jason

But those guys who work in the league, and right beside the league, and are basically embedded with the teams, know sooooo much! Break out the umbrellas if this happens, fellas, because pigs will be flying and I'm not sure if they have the same aiming ability as birds.

Wow. A wet dream revisionist draft. It would have been glorious.

Good post. Particularly the bolded points.

Ahem... Cough... MLB? It is hit and miss, you're right, but that would have been a huge hit. Especially since the team got rid of Urlacher. Sure would have been a nice 7th rounder last year. I believe Mathieu will be another one of those hits, provided it doesn't cost more than a 3rd rounder. His question marks and measurables are enough to cause some concern. If he's there in the 4th round - which would be insane - the Bears would be equally insane not to grab him.

If that's the case, then it makes the devious, master-mind plan we talked about after the draft last year (i.e. Emery drafting for a future without Lovie while setting up a potential transition to a 3-4) even more realistic. Maybe then McClellin would turn into a more productive player? It may be too early to judge him, but 7 tackles in the rookie year of a first rounder is atrocious.

C'mon man, New York bent him over harder than Ving Rhames in Pulp Fiction.

That's why I always say it, or mean to say it, as a collective. I don't know nearly enough about salary cap stuff - nor do I care - to adequately be a GM, but with guys like LT2 and twig I think we'd have it pretty much covered. Hell, there have been multiple years in the past when the reporters who are supposed to be "close" to the Bears and "know everything" were not nearly as close to the correct figure as LT2 was. It's just funny to me that these guys are put on pedestals, but if you look back in the board history about who we all wanted before Emery was hired, and you can see comments about this guy being a moron or that guy being a horrible selection. If they had been hired by the Bears, all the sudden they're untouchable pillars from which all correct NFL decisions are made? Gimme a break. I can't honestly see how any Bears fan doesn't think they would have done better drafting over the past few years. There isn't one draft since 2003 that we can look at and say, "Wow, that is a great draft!"

I hope you're right, and I hope everyone passes on him, because there is no way in hell he's a late round talent. I've watched him pretty closely the past few years, and he's been a stud for quite some time. He's been kicking ass in the SEC (pretty much the NFL's JV) at multiple positions since he was just a pup. If the Bears get him in the 4th, or in the 3rd after a trade down, it will be a huge steal. He's easily worth a 3rd round pick, and probably should be an early 2nd rounder if his college dominance and versatility has anything to do with it.

Agreed.

If this isn't a sure sign that the Bears need to invest early and heavily in OL, then I don't know what is. With any luck Jones is slipping like some say, and the Bears can get him in the 4th. I'd love to see a Bama OL draft of OG Warmack in the first and C Jones later.

It's possible to support while being skeptical and pessimistic. BTW - I haven't failed to accept he's injury prone. He's older, it's gonna happen. But I also think his skill level and extra attributes make him a worthwhile veteran who makes the team much better (something the stats from last year have proven).

Why #3? Why not #2? I'd say what he did in Denver looked #2-worthy. I doubt Campbell would have had similar results.

Agreed. But, then again, I was pissed last year when they drafted DE in the first...when they didn't really need to.

As a backup, I don't mind the concept of Tebow. With a QB guru coaching, maybe he can harness the various great Tebow attributes and use them to accentuate flaws? He's especially more appealing if the Bears actually to plan on putting in some read-option packages. But he'd have to come free...no draft picks.

Let's hope not. Or let's hope someone wants to trade up.

You're the one talking conspiracy. I'm talking about the fact that it's not all monetary, and there is inherent value to a leader, a teammate, a respected member of the clubhouse, and a vocal member of an organization that could speak on the team's behalf when pursuing big name free agents. Is it that difficult for you to comprehend more than one possibility? I won't trust Emery's moves until they bear fruit. Until then, we should all be skeptical since his track record is minimal and the success hasn't followed. If the Bears turn into the Patriots? Sure, he slowly but surely becomes untouchable. His decisions are not questioned. Until then, however, every move he makes should be met with uncertainty. Unless you're just simply into the idea of blindly trusting someone in charge...in which case you might want to avoid koolaid at the next random picnic.

Agreed. And until the Bears can replicate that type of success, their moves are rightly more scrutinized than the moves made by the Patriots.

All that is kind of my point. It's more than just money.

Good post. And if he's there in the 2nd, he's a great pick for the Bears.

Unless the OL actually performs well, it remains a valid excuse for Cutler. It can't be an excuse for when he's in the first drive of the game and throws into triple coverage, but I'm going to give him a relative pass if he's trying to win the game in the 4th quarter and he's been getting his ass handed to him for the better part of the game. Until he plays well, he's always a valid scapegoat. His brief stretches of good play have been acknowledged when they happened.

This is scary for the AFC. The Browns now have the possibility of Campbell throwing to Kellen Davis.

Last time I checked you don't know a damn thing about what an NFL player has going through his head. My point is just as valid as yours in that regard. In fact, mine is more valid because other than Randy Moss ("straight cash homey"), most players will say it's not all about the money. If it were me, and I were choosing teams as an NFL player, it wouldn't just be money driving my decision. How the organization is run counts for something as well. How the organization treats their veterans counts for something as well. My overall chances of winning and producing stats that would help me win a future contract are also under consideration. What the other players on the team say about the ownership, management, and coaches speaks volumes. There have to be countless other things being considered. Do you honestly think the players sit down and basically weigh only the financials of their decisions? That's just ridiculous.

Possibly. Probably not with those two. I don't really consider either a "star" the likes of which that other players would clamor over. Especially not Bennett since he's been a backup most his career and has only had one good season out of five. I'm talking about the Julius Peppers type free agents, the guys that everybody wants. Think of it another way. You're a free agent linebacker. Do you go to the team that has Ray Lewis calling the shots, hyping the team, leading the organization, or do you go to the team that just dumped their unquestioned leader on defense and replaced him with a guy who bounced all over the place in the Denver LB corp, never cementing a role at MLB, before getting suspended last year for trying to cheat a urinalysis with what was probably horse urine? The former sounds more like an organization I'd rather join.

It remains to be seen if the excuses no longer count. If the Bears start Garza, Louis, and Webb on the right side, every indication is that Cutler will be running a lot more than in just the read-option plays.

Chicago isn't looking for them now. I never said they were. But the pro athletes of today are not like yesteryear. They converse with one another. Network. Form friendships. Just look at the revolution of sorts taking place in the NBA. It's ignorant to think that free agents don't talk to the stars of the team with which they could potentially sign. And in that regard, I believe Urlacher's word held persuasive weight.