy who was a RB in college. He was a big RB, but a RB just the same. Adding weight necessary to be a pass rushing DE is one thing, but to go from RB weight to DT weight is pretty extreme. You mention adding 20lbs, but how much would that zap his quickness? Also, the development factor. While pretty raw as a DE, he at least had about a year and a half, or something like that, of development at DE in college. As a DT, he would be starting from scratch. I also sort of don't get Gilbert as a DT. I mean, I don't really understand his role in this defense anyway. They picked the guy based just on his sheer athleticism when some much less raw d-linemen were still on the board (like Matt Shaughnessy and Michael Johnson.) If he doesn't develop into one position, that was a pretty dumb pick. That's been an argument of mine against Angelo for years. Too often he seems to fall in love with athletes over football player. I have heard so often the old adage that you can't teach speed. Regardless of that, too often those guys who look great in short on the track (or in a swimming pool in Gilberts case) just don't translate to the NFL. Have to wonder. Would Angelo have ever drafted Mike Brown, who was by no means a super athlete?

There's 2 obvious things your overlooking: 1. We've reached our limit in terms of spending. For us to sign Sims, we've got to free up money. Is it worth dumping Brown for Sims? I think it is. Agreed. While we likely would not have to worry about Seattle matching the deal, we would have to make Sims an offer worth siging, and he isn't going to sign a long term deal for nothing. To trade for him, he get him at the RFA tag price for one year, which is cheap. You can then, later, work on a new, long term deal for him. 2. Nobody wants to touch Brown's contract. We can't trade him because he's not worth 5 million per year. Not sure. That is the story now, but could change after the draft. $5m sounds like a lot for Brown, but if a team were to sign him in FA, they are likely going to have to shell out more than that in terms of SB and such. If this were a normal cap year, $5m may be more prohibitive, but in a non-cap year, we may be able to find a taker for the $5m.

Honestly, it would not surprise me. I am not going to predict he has a pro bowl season, but I would not be surprised to simply see their staff get more out of him. Vasher has been one of the more outspoken critics of this staff. Several times I recall him, when questioned/critcized for his coverage on a play, he pointed to the system and said he was doing as instructed. He talked about how he was supposed to take away the sideline and "push" at WR inside. So when WRs would catch those easy slants against Vasher, he basically said to blame the coaches. He also said he lined up where he was told when asked why he lined up so far off the LOS. Many point to the year he got his money as the point when he went downhill. Others point to the injuries. I have always pointed out the change in coaching could be a good sized piece of the puzzle. I swear I wonder what would happen to Mark Anderson if he went to SD and was once again under Johnson, who coached him to double digit sacks as a rookie.

I don't remember who the player was, but I believe there was a player who was punished for something that happend prior to being in the NFL. Personally, what I think is more likely is that Louis may be using up his one free pass, so to speak. For many smaller offenses, players will get essentially a warning. But if a player gets in trouble a 2nd time, its punishment time. This may be Loius' warning. Fair or not, Goddell has really drawn a line in the sand and is trying to clean up the sport.

Just saw Vasher is close to signing w/ SD. Could be interesting to see if, with the coaches he played well under if he does so again. Also, while we all knew Rivera was in SD, I have to admit I didn't realize Wilkes (DB) and Johnson (DL) coaches were also in place in SD.

I will admit, this is more interesting. I talked about sending our 4th to the Hawks for Sims a while back in another thread. A friends who is a bears fan up in Seattle raved about Sims and said most fans are pretty put off by the teams looking to deal him. Seems like everywhere you look coaches prefer their system to talent. Sims is seen as a very solid talent, but simply not an ideal fit for their system. I have been banging the drum that it is ridiculous to get rid of Brown. I still would not trade him for a draft pick, and feel the talk of just cutting him to save money is ridiculous. On the other hand, if dealing him would get us a very good starting OG, that may tip the scales. Also something to point out. Sims at LG could also have a chain effect and help Williams at LT. Losing Brown would hurt, yet at the same time, his loss would at the same time fill a pretty big hole, and one that didn't look great in the draft.

