jason

All I can think of is Dez White. Webb must be the same - great practice player, bad game player. That's the only excuse I can think of right now. Well, that and the fact that the Bears couldn't reinvent the ENTIRE OL in one offseason, and maybe Webb was just the lucky roll of the 5-sided die?

This part I agree with. If there are no changes in scheme, this defense could struggle somewhat. I think Urlacher will be missed (which was statistically proven last year).

There is where we always disagreed. The scheme was never really aggressive under Lovie. While the 1-gap/2-gap differences you mentioned are legit, there is simply not a single defense in the NFL - or the entire football world for that matter - that doesn't try to sack the quarterback. But that, in and of itself, doesn't mean the D is aggressive. The D under Lovie was not really aggressive; they were reactionary. They were fine with letting an opponent get small plays over and over because they figured percentage-wise it was likely there would be a stop or turnover before the entire field was traversed. Having said all that, it's no big surprise you prefer the one-gap scheme, and I prefer the alternative. I'd much rather see a coach who says, "No matter what the opposing offense runs, my scheme will cause chaos and they won't know what to do," than a coach who says, "We won't try to trick them, and they'll know what we're running...but we'll out-execute them."

Some of this may be an attempt to find the clean end of a turd, but at least he's trying. I have to commend him for that.

Nail on the head. How much change does a 10-6 team need? I hope he proves to be right, but it reeks of "new manager attempting to change things for the sake of change."

1. That's why I said "essentially," nobody else even thought about him. He was a Bear or nothing. 2. Bad footwork or not, he was a first founder with great potential and minimal chance to show his value on the field while healthy. 3. Bad character...meh. The Bears do not have the luxury to cut every guy who makes mistakes. The Bears need players. This is nothing new; you're right. I didn't like it then, and I don't like it now. If the Bears pass on all question marks they are severely limiting their potential talent pool. Not smart.

Idiots?! This is the Patriots. Not the Bears. I'd say their moves are above question until proven otherwise. Their track record speaks for itself.

This offseason: -Essentially cut a HOF MLB who was statistically proven to have a very positive effect on the defense -Traded a first round OT two years after he was drafted and before anyone really got to see him work a game while healthy, while simultaneously having one of the worst OLs in the NFL for 5+ consecutive years and having very little known quantities for depth -Cut a hybrid TE who was drafted with the premise of getting more targets for Jay and turning around the Bears horrible offense The first is still a question mark until we see the defense and the new pieces in action. The other two are premature and have other issues that have already been noted.

You're all about woulda coulda shoulda. Aromashodu looks good, but he has never been able to put it all together. There has to be a reason why. If I'm wrong with him or Cinnabon, they'd have most likely done something by now.

In terms of keeping our guys it's been disappointing.

Completely agree. Both moves, especially the ERod one, were rushed.

Not like he was going to be used as a hybrid anyway. The Fiametti signing says the staff wants a FB, not the guy we all hoped ERod would be.

I am, but this has been an offseason of disappointment in terms of FA. This move also feels like a "get rid of the old regime"-move just a little bit. The financial aspect obviously consequential here as well. And I've been on record as saying a team that puts money as their primary consideration is going to have issues. This also signals your boy Webb will probably start, which is bad news in my opinion (how many damn chances does this guy get?!). Perhaps most frustrating is the fact that Webb got multiple chances while the Bears two first round OTs of the future got dicked by Tice and moved inside to OG while a player (not just Webb) performing very poorly remained outside. Some will vomit, "Trust the staff," and all I can think of is the long debates on this board about how the GMs and coaches know soooo much and we know so little, and that's why we aren't qualified to question their decisions...decisions that have resulted in some dreadful drafts, pathetic coaching, questionable personnel decisions, and mediocre teams. Well, I seriously question this move. It feels less about player impact to the team and more about everything else.

Ahhh. Devin Aromashadu, perfect relation to this thread. Yet another guy with the measurables who has never been able fully to bring them bear...which is exactly the pipe dream, what if stuff that Cinnabon will result in.

I only said that because you said STFU. Don't like it, don't read it and don't reply.

I'd say its depressing because the OL sucked, isn't deep, and they're so quickly dumping a former first rounder a short time after he was drafted. I'd have liked the move more if he got into training camp and they could tell if he was fully healed from his injuries.

