jason

MUCH RESPECT for you posting that Webb comparison.

You're going to use 2013 WR stats for Hester? Really? The point I'm making is, Hixon came in as a WR. He's done nearly nothing. Hester came in as an athlete/DB, and has produced a much better receiving career than Hixon, where Hixon's best season is comparable to Hester's third best season.

I don't see how you can unequivocally say that. Hester has had better seasons.

Agreed. That's why there was such a discussion about whether to keep/extend Cutler. Let's analyze that... Chicago fans were actually debating whether or not the Bears should keep their franchise, pro-bowl QB instead of a journeyman scrub who caught lightning in a bottle with Trestman's offense. Money was obviously paramount in this debate, but it's pretty telling of the offensive production that McCown not only elicits that discussion, but parlays it into a starting gig on another team. I'd prefer a cheap stop-gap at backup QB, just in case (when) Cutler gets hurt. And support that with a mid-round rookie who Trestman can mold.

Hate the TE pick that early. Makes very little sense.

Actually, it's more of a combination of who replaces Hester and what he does in Atlanta. If Hester is similar to what he was this past season for the Bears, then it was a bad idea to replace him unless his replacement does similarly or better at a discounted price.

I trust Trestman's decisions on offense over me too. I think everyone should, obviously. But your last sentence is where the problem is...we can't trust his opinion on special teams yet.

Your points are good, but when I watch the highlights I see a guy with good anticipation, angles, speed, and a pretty good understanding of the defensive alignment. I see nearly none of this when I watch Conte make mistakes (although he's not specifically highlighted). I think as a rookie he'd be an immediate improvement over Conte.

HaHa Clinton-Dix is elite talent.

Great job!

It's in the general theme of this thread. Just because Trestman didn't want him as a WR doesn't necessarily make it a good move, nor does his offensive improvement absolve him of the decline in D and ST. In fact, it directly relates to the decision making in regards to Hester (i. e. This thread).

It's not that simple. It's only that simple for the offense. The D and ST got worse. It's really that simple.

I remember. That's why I never really thought the concept of him being a #1 WR made sense. Hell, I went to a game and had a sign that told him which way to run because he kept going backwards. Having said that, if the coaches give him a small number of plays, a small number of routes, and simple responsibilities, I think he could be successful. Give him just the corner, post, and fade. If he works OK with those, maybe add a dig or out route. As soon as he starts to obviously have problems, scale it back to the last thing he did well. The key here is to minimize it since he's going to be a #3 at best, and more likely a #4.

Old school works better...then you don't have to change it more than every year or so...kind of like cracker's underwear and/or colostomy bag.

And that doesn't even take into account how much of a leader Urlacher was on the field. The defense definitely suffered as a result of having no discernible leader out there last year.

If Hester is a member of Mensa, and I'm below him, then you're somewhere between a homunculus and a stupid jellyfish (not one of the smart ones). Oh, and BTW, Hester was never going to be a #1 WR like Lovie thought, but he was a serviceable 3rd or 4th WR. He doesn't have the biggest or best hands, and he's certainly not the smartest, but he can run a deep pattern and get under the ball. If you recall correctly, he was severely underthrown and poorly overthrown on a handful of passes when running deep during the "WR experiment"-years. Everyone asking for a speedy WR who can stretch the field and catch 20-30 passes a year should have wanted Hester back. The problem he had was that they tried to turn him into a #1, which he isn't.

Again...eat shit. I have been right FAR more times than I've been wrong in regards to the Bears' picks and FA moves, and there is little chance I would have put a worse product on the field than the Bears have over the last decade. I've said before that I don't keep up with the salary cap, but I definitely would have made better moves and draft picks. This is a bad move for the Bears. Hester is still one of the most elite return guys in the NFL, and he's exactly the burner the Bears need at the 4th WR position. He won't get many catches, or many passes for that matter, but he stretches the field for Marshall and Jeffery. This is especially bad for the Bears if when the contract details come out we find he was had for 1-2 million. The Bears will be worse on ST next year without him. I called the D being significantly worse last year without Urlacher (injuries weren't predicted), and I'm calling this one. Bad move.

