jason

That's what they're saying, and that's what I hope, but I don't see it. He's too small and weak to be an every down DE. That's why everyone said he fits as a 3-4 guy, not a 4-3 guy.

And just for the record, if he ends up doing well and getting 10 sacks as a situational pass-rusher, it's still not a smart pick. It's Mark Anderson 2.0. It's still a LB who they send after the QB instead of a DE, a player they could have drafted if that's what they actually wanted. It's adding to a position of strength (LB) when there are several similarly or higher rated players available at positions of need.

It could also be because he's got contacts all over the place and someone leaked that the Bears were dreaming about getting him.

That would make sense if the Bears were the Patriots and they were in the playoffs every year and a threat to go to the Super Bowl every year. But since they haven't, and they aren't, it doesn't make sense. If thousands and thousands of Bears fans think the Bears need one of a few positions, it makes sense if the Bears select a player for that position in the first round. It doesn't make a lot of sense to draft a guy who may or may not be that position, especially when there are other guys at those positions rated higher.

Horrible pick. Problems: He's not strong He's not a true DE He's not a true OLB The Bears don't play 3-4 Concussion history Reiff still on the board Decastro still on the board Mercilus still on the board Overall there were better players at bigger positions of need.

Reiff!!!!

Floyd, Hightower, Curry, Mercilus, Reiff all there...WTF is Lomardi smoking?

F McShay and his mock. That would be horrible for numerous reasons.

If that move were made to get Cox, I hate it. If that move were made because Forte is not signable, I'm fine with it. If Khalil gets past Minnesota at 3, I love it. But it's not happening.

Here I was thinking it was about TO and his physical abilities as it relates to the concept of cutting a player (i.e. Rachal) who doesn't perform up to snuff. Maybe that's why I couldn't get you to agree with the fact that he's still physically better than many others in the NFL.

I fully expect draft day disappointment. It goes with being a Chicago Bears fan.

Understood. MJ+Person Fouls+slow combine+throwing coach under the bus=RED FLAG. Having said that, I would still put a 6th or 7th towards him, hoping he gets his head out of his ass. He's definitely got talent greater than someone drafted that late. Having said that, I'd take a bunch of Mike Brown types - guys without the measurables but have great minds and football instincts - every day of the week.

I experience no slow downs on the site.

You continue to paint with a biased brush. I've admitted to numerous Martz mistakes; your memory just isn't that good. But at the same time I'm open-minded enough to admit that a great majority of Martz issues would have been solved if the front office had actually paid attention to getting Martz the tools required to run a professional offense. The QB was a great step in that direction, but the collection of bad-to-average at OL and WR made his job a virtual impossibility.

C'MON! Virtually nobody hit on Urlacher! He was a Safety that got turned into a MLB. I guarantee that wasn't mentioned on most Bears boards at the time.

A dumbass, indeed, but I hope the Bears pick him in the 7th. A talent considerd 2-4 grabbed in the 7th is a steal.

So he's stupid, and uses MJ...how is that different than many other players in the league? This just in, there are guys in the league who get single digits on the Wonderlic - a test so simple the average high school freshman would ace. Hell, Dexter Manley was illiterate! Also, I'm sure there are tons of guys in the NFL who use marijuana.

Likewise. It's all in good spirits. When people vehemently disagree, it's difficult to change the other's opinion.

Good Lord...I wish that too. There would have been hits and misses (saddens me to think we wouldn't have had Urlacher), but I have no doubt in my mind we'd have been better than we have been over the last 5 - 10 years. We may not have had some of the better defensive picks that have come from later rounds, but we would have been much more solid offensively, would have had a much more steady/solid OL, would have been more dynamic on offense with plenty of pass-catching options, and azbearsfan, Martz would have been a success in Chicago as a result (he failed primarily because the OL was shit his entire time here; it's not up for debate - all other problems fixed with a stronger OL). 1st Round quick hitters: -I loved Moss -I hated Enis -I loved Mike Williams -I hated the Benson pick

I've conceded the math of attitude+skills But this all started, and is in this thread about Chilo Rachal, because the logic of "if he sucks, just cut him, no harm no foul" was used. I still contend the same logic applies to TO. Further, this thread continued on because you've claimed his talents have eroded drastically. And I've yet to see someone concede the idea that no matter how much his talents have eroded, just on the minimal tape we have, he's better than most #3 WRs in the NFL. Just start there. Is that not a simple and logical statement? As for the gem comment, this is more about WR than anything. All people have talked about for years is WR this and WR that. And for several years both TO and Moss have been available. And each year this topic arises on Bears' message boards only to be shouted down from the rafters because of the duo's admitted attitude problems. To me that is seeing a problem, complaining about the problem, and refusing to address the problem because you don't have the perfect solution. Sometimes you have to apply duct tape. That's all I'm saying, and all I have said. With his lessened talent, and nearly zero interest from the NFL, I have to think he knows this would be his last chance. And given his stats two years ago, I find it hard to believe he couldn't help this team more than Max Komar, Dane Sanzenbacher, and Devin Thomas. He starts shit? Cut him. He isn't as good as thought? Cut him. Easy.

I dislike waiting until the third to get OL help since I obviously think it's still the #1 need, but starting the draft with Brockers and Perry would be unreal. If the addition of those two didn't turn the Bears front-four into the NY Giants 2.0, where a QB isn't safe on any down, then I don't know what would. Also, I'd rather seea CB in the 5th instead of another DT. Overall, however, this would have to be considered a good draft for the Bears.

Continuing with Lucky's recent research, the folks at ESPN (more specifically Grantland) have produced some interesting stats as they relate to the draft. http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/785360...-truly-valuable It's not all that surprising in some regards, but it does back up the concept that some positions are safer to draft in the first two rounds, and some have higher bust rates. TE is the safest in the first two rounds, and OL is the second safest. Similarly, no position other than QB drops off in production like OL does after the first two rounds. There are always reasons to debate data like this - we've probable covered them all - this is still the most extensive analysis of the type that I've seen.

Good catch! If Adams is there for the Bears in the second and they don't select him, I'll be livid. That's a huge drop for a guy many thought wouldn't be there for the Bears in the first.

Another nightmare: With the 79th pick in the NFL draft, the Bears select John Doe, DB, out of West County Texas Tech University at Austin. I'd rather Emery took players almost exclusively out of a few major conferences than try to double-down like JA was fond of doing.

I have no clue what you're talking about in the beginning of your post. As for the bolded, the best I can say is, I graded what video there was available. Anyone who objectively looks at it would probably come to the same results I did. The three valid reasons not to pick up TO: 1) lemon's point - Tired of the Bears picking up aging vets hoping to get their last few years of productivity 2) He's a bad apple, and his antics outweigh his value since a comparably skilled player could be had with much less grief 3) One views his talents and skills as being so greatly diminished that he isn't value added The first two are legit, but his most recent NFL statistics and his domination of the NFL's minor leagues say that #3 is not legit. I'm not all that excited about him, but playing devil's advocate on this issue is worthwhile because everyone who cries about the lack of a WR has been dismissing TO and Moss for years and years. And here they were, yet again available, and yet again they're being dismissed. It's as if people want to complain but don't want to actually look for difficult solutions. The perfect answer is not always available. Pointing to #1 and #2 above is not complaining. Pointing to #3 doesn't appear to be valid. I guess complaining is just easier. What's so hard about dividing the issue? Does he, or does he not, have the physical skills to still play in the NFL? The answer is yes. Does his physical ability outweigh his baggage? Apparently not.