Eat shit. There isn't much to talk about on the board, and if you don't want to read it you don't have to. If Wesson insists that someone plays a position because of a label, and not because of the actual playing time, then it's pertinent when discussing the type of roster moves the Bears should make. In other words, it's pertinent to the board. Banal? Sure. Tedious? Sure. But what else is going on that hasn't been hammered into the ground? Nothing. And to be quite honest, this is a multi-leveled discussion because it goes back to Wesson harping on and on about how the Bears needed to sign like 12 WRs who were all 6'45" and over (lot of good that did the offense, since Cutler still had to run for his life like I said he would). Because of his playing time and his height, Weems is neither a WR nor a tall WR. He's a short ST player.

You are what you do.

I love vocal new members. Regarding your post, maybe it's the fact that this franchise has not taken the right chances that has gotten them in QB trouble over the years? Instead of retread old dudes like Chandler, complete non-QBs like Kordell Stewart (who never got dumped on like Tim Tebow is getting dumped on, despite being a worse throwing QB), or 7th round piles of garbage like Moses Moreno, they are actually trying to get a player with potential upside. Since Jim Harbaugh left this is what the Bears have seen: 1994 - Steve Walsh (11) / Erik Kramer (5) - Both journeymen with average skills and nearly no upside 1995 - Erik Kramer - Fluke year, still no potential 1996 - Dave Krieg (12) / Erik Kramer (4) - Yeah, adding old ass Dave Krieg to the mix was a look towards the future 1997 - Erik Kramer (13) / Rick Mirer (3) - The Rick Mirer traded was horrible when it happened, and it is still horrible. 1998 - Erik Kramer (8) / Steve Stenstrom (7) / Moses Moreno (1) - At this point keeping Kramer was like holding on to 8-track tape players, Stenstrom and Moreno were horrible (I guess Stenstrom at this point had potential 1999 - Shane Matthews (7) / Cade McNown (6) / Jim Miller (3) - Matthews had the weakest arm in NFL history and had no potential. Cade was our rookie pick that didn't work out, but at least it's an effort. Jim Miller was a journeyman, stop-gap, essentially the replacement for Erik Kramer. 2000 - Cade McNown (9) / Shane Matthews (5) / Jim Miller (2) - The Bears begin to give McNown the steering wheel. It doesn't work out. At least they tried. 2001 - Jim Miller (13) / Shane Matthews (3) - Treading water. Nothing more, nothing less. 2002 - Jim Miller (8) / Chris Chandler (7) / Henry Burris (1) - Bandaid, bandaid that lets blood ooze, bandaid that doesn't even stick to the skin. Horrible. 2003 - Kordell Stewart (7) / Chris Chandler (6)/ Rex Grossman (3) - Kordell was an average QB at best, and this was obviously not a move for the future. Chandler was collecting social security. Rex was the Bears attempt to groom someone for the position...which is why we all loved him at first. 2004 - Craig Krenzel (5) / Chad Hutchinson (5)/ Jonathan Quinn (3) / Rex Grossman (3) - Krenzel was never going to succeed in the NFL, but it was a somewhat smart move to continue drafting QBs with the hope of finding the next great one. Hutchinson was also a decent gamble. At the time he had all sorts of buzz, and this was thought of as a high-reward, low-risk move. Medicine Woman was just an atrocious move, period. All in all, this was a good attempt to fill the position with some potential upside. 2005 - Kyle Orton (15) / Rex Grossman (1) - Orton was essentially the organization taking a mulligan on Krenzel, because they realized he was terrible. At this point the Bears had two young, promising QBs, and the battle between Sexy Rexy and Neckbeard began. 2006 - Rex Grossman (16) - Sexy Rexy wins, but the QB position looks fairly stable, until Lovie dicked around with his playing time at the end of the year and created a controversy, perhaps forever tarnishing Grossman's confidence. 2007 - Rex Grossman (7) / Brian Griese (6) / Kyle Orton (3) - I didn't like the Greasy move at the time, because it essentially said, "Hey you two young QBs, one of you will be third string." This started the next downfall, and caused many arguments on this board. 2008 - Kyle Orton (15) / Rex Grossman (1) - Neckbeard wins over Sexy Rexy, and looks decent in his first chance to be a starter. 2009 - Jay Cutler (16) - The move had to be made. Rex was a shell and Orton was gone. 2010 - Jay Cutler (15) / Todd Collins (1) - Jay still the foundation, Todd Collins was a pointless journeyman with no hope of success. Many here complained loudly about the need for a backup. 2011 - Jay Cutler (10) / Caleb Hanie (4) / Josh McCown (2) - 2010, ditto. 2012 - Jay Cutler (15) / Jason Campbell (1) - The Bears, always seemingly two years late, do what the fans have been calling for: securing a solid backup QB. Sure, he ended up being forgettable, but it was a shot at a player who looked to have upside in Washington, but fell into the black-hole at Oakland. It was a good move, just didn't work out. To summarize - Draft picks with potential (McNown, Grossman, Orton) Draft picks as filler (Krenzel) Gambles (Hutchinson) Great moves (Cutler) Moves for journeymen, bad player, or both (Walsh, Kramer, Krieg, Miller, Chandler, Griese, Campbell, Mirer, Stenstrom, Matthews, Kordell, Quinn, Collins, Hanie) Seems pretty obvious to me what the problem has been.