Well, I remember after the Buccaneers game where Griese torched us, somebody on the d-line (I want to say it was Brown) basically said that no pass rush could get there fast enough to disrupt the QB when he could take a short drop and get the ball out immediately. What he was politely leaving unsaid was that Griese could throw immediately because he always had a guy open in the seams between the coverage zones (either between the CB and the safety or between the two safeties.) Those seams are effectively bigger when the safeties are too slow to the ball or run themselves out of the play. It might not be as big a deal if we didn't play our CBs in zone so much, but a poor safety in the Tampa-2 means that the receiver is open as soon as he leaves the CB's zone. That's what keeps happening to us on third and long when we go into the Tampa shell: the quarterback can get the ball out before the rush gets there, because there's always a guy uncovered after the CB passes him off and before the safety can pick him up. I remember that game and Brown's comments, but I am not sure the FS was so much the issue. Our CBs were playing way off, and that was a key problem. WRs would run short patterns for easy gimmie completions. Also, they would run a ton of slants, but we are talking 3 and yard drag routes. Unless the FS was playing in the box, he would not be part of this. In that Tampa-2 four-man rush that we use on 3rd and long, there might be one rusher who can disrupt a quick pass pattern without help from the secondary, but it's not a DE. It's Tommie Harris. The under tackle's got the shortest path to the quarterback, and 2006 Edition Tommie Harris could definitely get into the backfield in a hurry. Even if the under tackle doesn't get to the QB, as long as he can collapse the middle and force the QB to sidestep or leave the pocket, that buys some more time for the edge rush even when the coverage can't. But the DEs in the Tampa-2 line up wide and run a big wide arc: they've just got a longer path to the QB, unless he's being flushed out to them. In the Tampa-2 on third downs, the DEs depend on the under tackle or the secondary forcing the QB to hold onto the ball - Alex Brown isn't as important in that situation as interior pass rush and solid coverage. One, I am a tad confused. You talk about 3rd and long, but also talk about quick pass patterns. While those can break for bigger, the issue on 3rd and long is not usually those quick pass patterns. Two, I would say the DE is a key part of the pass rush. The idea is basically for the DE to rush to the outside, and push the QB inside, where, theoretically, you have a DT that has penetrated and cleans up. Look, I totally agree that the pass rush and the coverage are interrelated and depend on each other to be effective, but it goes both ways. That's why you have things like coverage sacks forced by the secondary and picks forced by the pass rush. Unless Harris hops in a time machine back to 2005, the Bears are going to have to rely on the coverage to force the QB to hold onto the ball for just a second or two. The best edge rush in the world still takes a few seconds to get to the QB - that's why the West Coast offense was such an effective answer to the 46. Just disagree in theory I guess. If you have the best DBs in the league, and no pass rush, I will bet you the QB can still find a way to complete the play eventually. I remember a game we were playing GB. Our secondary we doing very good and covering the WRs, but Farve had all day. I mean, the announcers showed the play over and over again and jokes about how long he had. Anyway, he finally found a WR (I think Driver) downfield. On the flip side, if you have a weak secondary but a great pass rush, I think you win more than you lose. Yes, they are all related, but I think if you ask all 32 coaches, every one will tell you pass rush is the key. I don't like the idea of getting rid of Brown, but the defense could be better off with no Brown and competent coverage from the safety position, especially in the kinds of situations that have been keeping our defense on the field for the last few seasons. Personally, i would argue our CBs playing 10 yards off the LOS is a bigger cause than the FS. Look, I have argued for years we need a FS. I have argued for years Brown is average and over-rated. But w/ all that said, this move still just does not make sense to me. All we ever hear from Lovie is how pass rush is the most important thing. We finally go out and get a pass rusher, but following that up by getting rid of our next best DL just doesn't make sense to me. If Anderson had shown more fine. If Adams were still alive. Fine. Hell, if Harris were still a stud, fine. But I would absolutely argue Brown is our 2nd best DL right now. One more point I have to make. If this move is all about money, that to me make our siging a one dimensional TE for what we did that much more suspect.

No amount of pass rush is going to keep a QB from hitting a skinny post on a 3-step drop, not when he knows there's going to be a hole in the coverage every single time. but how much does the FS effect this play? I agree where you say w/o a FS upgrade, we are vulnerable on 3rd and long, though I would say a good pass rush helps against that. But I am not sure how much a FS upgrade effects those quick 3 step drops. I mean, ideally we wouldn't have to choose between starting Idonije and starting Danieal Manning, but if we do, I'm picking Idonije every single time. I like Brown, I think he's a quality starter even if he doesn't make lots of big plays, but the dropoff between him and Idonije/Anderson is peanuts compared to the difference between any of our current free safeties and a remotely capable starter. I agree Idonije/Anderson could prove more capable at DE than whoever (Afalava/Steltz/Bullocks/Payne) at FS. At the same time, I consider DE a far more important position. DE is simply a far more important position overall than FS, IMHO. If you have a weak DE but a strong FS, I think you are in more trouble than if you have a good DE and a weak FS. I don't care how good your FS is, if you can not generate a pass rush, he will be exposed. On the other hand, I am not sure the same is true in the opposite. If we have a good pass rush, I just do not think the pains we have felt at FS would be nearly as great. As poor as our FS play has been, also key has been the lack of a pass rush. Look, I want to upgrade at FS, but downgrading our pass rush is simply too much for me.

