jason

Exactly. Which is why it made zero sense to start McCown the last game of the season. Enderle is currently a player with no game-time evaluation. And, before someone chimes in with "the coaches know because they have seen him in practice," spare me that nonsense. We all remember how awesome Dez White was in practice and how much he sucked on the field. That logic is flawed. Practice Game.

Hell no. There are enough of FA WRs that can be had for similar money without giving the pick away.

That's a solid C- in my book. 1. The short DB in round 1 is horrible. 2. The TE in round 4 is a waste. I know you want a new TE because "everyone has one" but the two problems with that are A. Kellen Davis is talented, has shown promise, and hasn't been explored yet, B. There are other needs that need to be addressed more than TE. 3. Demetrius Bell as the answer at LT? You gotta be kidding me. The last thing the Bears need is yet ANOTHER LT prospect who shows talent but is injury prone. Bell has missed 17 games in 3 years because of injury. Pass. 4. Did Knox get cut? I like the Toon, Zeitler, Carder picks though.

You could be right. It could all have to do with speed. OR maybe thought of differently, the ability to get open. Jerry Rice was never considered a burner, but he sure as hell got open. Because if it were speed, then it would be difficult to explain the lack of success with Knox and Hester, two guys with world class speed. Both are faster than VJax or Bowe.

Green Bay is the anomaly. They have had multiple WRs who have been good for a very long time. It's something difficult to pin down, but they always manage to have a wealth of WR talent. They draft it, cultivate it, coach it, and put everything together in an offensive system that consistently produces passing yards and TDs. Believe me, I would LOVE to have the Green Bay offense, WRs, their focus on offense. It's the entire reason I'm about the only one on the board who liked Martz and Crowton. I'm desperate for offensive success. I'm a dehydrated guy crawling through the desert hoping to get an oasis of offense. Anything to get the Bears out of the 1920s of offense where it's all based on trying to shorten the game. I'd love to see the Bears pass for 4000 yards when there are multiple QBs throwing for 5000! With all that said, I think this comes down to the age old debate on this board of OL vs. WR. If the Bears invest in VJax and get Floyd in the first, it matters not if Cutler is on his ass half the game and can't call any plays that require more than a 3 step drop. Which is why I would much rather see the OL get turned into a juggernaut. Then it becomes a matter of finding athletes. Give Cutler enough time behind the OL and I believe the guys we have now would get open. This is the NFL, and these guys can get open if the play gets time to develop. In recent years, the plays have been very short because the QB couldn't stand in the pocket. There were very few times this year that Cutler got to sit in the pocket and make second and third reads when the #1 guy wasn't open. Get him that #1, and the others are suddenly open a lot more, but Cutler may not have time to get to them if the #1 is covered. Get him that OL, and if the #1 is not open, Cutler has time to find the other guys. Which is the entrie reason I think the Bears absolutely have to get a LT in FA (don't really know of one), or try their damnedest to get one in the first. It's really a matter of preference. The Bears haven't tried to get an awesome set of WRs in a long time, but the same holds true for OL. I just believe the latter is more likely to produce success. It'd be fun to watch VJax and Floyd running routes for the Bears, but I think one of the two would get wasted because Cutler wouldn't have adequate time to throw.

Without considering FA moves, I go LT, WR, CB, DE, LB in that order. But, of course, that's all dependent on the flow of the draft. If the top 4 LT prospects are gone, and only Blackmon is gone of the WRs, then you wipe the drool from your mouth and pick Jeffery or Floyd. If, however, there is a run on WRs and all those guys are gone, then one of the top LT prospects is there and you do a happy dance before picking the LT. If both of those positions are just picked over and over, you curse the Bears for winning in week 17 and then go BPA.

I agree with this for the most part. FS - Conte is something I can live with. I didn't think he did poorly. DE - Izzy isn't the answer. He's too inconsistent. Some games he's a beast, and then he disappears for a month. LB - I don't think this is as big of a need. I think LB is the easiest defensive position to draft, the fill, and to coach. The guys in there now are good for another few years, and when they're done it shouldn't be too difficult to find good players to fill in. Maybe not an Urlacher kind of player, but close enough to do the job well.