You're right. LOVE IT. It shows the Bears are not complacent. It shows they are willing to take a no-risk, high-reward chance on a player in substitute of signing a guy who fits the skill level of a 3rd string scrub, a guy concealed behind glass, break in case of emergency.

Dude, there have been times when a team has had to resort to a non-QB player playing QB. In that case, they played QB. By your logic, even though they played 99% of their snaps at another position, because they played a handful of snaps at QB they are then QBs. It's about the concept of volume and percentage, which apparently eludes you. Where he played in HS, college, or where he was drafted is inconsequential; it's all about what he does now. And that, my friend, is playing ST. When he starts to significantly contribute as a WR - kind of like the transition Devin Hester made from a ST/WR to WR/ST - then you may have a point; but, until that time, Weems is a ST player and not a WR you so covet...which is kind of funny since he's short and it doesn't fit into the whole "OMG we have to have 6'6" WRs"-narrative you've been on about since early last year.

Pretty clear you're not thinking very deeply on this. If Cutler goes down, and the backup goes down, and the backup's backup goes down...is the next guy a QB? Sure, in a pinch they might have that guy throw a pass when he's lined up at QB, but is he a QB? Obvious answer is no. Same as Weems. By that same respect, I guess the late, great Walter Payton was a QB, because he threw some passes. I know all those pesky rushing yards get in the way of his clear definition as a QB, but since he threw a pass he's a QB. Right? I guess by your definition, if both pilots on a plane pass out, and one of the passengers take control of the plane, that makes them a pilot. Or maybe when a little kid gets to visit the cockpit and they grab the sticks or push a button that makes them a pilot as well. Hell, I once was in the front seat and got to "steer" for about two seconds. I'm a pilot. I'd say it's just passengers who are impersonating pilots, but if you want to see it your way, fine. Weems can call himself a WR. He can be listed on websites as a WR. But he makes next to zero impact as a WR and nearly all of his impact as a ST player. Therefore, he's a ST player. Unless, of course, you're going to hang your hat on Walter as a QB.

Hilarious. You couldn't be more wrong. Weems is less a WR than Tebow is a QB. Get it through your thick skull: He is a ST player. Period! It's possible to be just a ST player. Many do it. Sure, in a pinch they might ask him to run a route as the 5th or 6th WR, but he makes virtually zero impact as a WR...which means he's not a WR. The 53-man roster allows for this privilege. 11 on offense, 11 on defense. That's 22. Figure in backups and that's 44. Figure in specialists (e.g. Punter, kicker, long snapper), and that's 47ish. There is room for a pure ST player...which is what Weems plays.

This is not 20/20 hindsight. I didn't like the pick then because I thought it was a luxury with plainly obvious greater needs. Once they had him on roster, I begrudgingly embraced it and hoped they would use him to his fullest edge as a hybrid TE (I.e. last year's usage), like Hernandez. That didn't work out either. Now the dude looks like a turd...a waste all around.

Wasted pick when it happened, wasted potential when he got switched to FB and got minimally used, and now he's likely to fulfill the trifecta of waste...wasted talent.