jason

Regarding the bold, it's proof of two things: 1) That the Bears went into prevent and allowed short yardage throws and runs 2) That Tebow can complete short yardage throws And reaffirms my belief that if Cutler goes down, the Bears could potentially work shorter passes, especially with the WCO in town, with Tebow as a QB. Adding in his obvious running and leadership talents is just gravy. As for your question, my answer would be simple: You can't make chicken salad out of chicken shit. You can make it out of spoiled chicken and it won't taste that good, but you have to have the ingredients. McCown doesn't have them.

So your only concern with a Tebow pickup as nothing more than a #2 is the volume of the cries for Jay Cutler's replacement? Umm, OK then.

I think you're looking at it without giving yourself all options. You're saying continuity or talent. Think about it like math. If talent and continuity are both 1-10, then there is a delicate balance. 8 talent with 2 continuity is better than 3 talent with 7 continuity. It's not simply 8+2=10 and 3+7=10. I don't give a damn how long you and I play together, we aren't going to be better than even the worst offensive lineman in the entire NFL. In terms of players, however, you should explain 2010 to me. FOUR returning starters: Omiyale, Williams, Kreutz, and Garza.

If there is one person on this board who I knew wanted no part of Tebow, it's you. You have been firm for years in your disdain for any player who is not an Eagle Scout. Gotta give you credit for consistency.

That's a completely different argument. I do think there would be clamoring for Tebow as soon as Jay had a bad game. But I would hope the Bears fans are smarter than Jets fans, and the noise would be minimal. I would also hope the Bears organization is better than the Jets organization at managing the circus. What's the saying? The backup quarterback is the most popular guy in town? The only time this isn't true is when a team has a star at QB (e.g. NE, NYG, DEN) or when they have a horrible backup (e.g. CHI). If the Bears had a decent backup we'd hear the "replace Cutler" talk a lot more.

That is only partially true. If you put the following OL (in their primes) together they would dominate without continuity on day one so much that any RB in the NFL could produce a 2000yd season: Johnathan Ogden, John Hannah, Mike Webster, Larry Allen, Jackie Slater Continuity is not more important than overall talent. It's only more important when the talent is weaker.

COMPLETELY AGREE. As far as I'm concerned, when looking back at Emery's draft success, we basically have to discard year one if players don't work out.

The world isn't black and white. People don't think he's amazing. People think he's better than McCown.

Sorry, I still say that's incorrect. The Marion Barber run out of bounds was the final nail in the coffin, nothing more. The real downfall of the team during that game was a combination of prevent defense and gutless playcalling, both of which shortened the Bears TOP while giving the Broncos more chances. Thankfully, Lovie Smith's "three point lead protecting"-ass is no longer with the organization. No clue why a team would completely shut out an opponent with gameplan A for three quarters, and then completely change things around in the fourth quarter. Barber is nothing more than the goat in all of this.

Not the exact same thing. If Tebow has to throw 25 times, the Bears probably lose. But Tebow has more available options, which is why he was an offensive threat while playing for the Broncos. Otherwise teams would have been able to simply load up the box with 9 or 10 and say, "Beat us with the pass."

I just meant that he's unlikely to see time because he does what two other better receivers do. It's not like they're going to call his number very often when two better options are present. I don't think it was necessarily a bad pick, particularly for the round and value, but he's kind of stuck behind two superior players. He needs a niche, and his talents, unfortunately for him, do not find that niche on a team that already has Marshall and Jeffery.

The thing that stinks about this experiment this year is that the Bears finally did a pretty damn good job at drafting. They addressed positions of need without getting ridiculous, didn't draft some random DII developmental LB/DB/S, and got pretty good value for their picks. On top of that, they went with a theme that was very apparent: athleticism. There just doesn't appear to be very much flexibility for the Bears in this draft, considering the players available. If we had to do it over, however, I think the general idea is that Long isn't selected in the first. That means the Bears absolutely have to go OG elsewhere. And the only round that makes any sense is RD2, where Warford would have been available. The fourth round pick has no trailing OGs at all. So that pretty much makes any modified mock draft set up as: 1. ??? 2. Warford From there we have to establish any other player in the other rounds to maximize BPA+Need. If people want the 1st rounder to be Sharrif Floyd (that seems to be majority, and I dismiss Eifert as the Bears first round pick because it would have been stupid), then that means Khaseem Green is almost certainly the 4th rounder (LB major need and BPA considered). 1. Floyd, DT, UF 2. Warford, OG, UK 4. Green, LB, RUT So who is available after Jordan Mills in the 5th? Maybe Ricky Wagner? Maybe Ryan Swope? David Quisenberry? Seems like this board was in favor of Swope for the most part. 1. Floyd, DT, UF 2. Warford, OG, UK 4. Green, LB, RUT 5. Swope, WR, A&M Still a need at LB and OT. Some have called for a S. A backup QB has been talked about. A CB before Peanut retires? Maybe even that second TE that excites people. Pickings are slim. Bacarri Rambo (S, UGA)? Ryan Griffin (TE, UCONN)? Cornelius Washington might just be the BPA at that point, and he obviously fills a need. 1. Floyd, DT, UF 2. Warford, OG, UK 4. Green, LB, RUT 5. Swope, WR, A&M 6. Washington, LB, UGA The 7th round at that point is a no-brainer. Since Marquess Wilson probably won't see the field as it is now (too similar to Marshall and Jeffery), it would make sense to go with the BPA for this round, who also happens to fit a Bears need. 1. Floyd, DT, UF 2. Warford, OG, UK 4. Green, LB, RUT 5. Swope, WR, A&M 6. Washington, LB, UGA 7. Fragel, OT, OSU In my mind that's the best possible alternative draft, but I think what the Bears actually did is one of the best drafts we've seen in recent memory.