I have seen others mention using this move to help the FS position, whether due to trade or the cash angle. Honestly, I am still not for the move. Look, I have no argument on how weak our FS position is. At the same time, I simply question how any of our DBs are going to look if we can not get a damn pass rush going. Lets say we as a quality FS, but at the same time, we see a significant loss on the DL in Brown. It isn't just pass rush either. I remember how bad Anderson was against the run when he started. The problems on the DL create a far greater ripple effect than if we have a hole at FS. It really feels wierd sticking up for Brown. Frankly, he has been a fan favorite for years and I have talked aften about how over-rated he was. I still don't think he is too much more than average, but I think he is significantly better than what else we have. For me, and maybe this is too simplistic, but I just can not understand the idea of upgrading by downgrading. Why can't we simply upgrade our FS position w/o having to first downgrade the DE position. Why can't we upgrade with the addition of Peppers, w/o at the same time downgrading elsewhere along the DL.

And I don't like not having a proven end opposite Peppers. That is part of it for me. When you get a franchise player, you do what you have to do to support him. While not the same, replacing Brown w/ Idonije or Anderson is similar to adding Cutler, but not giving him a quality OL to work behind. When you get a stud, you don't put him out there by himself. You support him. Our DL is lacking. Even w/ Peppers, the DL is questionable IMHO. We hope that we get the hyped up Peppers and that has a carry over effect on other positions, but based on recent history, that is a pretty big hope. Anyway, I guess my point is, I do not understand upgrading our DL by adding Peppers, only to then downgrade it by getting rid of Brown. There may be some debate as to how good Brown is, but I just don't even see the argument that we have his equal among the depth chart.

Actually, I dont think this is a Lovie move at all as Brown is one of his guys. But being one of Lovie's guy doesn't hold much weight anymore (AP, McKie) This has JA written all over it. Agreed. I think this has much more to do w/ Angelo than Lovie. I think money is likely the top factor here. If the "rumor" is legit, there is talk we could simply cut him if we do not find a trade partner. There is no way you can argue he would be released for any reason other than money. We are trying to save the coin his contract would otherwise call for. The one question I have is, are we tring to save that money to recover from the Peppers deal, or are we doing it w/ a plan of another addition. I'm fine with it. This is a guy who would make all of his money in two or three games a year getting multiple sacks and disappears in the rest. I'd rather see some young blood in there. I have argued that for years. Brown would have a few games each year where he would look unstopable. In those few games, he would register nearly all his sacks and big plays. The rest of the games, he would take those wide angles to the QB and easily be blocked out of the play. At the same time, I would argue he is solid in all games against the run. And while his pass rush is inconsistent, I would also are that (a) it is still better than the rest of the DEs we have in depth and ( when the DTs do their job, even his wide rush angles are far more effective.

For the record, I think Melton, not Gilbert, would be the final DE to speak of. Lovie has recently said Gilbert would be developed at DT and Metlon at DE. Unless Lovie is totally ignorant of the idea of moving Brown, it doesn't make sense for him to come out and say Gilbert would be developed as a DT if there were still thoughts of playing him at DE. So it is Anderson, Idonije and Melton. Agreed on your comments about Anderons and Idonije, and Melton is an even bigger reach.

I kinda agree with him about SS. At WR and SS, we are loaded with unproven players that can be starters. I don't see any star quality at either position. I never said any of our WRs would become stars. I said starter quality. But at the same time, I would simply argue our WRs have shown more as NFL players to give some support to the "potential" argument, where as the SS' have really not shown that much. RE: Manning. I think he's being moved to SS because film has probably shown he has no clue what to do in pass coverage and it's his last chance to make it as a defensive player. People mention him as a nickle back, but the only thing I ever found him good at was blitzing. That makes him a one trick pony. Agree and disagree on DM. To me, he struggles in zone coverage due to a lack of instincts. That kills him as a FS. As a nickel though, he would more often be assigned to a particular WR, rather than having to play smart, play off reads. There is simply less "recognition" issues as a nickel as it is more of a specific assignement, as opposed to FS where he would have far greater recognize/read and react responsibilities, which he struggles with. Similar argument can be made at SS. There is a greater level of read responsibility, but the area of coverage is shorter, and thus his athleticism may better make up for the slower read/react timing. Still, I would argue if we were so set and sold on our SS position, we would not be looking to make this move. We would simply keep DM as a nickel DB and return man. That we are moving him to SS, and talking as if he very well could be the starter, I think that reflect on our current group of SS'.