GB, NO, and IND are teams that are virtually all offense all the time, and have all Hall of Fame QBs who can thread a needle at 50 yards. GB has the best blend, but I really don't think Nelson is that great. I think he's a product of the system. Same thoughts go for the #2 and #3 guys in NO. As I said in the other reply, Harrison and Wayne are completely different players. Wayne is the big #1 everyone is talking about, and Harrison is a lightning quick possession guy who runs full speed out of his breaks. And PIT/NYG aren't even worth addressing really; they're WRs aren't that great. I will admit, however, that your thoughts about Atlanta are the best comparison to what is being discussed. While White is only 6', he's thought of as a big WR. And Jones is without a doubt a big WR. So, that's an interesting comparison, and a potential example of how the double big WR thing could work.

You completely misunderstand my point. In fact, you only prove my point. Fitz & Boldin - Are completely different players NE - Moss and Welker, completely different players. Indy - Harrison and Wayne (Clark is a TE) are completely different players. Phi - These two are pretty similar, but this is a stupid example because Jackson is 5'10" and Maclin is a generous 6'. What everyone keeps talking about is a big WR who is a bonafide #1. So, with all that said, if the Bears get V.Jackson and/or Bowe (both are big, explosive, #1 WRs), and then getting Blackmon/Jeffery/Floyd (big, explosive, #1 WRs) doesn't make a lot of sense. The combo that's getting thrown around is Madden stuff. There needs to be a balance in WRs, a mix up of talents that complement each other. If the Bears grab VJax or Bowe in FA, then they probably would be fine as is, and have a great blend of speed (Knox, Hester) and possession (Bennett) guys who would work well together without having to shoulder the burden of #1 WR status.

I've watched this one back and forth, but yeah, I'll go ahead and call you crazy. No way in hell Webb is a probowler. No way. His feet are atrociously slow, he doesn't get a good lean when run blocking, and he's too high when pass blocking. No freaking way. No way. If the Bears don't sign a LT, it should be Carimi. The problem is, the Bears need a RT and a LT, because Louis was clearly a better LG than a LT. If, however, everyone is dead set on the idea of Carimi being a probowl RT, then they still need a LT. Two situations make the most sense (from left to right) with how the Bears typically draft. -Carimi, C.Williams, Garza, Louis, FA/Draft -FA/Draft,C.Williams, Garza, Louis, Carimi Now, if they sign a good FA OG, then either Louis or Webb will probably end up starting at one of the OT positions, and that will clearly be the weakest position on the OL, and a hole the Bears will need to address (again) the following year. But if they signed an OG, and they were smart, they'd do the following: -Carimi/C.Williams, FA OG, Garza, Louis, Carmi/C.Williams

One of the things I keep seeing from many posters is something along the lines of "Get VJax and then pick up either Floyd or Jeffery in the first round." Isn't that a little too Madden GM, and a little away from the realities of an offense? Aren't they the same types of players?

Jay Cutler's body probably disagrees with the last part.

Me too.

And that we don't have the Warren Sapp/Tommie Harris guy. The Lovie-2 needs a pass rushing DT, a hyper-mobile MLB, and a smart FS who takes the right angles. Right now the Bears have just the MLB, but even Urlacher will lose speed eventually.

Old news. We almost all called it when the situation set up the way it did.

This is awesome. I dont' want to ruin the surprise.

Isn't the entire point to the first post I made in this thread the very proof that I'm not thinking of this in a black and white manner? When/if the Bears let go of Lovie, he will certainly be rehird, but that has just as much to do with the respect thing as it does with constant recycling of coaches in the professional ranks. The simple fact is, Lovie is a really nice guy, doesn't appear to be too demanding, he's fiercely loyal, runs a really soft mini-camp that the players love, and absolutely never throws anyone under the bus. That's why he's respected. Which is good. But what isn't good is the fact that when people say Lovie is respected, they rarely mention his ability to coach, to create gameplans, to adjust to game situations, or to improve his players' abilities. BTW - I like that you said there is "quite literally no talent on this OL." Far too many people are talking themselves into the idea that Webb, E.Williams, Omiyale, Spencer, and Louis aren't at best average, and at worst atrocious.