Don't fool yourself. If the Bears are in a situation where McCown throws it 25 times, they are definitely losing that game.

I'll chime in with another "these are bad arguments for your side of the debate." A risk on potentially the best QB of all time is not really a risk. You make that move every single day of the week, and twice on Sunday. There were indications that Manning would come back, it was just unknown at what level. Manning at 75% is better than most QBs in the league, much less Tebow. Everything the Jets do is null and void. That organization is a F'ing joke. To trade for him, never play him, create the media circus, see how badly Sanchez played, then leapfrog Tebow with a 3rd stringer, then see Tebow busting his ass more than anyone else in the offseason, then release him the day AFTER the draft? That's just unprofessional and appears to be personal.

Done.

I'm guessing on 3rd and 1, with Tebow in the game, the teams load up on the run. Tebow can hit the short 5 yard pass pretty easily. He has trouble with the deeper developing throws, and even then it was more a matter of "trying to ensure the DB didn't intercept the pass" instead of "giving the WR the chance to catch it." Tebow on 3rd and 1 and the Bears success percentage goes up significantly.

GREAT post. Tebow's time on the Broncos should be judged, not his time on the ridiculous Jets team. Why not Tebow as a #2 or #3? He competes and he gets a job. He doesn't, and he's gone. Easy. I have not doubt he'd beat McCown out of the backup role.

I'm not pissed about a backup QB. I'm elated the front office (i.e. not JA and Lovie) finally addressed the OL. It was, quite simply, the primary reason the Bears have not been able to make the next step. It was plain to see, but the experts decided against making the upgrade year after year after year. As for the rest...what makes you think Tebow will blow up the locker room? If anything I'd say he'd help the locker room. People love this dude. Does he need mechanical work? Yes. Does he need an improvement in accuracy? Yes. But, then again, don't most backup QBs? Conversely, doesn't he bring attributes to the table that most backup QBs do not? Absolutely. The plain and simple truth is, Tebow is better than McCown in nearly every possible way, and has proven himself to at least be a capable competitor on an NFL field. Ideally he would have had better success with completion percentage, but his upside next to McCown's upside is a ridiculous comparison. To put it another way, Tebow's upside is somewhere north of the middle point of the Sears Tower (I don't care what the new name is), and McCown's upside is barely climbing above the Billy Goat Tavern (regarding geographic height, not quality of food).

Yes. It was me. I'm on board. He's a better option than McCown. This is not even up for debate. And given the new staff's desire to run some read-option stuff, Tebow is a perfect choice. Put another way, it's 3rd and 1, who do you want in the game? Cutler or Tebow?

Much like Fudge Ripple, I doubt you'd still be employed if half of the plumbing you worked on ended up broken in a relatively short period of time after your work. I suspect you have a much higher success rate and several proven measures used for specific problems. I've done some plumbing, and on a very basic level, there is much more of a cause/effect to the work, with definite fixes on specific issues. Again, someone critiquing your work is different because you can prove results. They can't.

I'm not sold on the Vikings moving that much to get a question mark at WR. Many think he wasn't even the best WR at UT last year.

The first paragraph is contradictory to the closing statement. If they knew so much because of their experience/training/whatever, Lovie and JA would have been drafting this year. I think we should distrust these guys until they prove success.

There is a massive difference between your schooling and training, and that of the front office folks of sports. Your training, in many way, is irrefutable and supported by ridiculous amounts of testing and quantitative study. There's obviously is not. And if you had the success rate with patients that they do with drafts, I doubt you'd still be a doctor.

Each of these teams had great drafts. Eagles Bengals Chargers Rams Cardinals

To do this "we act as a GM"-thing, you can't do trades that didn't happen. You don't know if you could have made the trade.