We actually do agree some here. I never said I felt any of our WRs were top 10 WRs. At the same time, I do not believe you have to have a top 10 WR. But at WRs, I do believe we have a group which has shown enough to believe we have 2 starters and talented depth. When I look at our group of safeties, honestly, there is not a one that I would say has shown me much to give me confidence in a single one as a starter.

Sorry, but I don't understand this move. For the record, Alex Brown has never been the Joe Crede for me. I was never that great of a fan. I always considered him slightly above average. He is solid and steady, but nothing special. Even when our DL was playing at its peak, he still wasn't able to take his game up a notch. With that said, if we trade Brown, we are creating a hole where this is not currently one. Yes, we just added Peppers. Great. But there are two starting DEs, and sorry, but none other on the team should be counted on to start. Anderson - What happened the last time we thought he could take over for Brown? He proved a total and massive flop. He showed some signs last year of solid play, but come on. He didn't show 10% of what he did as a rookie. Why does anyone think he can start now? Idonije - You want to talk about over-rated fan favorites. To me, arguing we should Idonije can start is about equal to saying Adrian Peterson could start at RB. Idonije is a good player to have on your depth chart. He is a nice option to go to when someone goes down, or to play in a rotation. He is not a player you want to enter the season as your starter. He should be considered depth and a backup plan, not a starter. Let me ask this. If he is such a great DE, why has this staff changed his position (and weight) every year? Melton - later round draft pick who was raw to begin with (remember, he was a RB first couple years in college before switching to defense, and only had one full season as a starter at Texas as a DE) and lost out on his rookie year due to injury. If Adams had not passed away, this move would make more sense. But w/o Adams, I just don't see the point. I get that we lack draft picks and would love to add picks, but does it make sense to create a hole in the process. If we do this, IMHO, it would only mean we would have to use a draft pick on a DE, which seems to sort of defeat the purpose. Again, I am far from Brown's biggest fan. I have always felt he was solid, but little more. At the same time, he is considerably better than our 3rd DE, whoever that is, and likely better than any other DE we would be able to add. Pass rush has been a big weakness for this defense. With the addition of Peppers, we finally have hope that can change. Sorry, I just do not see the sense in this move.

Personally, I think you are nuts if you think our potential at SS is equal to that at WR. Our WRs have much to prove, but have at the same time shown much on the field. At SS? Well, our group of SS' is such that we are moving DM to SS. What does that say about our prospects at the position.

To me that was more about not liking Beekman then it was liking Omiyale. For some reason, we liked a bad Omiyale better then a mediocre Beekman. Don't forget that we went back to Omiyale after Orlando was hurt/benched. The Chicago media believes it's just a matter of time before we announce Omiyale is the RT. To me that means we really like Louis or we're searching for a veteran FA guard. To me, the key it was about was having in mind the sort of OG they wanted. They wanted to get bigger on the OL and play with more power. Beekman is more finese and small of frame, thus not a fit for what they were looking for. Omiyale sucked, but was more like the sort of OG they wanted. Scheme over talent. I agree he is likely to move to RT. I personlly would rather keep our options open w/ a draft coming up supposedly loaded at OT, but weak as hell at OG, but it sounds like we have all but made up our minds. We ignore the fact Forte looked like crap all last season. We blame the line and we blame his injuries. We forget he looked bad at the end of his rookie year. But all last season he looked slow as hell and he sucked at the goal line. Hell, I thought Bell looked just as good. We also blame Forte's poor number on Turner becoming pass happy. Again, we ignore the fact that the only reason we became pass happy was that Forte could gain any yards. IMO Taylor's the starter. Hey, I was among the few saying Forte sucked last year, despite the awful OL and other aspects. But another reason (at least given) for Forte's slump was injury he was playing with. Taylor may well be the starter, but I simply do not believe this is a situation where we signed him with the plan of making him the starter, regardless what Forte does in camp, like with Beekman/Omiyale. If Forte looks very good in camp, and more like his rookie year, I think he starts. I think this could be a legit competition, rather than one like we have talked about in the past.

