jason

I don't necessarily think it's bad in terms of depth, but it's not the right move. And I don't necessarily agree that any of those guys would be a substantial upgrade over Bennett, Hester, Knox, and Williams. Meachem (40/620/6) = Knox (37/727/2) Royal (19/155/1) = Hester (26/369/1) Manningham (39/523/4) = Williams (37/507/2) Robinson (54/858/11) Bennett (43/481/1) The only one that doesn't make sense is Robinson and Bennett, mostly because I couldn't think of a better way for the FA WRs to align with the Bears' WRs. But Robinson doesn't interest me all that much. Despite his size and speed, he's very injury prone and I think he just got lucky last year. The stars aligned. The minute he gets sitned it wouldn't surprise me if he got hurt and turned into a waste of money. Otherwise, what upgrades have the others really provided?

First part: Hell no. If the Bears stay at 19 and get a guy who wasn't even close to the first round radar before the combine, it will be a horrible move. It will be a reach. He is not the third best WR available, and probably not the fourth, regardless of what all the post-combine slotting has said. Second part: If the Bears move down? Then yes, it's not as bad of a move. It falls in line more closely with where he should be drafted. The combine workout warrior stuff is troubling to say the least.

Completely agreed. Meachem, Manningham, Eddie Royal, and Laurent Robinson just add more pu-pu to the pu-pu platter of WRs. The only one out of the group that actually interests me somewhat is Meachem. But that's mostly on the intuition I have regarding him being in a prolific offense that spreads the ball around, yet he got decent catch numbers, and the fact that he has world-class speed. In the end he sounds a lot like Knox and/or Hester, but I wonder if he could do better and produce more if he were on an offense that didn't run so well with so many pass-catching options. Colston or VJax are the only two FA WRs that really make a lot of sense. Otherwise it's the old fantasy football dilemma of having a bunch of #2 and #3 guys who get you 50yds per week while losing to the team that has 2 or 3 top-dogs who get 100yds and a TD.

THIS. You might as well set fire to the Superdome. Brees is absolutely loved in New Orleans. Cutting him and getting Manning would be one of the top ten stupidest moves in NFL history.

Roy Williams - Disappointed us all because we had such high expectations, but the dude put up stats comparable to Mario Manningham, who has caused more than one FA boner on this site. Marion Barber - Had a pretty decent year except for one game that has tainted him in the eyes of some. Amobi Okoye - Showed flashes of his talent and potential, not really a bad pickup. Vernon Gholston - OK, bad pickup. Brandon Merriweather - Below average pickup. I thought the moves were brilliant at the time. And I still think it's a good idea. Whenever possible the Bears should look to players who have shown exceptional talent or potential, or who have shown production, but have been pushed aside for whatever reason and have minimal interest around the league. If those players have failed to live up to their talent or potential, yet have shown glimpses of greatness, it doesn't hurt to sign them to cheap(ish) contracts and hope they pan out. It's certainly a gamble, but if inspiration grows roots it could bloom into on-field production. You never know if you can inspire or teach a player to live up to his hype. If things don't work out, cut'em. No problem.

Jeff Garcia was an option that would have worked and he wouldn't have been super expensive. He's been around, knows the league, would provide accurate, smart throws, and will not create locker-room drama. He signed late in the year last year with Houston. He would have been the perfect backup.

He's a better #2 option in FA than anyone else that has been mentioned. 50 yards a game would not be difficult for him to get at all, and that would be 800 yards a season. Add in a guaranteed 6 or so TDs, at least, and the threat of red zone jump balls, and he's a bigger upgrade than just about anyone else out there being considered for other than a #1 gig. IDK if the price would have been driven up on him if the Bears had jumped in early. Nobody was buying at first. Same as TO. If they had him in for a visit/try-out, and liked what they saw, they could have been prepared with a contract right then. It's entirely possible he would have taken it, or at least been more apt to work towards an agreement during negotiations, since he wasn't getting other offers. Now, however, he knows that other teams are looking at him as a viable alternative. Before they were not. If he does well this year, I view this as Emery's first mistake. When a team has a problem, it needs to be addressed by whatever means possible. All avenues need to be exhausted until it is no longer a problem.

Had action been taken immediately, he was for the taking. The Bears could have already had him. At a discounted price no less. But now that he has done well at a try out, there goes that idea. It may all be rumors, but if multiple sources are saying he "lit it up," then he's far from washed up. http://eye-on-football.blogs.cbssports.com...475988/35114661

So the Bears would have at WR next year: L. Robinson E. Royal R. Randall D. Hester E. Bennett J. Knox D. Sanzenbacher Seems sort of ridiculous to me to devote that much to the WR position, and that much FA/Draft to the WR position in one year. If that happens, there will be minimal change in the offense because Robinson is fast but unproven (stats not dissimilar from Knox), Royal had a big rookie year and dropped off the map after that (comparable to Hester as a player), and a rookie will have minor impact while fighting for targets and catches in an offense with, by your proposal, 7 WRs. You've essentially created the pu-pu platter of WRs. I'm guessing you think Knox isn't coming back, Sanz will get cut, and Hester is going back to only ST?

Bolded Part: That's how I've felt about Moss and TO for years and years.