These are only proposals. That doesn't mean they'll come true. If they do come true, then Hester's value is lessened. If they don't, he still has more value than vet minimum.

Horrible idea. And it won't change the impact or collisions. Now teams will pooch more often. Besides, even if you kick deep, there is still a massive collision with the guys running full speed for 10-15 yards into that first wave of blockers. Just a horrible idea.

I think Matthews would make this offense unstoppable, but it would hurt the defense. Overall, I don't like this draft, but I think this would be Forte's reaction.

Holy hell. What a start! Unfortunately, as soon as I saw this I thought, "That's impossible." So it kind of makes the rest of the draft moot. Although, I am salivating at the thought of those two guys wearing Bears' jerseys. I'd have to think that would guarantee a serious upgrade in the defense.

I just don't like drafting a RB when there are so many other positions of need. If the Bears trade down and accumulate picks, then I think RB isn't as bad of a choice.

I think you're on track with the thought process (i.e. performance escalators), but your requirements are far too high. You realize nobody in the last 10 years of the NFL has been able to average 16 yards a punt and 30 yards a kickoff, and in most years, 30 on a kickoff makes you the league leader? You also realize that last year, Devin Hester was the only guy to average over 27 on kickoffs and over 14 on punts? The ONLY guy. Period.

Standard. Easier to follow.

I'm torn. The trades are horrible value, and I hate some of the picks, but some are really good. First of all, the Bears lose on all three trades on the draft value chart. The Bears and Chiefs trade ends up being 1100 for 1000. The Bears and Niners trade ends up being 760 for 671.2. The Bears and Titans trade ends up being 54 for 45.9. That's a net loss of 196.9. Horrible. As far as the draft goes... 1. Mosley - ILB - Alabama - I get BPA, but drafting a first round LB - arguably the Bears strongest position in terms of talent and depth - is not how this draft should start. 2. Jernigan - DT - Fl. St. - He would be a steal, for sure, so that's at least a bright spot. 3. Brooks - S - Fl. St. - For all the picks he acquired, the best he could do to fix the Bears' current #1 issue (i.e. FS) was to get a guy from Florida State (Brooks) who is slow, undersized, has horrible hands, and is a weak hitter? 3. McGill - CB - Utah - Tall DB who could sit/learn for a year or two. But not that great right now. 4. Sankey - RB - Washington - I'm typically against a RB in this draft...but this guy collected so many picks that this isn't horrible. And to get the potential #1 RB in the 4th is a solid value. 4. Martin C - USC - Same as the Sankey pick in terms of value. Many have Martin as the #1 Center. 5. Reid - DT - Princeton - Hate this pick. Dude's gonna be a bust. 3.5 sacks in the Ivy League? Seriously? 5. Martin - DE - UNC - Hate this pick. Just about everyone says this guy is very unrefined, lacks burst and skill, and isn't very strong. 5. Murray - QB - UGA - I like this pick. He has skill and if he recovers from injury he'll prove people wrong. 6. Jones - WR - ND - Hate this pick. He's the exact WR the Bears don't need. Not a burner, and not very big. 6. Colvin - CB - OK - Hate this pick. Undisciplined and slow. 7. Linder - G - Miami - I guess this one isn't horrible, especially for the 7th. But he definitely is not someone the Bears want on the field. 7. Connor - QB - S.Car. - Hate this pick. Why get a second rookie QB, especially one with such limited upside? Out of all that, Mosley is probably the only guy that sees the field as a full time player. And it's at a position of abundance. Jernigan definitely makes the rotation. Sankey, Martin, and Murray are good picks for the Bears future. Overall this draft plan would not make me happy at all. And Conte would STILL be starting.