jason

Fixed that for you.

Read the entire post, especially the word "beginning." Urlacher is solidly linked to Lovie and his relative defensive success in Chicago, where as Melton has only been around a few years.

I don't like it with a pass-first QB who has a great arm. If the Bears had someone like Vick or RGIII I'd be more inclined to think it was a good move.

I can't believe the overwhelming support for this guy considering how opposed most have been in the past to signing anyone who was not a Boy Scout (e.g. Moss, TO, Burfict). And before anyone says anything, I'm talking way back when they were available the first time. I don't mind the signing; it makes sense. But I've always been consistent about getting players with upside and some character issues.

What I hope happens: LT - Bushrod LG - Rookie/Brown C - Garza/Rookie RG - Louis/Brown RT - Carimi/Webb The rookie starting at LG is obviously Warmack or Cooper. I prefer Warmack. The center could be Schwenke, Jones, or Cave. I prefer Jones.

The same reason the NFL draft provides NFL-unknowns with millions of dollars even when it's a 50/50 crapshoot. The same reason the NFL managed to put in a rookie pay-scale system because the salaries were getting out of hand with unknown quantities. The NFL Owners have their hands firmly in a bucket of "what if," and a known quantity with some upside and years left in the league is about a sure a bet as they can expect to see.

Kind of what I said up-thread. We already had the read-option. Read - Did Webb and co. block their opponents? Option - Oh shit! Better run!

Excellent post! This was a "get Urlacher out of town because he's a Lovie-player from the beginning"-move. This was exactly as I said, a move made by new managers wishing to put their stamp on the team.

Precisely.

Very well said. The move didn't make a lot of sense for a variety of reasons. It would have been better to keep him as a stop-gap since he was a lot better than people are trying to pretend, let him train the pups, and end his glorious career as a Bear.

The negative effect is where veterans look at how the Bears "negotiated" with Urlacher and decide the reputation of "cheap Bears" is probably accurate, and the franchise isn't a positive one that will build a team. I'm cool with that if the Bears can turn into an NFC version of the Patriots, picking up mercenary players all over the place, but I just don't see that happening.

No. One of the stipulations of the bet was that he played for the Bears next year. Go check it out.

Wrong. In your scenario the leadership would have started at 2m because they want to get a cheap deal, and eventually settled on 3m with a, "Seriously, this is all we can do." Nobody starts with their final offer except this guy:

I expect a kick-back.

All the stuff you mentioned still leaves their superstar QB out of harms way. It still has other guys flying around, and the QBs standing where they should be. As for why other teams are doing it? Well, they're trying to trick the defense. Easy. But the key word is: trying. It will work for a while, but then it will die off because things like this have been tried before, and the end result was hurt QBs. QBs being the most important player on offense and all, well, sorta makes the decision to minimize the use pretty easy. The athletic prowess of some players today is just incredible, and they're "trying" to maximize that ability. The problem is - IMHO - they are trying to structure what should be dynamic, and they are jeopardizing their franchise player. The other aspect is, they don't know yet if it will be beneficial. It's like cooking; sometimes you just have to try a new spice. Might make you puke, might make you smile. I just don't think it's a smart move to jeopardize a franchise QB like that, particularly one who has been injury prone and never really known as a traditional "running QB."

4) Yes, hindered. The Bears' hand is now forced. Before they could have done just about anything, with most believing they'd grab a TE, OG, and LB at some point. But how they are almost obligated to grab a LB in the first or second. 5) I stand by it. I've read more message board traffic over the past few days than ever before. The Facebook page as well. It's overwhelmingly in support of Urlacher. 6) True. Nobody restructured. But they probably figured, like Urlacher did, the team was going to negotiate and there were no problems. 8) The end result was pretty good though, eh? 9) Kind of my main point. He was better than league average, or maybe even average if someone wanted to downgrade him somewhat. What is league average worth? I don't feel like crunching the numbers, but I'm guessing $3m fits well into the range.

I don't live too far from where he's from. I might have to stop over there and see what type of Hill stuff they have.

That's genuinely surprising. If you've been watching that long I have no clue how you can be so optimistic. You must be one of those people who skips into work on Monday morning.

I don't know what you're getting at with the Tillman and Marshall comments...they just don't make any sense. Apples and hammers. I wonder if you're willing to backtrack on the rest. The Bears NEVER offered Urlacher another offer. It was the 1yr/2m offer. Period. As for the hamstring, you point out exactly why they are hamstrung. Before they could have filled the hole with a FA or a mid-rounder. Then grabbed an UDFA and hoped he was a good backup. Now they don't have that flexibility. They'd be dumb if they didn't draft a LB in either the 1st or the 2nd.

Yeah, because the Chiefs and their horrible offense and miserable team are the bastion of intelligent coaching decisions. Correlation Causation

What are their creative trademarks? Other than the Saints - who use a lot of pistol - they are just juggernaut offenses who use a passing pack to destroy opposing defenses.

You must be a young Bears fan to have such optimism. I'll continue to be pessimistic until proven otherwise. And that hasn't happened more than a few times in the last 30 years.

My point is that it's not necessary. The Bears could put in a quadruple reverse to spice things up as well, but it wouldn't be a good idea. It's possible to keep a defense off-balance without resorting to too much gimmick, and without potentially injuring your franchise QB.

Unless it's purely about the couple hundred $K, the move to not resign Spaeth and to pick up this guy is stupid.

3) True. But I have a hard time believing Urlacher wouldn't understand the new defense since it won't change much. 4) Drafting a LB high isn't a problem, per se (despite my belief that LBs are one of the easiest positions to fill with later picks), it's just that the Bears are now forced to do it. And everyone knows it. 5) True. But it sours many fans. This is something we've talked about many times on the board. The team doesn't give a damn about us, which is why they continue to raise the ticket prices. 6) Perhaps. But I just don't see. Shave a little here and there off of other contracts for the fringe guys not making league minimum and you have Urlacher's difference. As for the doctor on soxtalk, I'm sure he said the same thing about Adrian Peterson. Different people heal differently, and there is no reason why a superbly gifted and physically talented person like Urlacher, who is now probably driven by the force of "I'll show them!", couldn't heal quickly and recover to levels a few years ago. This is especially true in the "deer antler"-era we now live in.