jason

Completely agree. Maybe a rushed move with thoughts that the value would be gone when they draft in the second rd as well. Can't wait.

Again, Emery is a GM. None of us are. End of discussion, right? Value is subjective. Eifert may have been a good value, but they don't need a first rd TE to sit the bench.

Not to mention Cutler's mechanics, health, and statistics.

Emery > a group of tools at NFP. Right? He's a GM after all.

EXACTLY. It was the #1 and #2 greatest need. Emery is trying to allow Cutler a chance at a successful offense.

Again, according to whom? Walter freakin football? PFF? Guess what? None of those guys are employed by the NFL, and Emery is. Isn't that what I've been hearing for so long? Trust the experts because they're experts? Well, there you have it. All the mocks are best guesses. An actual GM made this pick.

Pure BPA is retarded. What if Geno falls to the Packers? Do they draft him? He'll no. It's stupid. BPA has to be balanced with need. Drafting on only one of those reasons is a guaranteed failure.

Next greatest need wasn't DT. It was OG.

Eifert would have been a worse pick. A backup TE in the first? Gimme a F'n break.

Not when those needs are lower. Pure BPA is just not a good strategy. Weaknesses have to be addressed. Period.

Too early says who? All the experts? Well, ISN'T EMERY AN EXPERT?! Great pick. OL finally gets some attention. Cutler is smiling. Forte is happy. Carimi is a bit nervous.

BOOYAH! Don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out!

Hate this draft. Bears desperately need OG, and two go this early?! Just goes to show that OL should be a huge priority. Too bad Lovie and JA never realized that.

That's exactly how I interpreted the chart. It was a position grouping chart. Obviously nobody actually thinks the Bears need to draft a #1 WR with Marshall in town. But until someone steps up beside him, it is a questionable area. Not as questionable as other positions, but the point remains. FWIW - I also completely agree with your specific color-coding.

This is for those needing a little more visual representation...

We can only hope. Richardson will be a headache for whatever team gets him.

Position-wise, it does have appeal. If someone told me the Bears got out of the draft with a DT, OT, LB, CB, and TE I might like the draft more than if I actually got to see the names.

Thoughts? Seething hatred. I would punch Walter in the balls if he had any. 1. Richardson has injury, character, and intelligence question marks. Pass. 2. I'm just not high on Arthur Brown. I don't think he'll be great. 4. A small college defensive player? Are we sure Lovie and JA are gone? 5. Meh. Too little, too late. 6. Fodder.

I wish they would spend the entire day on the draft. I don't like this split day draft stuff. I want to veg out the entire day and talk about the draft.

That would still be pretty awesome this year.

Watched the 30 for 30 episode last night about the 1983 draft. It was very interesting. The Bears ended up with a monster draft that year: Jimbo Covert Willie Gault Mike Richardson Dave Duerson Tom Thayer Richard Dent Mark Bortz That's unbelievable. (Four OLinemen drafted that year, BTW). Little did I know, however, they were briefly in talks with the Raiders for Howie Long and some other guy. There is a good chance the Bears wouldn't have been able to select Jimbo Covert if the trade were made, and that could have potentially altered the course of the entire draft, but could you imagine if the Bears had simply made the trade (IDK the exact details) and drafted the same way the rest of the draft? It's crazy to think how one move alters the course of a franchise... -If the Bears make the trade, they now have Howie Long and Dan Hampton at DE -They might not draft Dent (Hampton made the probowl as a DE in 80 and 82) -If they felt strongly about Dent, they probably would have moved Hampton inside (he played some DT later on) -Which would have meant they probably wouldn't draft the Fridge. Thinking about a DL of Dent, Hampton, McMichael, Long has me starry eyed. They would have probably literally killed a QB or two.

Interesting. I can't say I'd be happy with a draft that starts out with two LBs, but the end result of the draft wouldn't be horrible. I'd rather see one of those LB positions a G/T selection, and your Bakhtiari selection could be the other LB (if you just happen to need two LBs in your draft).

I'm not trying to be a smart-ass, but for you to even ask the question makes me wonder if you know what the whole "Technique"-verbiage means. They obviously didn't play the 5-technique. For the life of me I can't find it, but I could swear you said somewhere that Williams could play the 5. That is simply untrue. He can't do it. He's not mobile or agile enough. If you are saying now that he is not capable of playing that way, then I'm fine with it. He could range anywhere from 0-1-T. Period. But given Paea, I don't know why the Bears would draft another 1-T NT/DT.

I was doing research on him and saw the 4.6 numbers. I hadn't seen the confirmed 4.51 numbers.

So if you acknowledge he is a NT, then why are you so insistent that because he played a few snaps at 5-technique he can do it now? Dude is a NT, does not rush the passer, does not have the lateral burst/quickness to attack gaps. It's a bad fit for the Bears.