If you are going to quote me, provide the entire quote and not cut off the sentence in the middle. I understand your point about WR, but on the other hand, we are loaded at WR w/ more talent and options than at most other positions. I am not saying we are loaded, plain and simple. I am not saying we have Fitz, Boldin, and the rest of the Az WRs. I am saying we have a greater collection of talent than at most any other position. I feel more confident about our WR position than: CB, S, DL (before Peppers), OL, RB (before FA). You say a bunch of 3rd and 4th WRs. I disagree with that too. Bennett started last year, and played well as a first year starter. DA has much to prove, but showed #1 potential. I would argue Hester has proven capable of being a #2, simply not a #1. Knox was a rookie, and there is no telling what his upside may be. Do you honestly believe none of these WRs are capable of more than #3? Again, the point is not that we are wholey proven and set at WR. Its that when I look at our roster, I see more promise and potential than at most other positions. And when I talk about promise and potential, I am also talking about players who have shown us as NFL players promise and potential. I am not talking about a Marcus Harrison who was supposedly a 1st round value that fell to the 3rd, but who has since shown not even the ability to stay in shape. I am not talking about Louis or any other players drafted in the back of the draft. I am not just saying potential based on age, but on what they have shown on the field.

You're forgetting that in '08 we started Brown at FS. We moved him back to SS, not because he was bad, but because we wanted him do do more then drop back in coverage. I think there was more to it that than. Brown was slow and ineffective at FS. Our SS' sucked, and I think may have even seen injury, and we were getting torn up on the ground, thus we moved him. But in 2008, Brown was a shell of himself. Go back to Brown before the injury to see what a FS in our system can do. When did Steltz get beat deep down-field? I remember it happening, but passes were seemingly always overthrown. If he's good in the box, why don't we ever play him in the box? Why don't we ever play him in the box? What, you think our coaches are so awesome now? Don't you think Payne is better in the box, and yet how often did we try to play him at FS? And he isn't the only example. Since Angelo game to us, he has drafted SS bodies to play FS. The only time it worked was with the one guy that he didn't draft (Brown). Bullshit. Seriously. Just about every position we're weak at I could argue we have talent and options. Now that is some BS right there. We have talent and options and safety . . . that doesn't mean the talent and options are very good. DA looked like he could be our #1. Are you counting on that? Bennett is solid across the middle. Hester & Knox both suck at route running. If that doesn't improve, how's Martz going to take it. Iglesias??? Rashied??? That's a rough group. Wow. Knox was a rookie that developed sooner than expected, yet last years solid play is worth what to you now? He sucks at route running? One, I did know that I have read that. Two, he was a freaking rookie. What, he would be a precise route runner as a rookie. Hester isn't great, but he is a damn sight better than you will give him credit. You can call BS, but the argument against is the real BS. Am I saying we are loaded w/ studs at WR? No. But can you honestly tell me you feel more confident w/ so many other positions over WR? I would argue we have seen enough to believe we have potential starters in 4 WRs. Look, I am not dumb enough to simply assume all the potential we talk about will come to fruition. At the same time, at WR, there is at least reason to believe it can happen. I look at our group of safeties, and I am not sure any could start for another team. I look at our CBs, and frankly, I feel little more confident. Yea, we have Tillman and maybe Bowman, but after that, nada. Simply put, there is reason for hope at WR, while at numerous other positions, little to none. Why would you ignore a 1st round talent who falls to the 5th round due to injury red flags??? That's what I was talking about. I guess it is against time to call BS. Sorry, but that just doesn't happen nearly as often as so many want to believe. Most often, there are more than one reason a player slipped in the draft, especially if you are talking about the 5th round. How many guys have we drafted who we heard all about how they were 1st rounders that slipped for this reason or that. DJ Moore and Harrison come to mind. I am not saying you can't strike it big, and frankly, in the 5th round I am far more willing to take chances. 5th rounders have weak odds making NFL rosters regardless of injury, so taking more risk in the 5th round is fine. My issue is taking such risks earlier, particularly the top 3 rounds. Again, bullshit. How about the '99 greatest show on turf? I do realize that team had a ton of future HOFers but they went from rags to riches overnight. I concede it's difficult to read too much into Detroit or San Fran because those teams were just god awful. Starting a response, went back to read the original discussion, came back and deleted what I wrote. It was going off into a Martz scheme tangent. More specific to the question of whether Cutler can do well out of the gate w/ the OL and surrounding talent. You mention how Martz did well early. I would still argue that is questionable. Yes, Stl is an exception, but with exceptional talent to allow such a situation. Do you really think we have talent that even could emerge similar to Stl? Nope. I have said this before, but I think Cutler is going to light it up in terms of yards this year. My concern is TDs, turnovers and rushing.