Interesting anecdote at the end there. I can tell you from my experience on the other end of the rank spectrum, I saw higher ranks often get off with less punishment or chastisement (or a bad eval) and lower ranks made example (UCMJ) of because as many saw it, harsher punishment on the higher ranks effectively ended their career. Where the lower ranked individuals could easily climb back up to their former rank. This was at numerous locations with numerous units. As for Abu Ghraib, I put up the analogy because military was mentioned. And without this getting into a weapons-grade pissing match or ID card battle, I think the fact that the officers got off with a slap on the wrist and a legal shell game of blame between Pappas, Wood, and Jordan proves my point and disproves the opposite. The fact that you say "can go to jail" and that none of the officers actually did go to jail says a lot. In regards to the Saints, Sean Payton is the COL, Gregg Williams is the LTC, and the players are the enlisted ranks. The primary difference of course is that a military officer has a lot more control over their troops, and an NFL player is still a millionaire who can unequivocally disobey his coaches immoral orders without nearly the repurcussions that would be felt by a soldier with similar actions. Is everyone involved with each of the situations wrong? Absolutely. But it still takes physical effort by the person committing the act.

Three. I'd prefer to load up on the OL and make it all-pro from end to end (seriously). Everyone would cry at first, but then an average Joe RB would be good for 5 YPC, and an average QB could find targets if he had 10 seconds to sit in the pocket. It's not realistic in the NFL because nobody would do it, but I think it's a better strategy and it minimizes cost on all the franchise-type skill players.

We agree on nearly everything, but you're just plain wrong on this one. Check out, for instance, what happened at Abu Ghraib. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Ghraib_to...tive_reprimands BG Karpinski - Demoted. COL Pappas - Fined. LTC Jordan - Remprimanded. SPC Graner - 10 years in prison (served 6.5). SSG Frederick - 8 years in prison. SPC Sivits - 1 year in prison. SGT Davis - 6 months in prison. The list goes on and on. Shit, most definitely, rolled downhill. Like it almost always does in the military. Those who were responsible for running a tighter ship were punished, but those who actually committed the actions were punished much more severely. Same goes for the Saints players and their actions.

Yeah but you didn't throw Jackson into the equation on the post to which I replied! I'm not so sure Mincey is all that interesting, or even a quality pass rusher - much less an upgrade over who the Bears have - but if Jackson is thrown into the equation it's a nice consolation prize.

The fact that the Saints are doing this gives me mixed emotions. On one hand, Moss is probably not the most beneficial player in a locker-room and organization that is currently in turmoil. I've never disagreed with the notion that he's potentially toxic, but the Saints should probably lay low for the moment. On the other hand, if an offensive juggernaut like the Saints want to give Moss a shot to join their finely tuned scoring machine, it tells me Moss is definitely someone the Bears (who are not a finely tuned scoring machine) should be looking at.

It may start with leadership, but the players not have the ultimate say when it comes to following through? Getting a bonus for a big, legal hit/play I don't have a problem with. It's against the CBA, but morally there is no problem in my mind. Ultimately it's the same as getting a sticker on your helmet in college. Getting a bonus for a big, illegal hit/play I have a big problem with. It's rotten to the core, dangerous, against the concept of sportsmanship, but ultimately the decision of the player. Otherwise we can get into the discussion of why the Pittsburgh coaches haven't been fined/suspended for retraining their players on the art of tackling without using the helmet as a weapon. If the coaches are teaching a player to hit a certain way, and not correcting in-practice mistakes, is this not the same thing? Isn't the only difference a spoken word? As has already been mentioned, the financial incentives being offered are minimal enough that it's not about the money. It's just like in the military; a person has the individual responsibility to follow moral orders and disobey immoral orders.

Reasonable? Yes. Interesting? Not really.

See, I'm actually good with math and you kind of lost me with this post. To clarify: Salaries per year: 2,2,4,4,8 = 20 Guaranteed money prorated per year: 4,4,4,4,4 = 20 CAP HIT Year 1: 2+4 = 6 (i.e. Salary + Guaranteed prorated money for the year) Year 2: 2+4 = 6 Year 3: 4+4 = 8 Year 4: 4+4 = 8 Year 5: 8+4 = 12 Cap Hits Total: 6,6,8,8,12 = 40 So, the cap hit is the guaranteed money that year - which is prorated for cap purposes over the lifespan of the contract (i.e. 4), plust the actual yearly salary (i.e. 2). Notice that the initial cap hit is the full dollar value of the contract. The trick: The player actually gets the entire signing bonus / guaranteed money (i.e. 20) and the yearly salary (2) right away. So the team pays, in this situation, over 50% of the money of a five year contract in the first year. This is exactly why I am sick and tired of players signing these kinds of contracts and then bitching in year four about their salary.

Which is kind of stupid considering he's not in the top 5 of DEs out there, much less the average of them (which puts him somewhere around 2.5).

Which position are you talking about? I'm guessing it's DE. If so, I sort of agree, but by having Williams and Peppers, the Bears could essentially underspend on DTs. Six in one hand...

VERY good point Any suspension given to a coach should be less than or equal to the same suspensions given to the players who participated.

Exactly. Foster > Forte. Similarly, Forte > Lynch. Both differences are by similar degrees. I'd say the gap between Foster and Forte is greater than Forte and Lynch. What that means: Foster got 8+ million per year. Lynch got 7+ million per year. Forte should get somewhere in between. This should not be that hard to figure out. If the Bears offer 7.5 and Forte doesn't accept, tag him for insurance and start looking for trading partners.

I'd be happy with that. Unless of course, there is a run on OTs in the first, and the Bears don't have one fall. Then it's not as pretty.

It does have merit because my statement was based upon average per game. The two were similar in production, but Lynch easily had more TDs. Otherwise, I agree with what you've said.

Agreed. Lynch got similar ground production this year as Forte, and was much more productive in finding paydirt. Forte offsets that with receptions. Four TDs in 12 games though? Now that he has a major injury problem, Forte should take a contract like that and be happy about it.