Exactly, exactly, exactly. All the clamoring for WR in round 1 makes little sense unless a big time FA is signed to be the actual #1. It all starts up front. Give Cutler enough time, and even the aforementioned David Terrell would be able to get open consistently.

I like the guy, and think he was a much better coach than he is given credit for, but the Ricky Williams thing seals the deal. Hell no.

You're right; it is pretty smart. It allows lesser DBs. The problem is, it requires a superior MLB, a dominant inside DT, and an intelligent FS. Without those three, there are massive, gaping holes all over the F'ing place because those two DBs aren't playing man; they're just sitting in a zone somewhere that the WRs can work around. There's a reason why average QBs always seem to put up decent passing yards against this D. Brian Griese throwing for 400+ yards anyone?

Mad is right on three things: 1) Welcome to the board 2) OL is a much higher priority than TE, especially since Edwin Williams and Chris Spencer are not good. 3) A TE in the second would be a bad idea, and a waste of a draft pick for this team. Other positions are much higher need...like your picks in rounds 3-5.

Um, except that is something completely different. You just basically supported my statement. Has he held on to wins while having the lead? It appears so. Does he step on their necks and put games away? Absolutely not. You didn't come close to even hitting this one in the same ball park. Very true, both are considered good at their positions. Both are well liked. But I haven't seen that much out of the DL under Marinelli's tenure. If anything, Peppers seems a bit less impactful overall than when he was in Carolina. And Tice, regardless of how much people think of him, has improved the OL very little while in Chicago. Regardless of all the fluff media pieces, the OL still sucks, and there has been nearly no noticable improvement from anyone other than probably Louis. Agreed. They don't win games. But the difference is, Bellichek doesn't straight up lie to us. He just deadpans. Oh, and he's a significantly better coach than Lovie. And by significantly better, I mean it's so uneven it's comical. So he's got that, and his three Super Bowl wins, going for him. The Lovie-2 scheme, by design, tries to significantly slow down the game, hope for turnovers, but rarely does it actually attack. It dares the opponent to go slowly down the field, piece by piece. He'd prefer his offenses to play the same way. It's not "believing" not to lose; it's "playing" not to lose. Of course he wants to win. But to do so, he plays not to lose. This is kind of the same thing as #1. When Lovie's teams get the lead, they don't continue to crush the opponent. Sometimes the accumulation of effort leads to a lopsided score, but it's not common. A ten point lead and Lovie is looking at the clock. This is not speculation; it's exactly what has happened the entire time he has been in Chicago. Being content with holding on to the lead is what Lovie is all about. It's been moderately successful while he's been here, but it's not the same as being aggressive and trying to put the game out of reach (i.e. "playing to win").

It's definitely an odd situation. Lovie's positives: -Gets players to play hard -Players love him -Players are willing to stand by him and persuade others to come to the team Lovie's negatives: -Defensive system is outdated and flawed -Won't step on an opponent's throat when leading a game -Believes in "playing not to lose" more than "playing to win" -Almost exclusively hires his cronies and friends -Nearly a complete failure at player development -Has horrible game management -Has even worse time management -Has even worse instant replay intuition -Has even worse press conferences -And if he was involved in the draft, he's much more interested in his defense than offense\ All that said, if he can continue to bring in big name free agents, it's easier to overlook his flaws.

He was indeed a pass catching TE. But he was also a pass dropping TE, a ball fumbling TE, and one of the weakest "big" TEs in the NFL. I see no reason the Bears can't get the same type of production out of Kellen Davis. He may be slower than Olsen, but his hands are just as good, and he shields defenders better than Olsen ever did. And, although we haven't seen it, I'm willing to bet he fights for contested balls better than Olsen does. I liked the guy, but I wasn't terribly upset to see him go, regardless of the reasons for his departure.

Yeah, because an employee who has never done something before is exactly the kind of guy you want running your multi-million dollar operation. Unless that guy, whoever it is, has been elbow-deep in the business of draft picks, scouting, and salary cap, then it's not a wise move. The more experienced guy, in terms of GMs, is probably a better answer. And particularly so for an organization that has clear management problems.