jason

I'd like to hope Dilfer is right, but as we've seen in the past, once Cutler starts getting his ass handed to him, his mechanics change. Unless the Bears get Webb out of the starting rotation with a much better replacement, we could see whatever body language changes that have been made go right back to square one.

This is very flawed research for a variety of reasons. I'll run through a few... 1. Pro Bowls are often based on notoriety more than performance 2. Pro Bowls are for the best of the best, and a great player who is stuck behind a future HOFer is destined to get very little PB consideration. You will see the same four names recycle (e.g. Long, Thomas, Clady) for several years because they are the best and get a reputation as the best (see #1) 3. Just like styles make fights in boxing, so too do offenses make OTs. A system that puts pieces in a position to succeed is more likely to produce PBers. 4. The Bears offense has stunk since forever, and attention will not be focused on it as a result 5. Pro Bowls for OTs often come as a result of unit cohesion and productiveness. The Bears have neither. 6. Pro Bowls for OTs often come as a result of a group that is collectively good, with a higher leaning towards early draft picks. One has to only look at the last time the Bears made it to the Super Bowl to see a perfect example. Tait (1), Brown (1), Kreutz (3), Garza (4), Miller (5). Consider that by the time Miller got to the Bears he was 9-year vet who had been kicking ass for the previous 7 years, and that's much more than a 5th rounder. Garza was an established vet on the rise; Kreutz was a pro-bowl center, Brown was a pro-bowl OG with gas in the tank, and Tait was a veteran, pro-bowl LT. 7. Smart teams continually reinvest in the OL, specifically the OT position, through the draft. The only SB team in the last five years that didn't follow this logic was IND, and we all know that's because their collection of WRs, TEs, and Peyton Manning (and his lightning-fast release) makes playing defense against them nearly impossible. 2009 - NYG coming off a SB win in 2007, they draft a 2nd round OT (Beatty) who replaces their OL weak-link (Diehl [5]) 2010 - NO wins the SB, and despite having a 2nd rounder (Stinchcomb) and a 4th rounder who would soon be a Pro Bowler (Bushrod), they draft an OT in the 2nd (Brown) 2011 - GB wins the SB, and despite having a 2nd rounder (Clifton) and a 1st rounder (Baluga), they draft another OT in the first (Sherrod) 2011 - PIT loses to GB in the SB, and looks to replace their 5th round OT (Scott) with a 2nd round OT (Gilbert) To sum it up... Do the Bears need a Pro Bowl LT to succeed? No. Do they need to consistently try to get a Pro Bowl LT, through the draft or through trade, to succeed? Yes.

Hate the idea. First of all, the defense is predicated on getting pressure, but that predication is based upon interior pressure more than exterior. DT is much more important in the Lovie-2 defense. Second, this team is not in a position to put all of their eggs in one basket. There are still multiple holes to fill.

Interesting grades. Better is relative. No player is a lock. In the draft, nearly nothing is certain. What are certainties, however, are the holes on the Bears' roster. A solid draft approach should be neither BPA nor need-based; it should be a combination of the two. If you have a C and an F, it makes a lot more sense to get that F to a C before you try to turn the C into an A. A bunch of C's aren't pretty, but they won't tank the overall score. An F will bury you in all facets of life. Only as strong as your weakest link, and all that.

Disagree/agree. He is not a terrible WR. In fact, he's probably a little above average. His stats, ability, performance, and sheer athleticism prove this. At the same time, moving him away from ST in favor of more WR reps just doesn't make sense. Afterall, he's the best returnman in the history of the NFL.

I should have written "will underperform for a first round CB." Picking up Kirkpatrick because he's great in the Lovie-2 system of covering space and zone is similar to drafting a strict possession WR in the first round for a team like the Patriots that dinks and dunks it all over the field. Both situations are reaches in terms of pure talent as it relates to other players at their position, can be had later in the draft, are not one of the most critical components of the system being used, and if not for the ease with which they'd fit into the team's system the player wouldn't be considered as highly. It would be similar to the Bears drafting Earl Bennett in the first round because they know he can fit in. Is Kirkpatrick good? Yes. Would he do well in the Lovie-2? I believe so. Is he the kind of player you want in the first round? No. Does he maximize the value of the first round pick? No.

The Kirkpatrick pick is not one I would like. He's a special player, but will underperform in the Lovie-2 because he will be called about to sit back into zone and play space more than he will be asked to shutdown an opponent's #1. The reason you draft a CB in the first is to shutdown the opponent's #1. Period. It's the reason guys like Revis are called Revis Island and guys like Tillman have put in a bunch of very good years with virtually no sort of recognition. You don't draft a CB in the first round to sit in a zone the majority of the game. If Defense must be had, the three most important positions in the Lovie-2 are DT, MLB, and FS; the CB position is undervalued.

Agreed. Bad is relative to the year.

I still think he's playing at a high enough level that the Bears need to pay him well, and that the two parties agree to a justified, respectable end to Urlacher's storied career as a Chicago Bear. Seeing him in another uniform would be a gut punch. Seeing him in another uniform when his body of work should garner a million here or there on respect alone, would be even worse. It depends on the salary demanded, but if Urlacher is asking for anything even close to reasonable, the Bears should pay it. Even if he's over what they would like, as long as it's not a ridiculous amount (for instance, if he wants a ten year contract), they should look at the difference as a "Hall of Famer"-tax, or something similar, and just do what's right, allowing Urlacher to retire as a Bear.

