jason

And you’re a dipshit crybaby who runs to moderators when things don’t go your way. I could tell you the sun is hot and you’d find issue because 10 years ago I removed an obviously political post that was against the rules. (Ironic: I agreed with the politics of it.) The facts are that Howard didn’t fit perfectly, but he was a very good RB. The front office created a hole where there previously wasn’t one. Which forced their own hands into drafting a RB, one that Pace obviously loved so much he basically promised Montgomery it was going to happen beforehand.

I’m barely over an hour from Nashville and didn’t even want to go or watch. I watched Avengers Endgame instead. He’s a shifty player and he will make some great runs, but it won’t be enough to make up for how it all went down.

I hate it. It’s a bad move. And I don’t care what anyone says. The Bears had a similar RB, who was proven, but dumped him for pennies on the dollar. And probably because the management already knew who they wanted. So they purposely made a hole where there wasn’t one, and then filled it...maybe. That’s like having a sturdy wooden boat and punching a hole in it, watching water pour in, all just because you wanted to prove the patch kit you liked could do a better job. AND they had to trade up to get him. This front office becomes enamored with specific players and gets nervous, which causes the trading up. It occurs far too much.

I’m saying we know what those dudes are. It’s a weak spot. If a 3-4DE is there with good value, it should be getting more focus than positions like OLB and TE, where starters are much better.

The comparisons don’t work. Goldman is a different position with different responsibility, and RRH is also subpar. Why I feel comfortable saying this is the fact that neither RRH nor Nichols ever really stepped up and/or surprised last year. At best they were the DE equivalent of QB game managers.

Just say no to miles sanders. First, he will cost too much. Second, he’s from Penn State. That lesson has been learned already.

If Nichols is inked in as the starter, that’s a problem. He is definitely below average. Meanwhile, everyone seems to think OLB is a high priority, despite having the best one in maybe the entire NFL, and a first rounder with massive potential on the other side. That just doesn’t make much sense. Put someone better in Nichols’s spot, and everyone benefits.

The question is valid. Opposite of Hicks is a void with minimal production and average promise. I think 3-4DE is more of a need than OLB. Nobody even really knows who the starter is there for 2019. I’d love to see Jerry Tillery slip because of off-field concerns. He could be great in the role.

Why in the world would any coach give Cohen LESS carries than he had last year?

Given the propensity to reach on small school projects, that should scare everyone a good bit.

Fair enough, guys. I’m just not of the belief that the front office would get rid of a very good player if they didn’t feel like they had a guaranteed plan to replace him already established. That leaves the RBs on roster, or something much scarier: a rookie they love already and will unnecessarily reach to get in a draft with minimal picks.

You realize 25 more carries would be less than 2 more carries a game, right? That’s so minimal it’s negligible. It’s absurdly minuscule over the course of the season. Of course he could handle 25 more carries in a season. Will literally less than 2 more carries a game really burn him out? It seems highly improbable to me. The decisiveness is the only valid point.

Tarik Cohen got 99 carries last year to Jordan Howard's 250. The split figures to change a bit since Cohen is incumbent and Howard is gone. So let's call it 125/225. Mike Davis got 112 carries in a 3-way rotation in Seattle last year. There's nearly no doubt at all he can carry more of the load. Additionally, for the coaching staff to dump Howard and pick up Davis, they had to feel pretty comfortable about his fit in the system and his ability to replace Howard for the most part. If there are roughly 225 carries to spread around, then Davis figures to get north of 150 of those carries. I'd guess 175-ish. Which leaves 50 carries or so. That doesn't sound like a big need. Furthermore, it sounds like a great way to spread the love, depending on game situation, to backups like Nall, or Mizelle, or whoever. Say no to drafting a RB this year, unless it's a massive upside pick like Bryce Love in the 5th or something like that.

I don't like the idea of drafting a TE, because I agree that it means we're basically dumping Shaheen...who several on this board thought was a massive reach at best. Why be in a rush when Burton is such a stud? If anything, Burton's presence means the Bears can slow play Shaheen's development, which has been incredibly slow considering his draft position.

How do we need a TE? With Burton and Shaheen, all the Bears really need in a 3rd TE is a glorified OT.

Hell, I didn't even know. It's nice to have a guy in place who actually has a few more hits than misses. For several years we could have randomly thrown darts and done better at the draft than Bears leadership.

I want to choke Hoge for this mock. Atrocious. A RB in the 3rd is stupid. I don't see why this is a trend.

I LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOVE this movie. Amos is slightly overrated HHCD is underrated. HHCD is more of a free-range safety than Amos. With the Bears front 7, the need for a thumper isn't as big. HHCD + Jackson = Amazing Alabama connection Such a good move.

If the Bears keep Howard, they are set. And that's why they shouldn't move him. If they get rid of him, then obviously they are not set.

That's the same thing I'm thinking. And if his fall from grace is a scheme issue (i.e. OLB to ILB), then even better. That's getting a potentially high producing player, stealing from the packers, making them hate one of their beloved for being a traitor, and adding a potential pass rush threat in a 3-4. To me the consideration all comes down to money.

This article poses an interesting question: https://bearswire.usatoday.com/2019/02/01/5-moves-the-chicago-bears-should-make-in-free-agency/4/ Should the Bears go after Clay Matthews? Does anyone really think he's going to sign for a reasonable and minimal contract considering his production the past few years? Would he start over Floyd?

I hate drafting a RB, but if it happens, that's the scenario I would accept. 7th round guys should be risks. Huge upside guys for whatever reason, but the potential of being dropped from the league in less than a year. Having said all that, if there is one position I hate the idea of drafting more than RB, it's TE. Brown, Shaheen, Burton, Braunecker. The Bears simply don't need another one. Burton is the guy. The second guy has to be Shaheen, or it's admitting a wasted draft pick. Besides, behind Burton it just needs to be a guy who either serves as a 3rd tackle or creates a ridiculous mismatch (i.e. Shaheen). Beyond that, the third TE on the roster is a guy you pick up in free agency.

I'm fine with Nall, but hate drafting any RB. It's using a draft pick when one doesn't need to be used, and when the Bears don't have a large number of picks. If the Bears had ten picks or so, sure, burn one. But drafting a RB with the current roster and the current picks doesn't make much sense.

Depends on the TD:INT ratio. If it's 2:1 like Trubisky, then it gets more attention. If it's greater than 4:1, then it gets less attention.

If Trubisky could consistently hit open receivers, particularly on deep balls, he would probably have similar highlights. I can't remember all of them, but there had to be a good 10-15 this year where he plain ol' missed an open guy deep. Many of those would have been TDs.