I think he's PERFECT as the #3 WR. His stats, speed, agility, and moderate reliability have all the appearances of a dynamite slot guy who should never have been put in the #1 role. With BM as #1 and EB as #2, the pressure is off Hester and he just gets to rip defenses apart while they're trying to figure out the first two.

I REALLY hate the idea now. You essentially want to shit on the cornerstone of the defense, the face of the franchise the past decade. That would not work well, and would hurt the Bears in future negotiations with other players who see the lack of loyalty.

That's kind of why I like the idea. A lot of the trade possibilities depend on what happens before the Bears select, but it seems like they may be sitting at a "reach for the fourth best player at a position"-spot when that same guy will be there several picks later. Going off of RME JICO's draft swap with the Texans, we could potentially end up with the following (according to the layout of Walter Football): 1st (26): Stephon Gilmore, CB, South Carolina 2nd (50): Zebrie Sanders, OT, FSU 2nd (58): Vinny Curry, DE, Marshall 4th (111): Ladarius Green, TE, Louisiana-Lafayette 4th (121): Michael Brewster, C, OSU 5th (150): Vontaze Burfict, LB, ASU I'd consider that a pretty great draft. Gilmore fills a hole (even though I'm not high on him), Sanders should start over Webb (despite his boneheaded play), at the very least Curry gets used as a situational pass rusher, Green probably beats out Davis (and gets rid of some other dead weight on the roster), Brewster gets a year or two of development before he takes over, and the Bears try to catch lightning in a bottle with the type of troubled, misunderstood player for whom Lovie seems to have a soft heart.

As always, I hate that idea. Using high draft picks for depth is a good way to pay rookies a lot of money to sit on the bench, get angry, and wait for the first chance to leave town. Unless a team has no holes, the first round should be to draft a player who is either definitely going to start, or has a good chance of beating out the incumbent to start (i.e. addressing a deficiency).

At 6'1" and an indicated older age (I don't know how old), you might have problem fighting for the ball when matched up against a bunch of 6'4" WRs.

I'd say 90% of the time it's more about $$$ than winning. Most of today's players are greedy beyond belief, and care more about their three year contract extension than the game in three days.

Perception. Nothing more, nothing less. Even educated Bears' fans seem to think WR is still a major need, and one that will be addressed by the front office. I contend that BM, Hester, Bennett, Knox is a very good starting four. And if Knox is out, we get to kick the tires on Thomas. We'll see, I guess.

Exactly my point about Gilmore. I think he's a great fit for the Lovie-2 because he's very talented, but that means he'd be a good fit anywhere. He's not an ideal fit in Chicago, however, because the defensive system requires much more talent at DT, MLB, and FS, and the CB position requires much less.

I think it means CB just got moved far down the list. OL, WR, DE...wash, rinse, repeat

WOW. This is the first thing I've seen that conclusively shows people were encouraging actually injuring someone with illegal tactics. I've stayed somewhat divided from this because I think it's not much different from the sticker system in college if the hits being rewarded are legal. Football is a violent game and people get injured all the time as a result of legal hits. But until this link, I hadn't actually heard someone unequivocally say they were trying to do so illegally (i.e. the head shots to Gore). "Remember me" shot to Alex Smith = Could occur legally Re-injuring 49ers PR Kyle Williams = Could occur legally Taking out someone's ACL = Could occur legally Now, actually wanting to do someone else harm in this fashion is a somewhat different issue, and any player who wishes to physically injure another player so that the opponent's career is potentially in danger is downright disgusting. Hurting someone with a legal hit is just part of the game. But hoping you actually injure them longterm is very unsportsmanlike.

I completely disagree with your stance on this. It goes against everything everyone has done and said on this board. Whether the other boards are used or not, that should not default all conversations into the Bearstalk main section. Unless of course you'd like to open a thread about Devin Hester's comments regarding the Treyvon Martin case? Talking abuot Fairley getting busted, how it affects the Lions, how it benefits the Bears, etc. = Appropriate Talking about the political implications of legalization = Inappropriate Remember your decision when the shitstorm hits on the next politically-laced article.

Fitting our system is key...which is why CB is not as important as several other positions in the Lovie-2 defense. One has to be a more instinctive, zone-type player instead of a man-on-man player.

No way the Bears do that. Gilmore in the first when there is still the following available? No way. OT - Martin, Adams WR - Hill, Wright, Randle DE - Mercilus, Ingram DT - Worthy

I honestly hope you and the coaching staff is right. I hope Webb turns the corner this year and makes everyone piss themselves over his play. Alas, I've seen him play the past two years, and I doubt it's going to happen. He's a 7th rounder for a reason, and he shouldn't be starting. You think it sucks that we have Peppers rushing opposite of Izzy, but the Bears have the best QB they potentially have ever had in the existence of the franchise, and he's being protected by: LT - 7th Round bum LG - 1st Round OT C - Aging Vet OG RG - Undrafted bum or 7th Round bum RT - 1st Round OT (hopefully) Where I see the major difference... Without a good DE opposite of him, Peppers can still work independently and dominate. Which he has done. Without a good OL in front of him, Cutler's talents are marginalized at best, wasted at worst.

Political thread? Admins?

If the Bears FO honestly believes that, then it makes sense to go elsewhere in the first. It would be a little hard to believe, however, since just about everyone else everywhere thinks the top 4 guys are legit first rounders.