jason

I hope Clint Boling slips that far. He would be a day-1 starter at OG. More of a technique guy, and that might not be Tice's guy, but he'd be an awesome addition.

I don't see how anyone can dislike this pick. Hell, if I like it, and I am pretty much against going anything other than OL in the first three rounds, then it's a good pick. The guy has a non-stop motor, incredible strength, and will be in the starting lineup before you can say "Tommie Harris' lazy ass can take a hike."

The Bears still need an OG. The Lions just created potentially the most dangerous defensive line in the NFL. Cutler got destroyed last year. I wanted John Moffitt. Too bad the Seahawks just got him. The OG hole is still there.

After reading the thread, I can't believe you're serious. The OL was the #1 and #2 need going into this draft. Carimi was great for where he was picked (because the Seahawks screwed up). PERFECT pick.

Not only is it a risky proposition because of the potential for Williams' failure, but the added risk with the rest of the OL is important to highlight. Williams may be the best OT AND OG on the team, and they want to move HIM to Center!!! If this is honestly a strategy the Bears plan on using, then there needs to be even more focus on the OL in the draft and during post-CBA agreement. Otherwise, there is the potential - and I can't believe I'm saying this - for the OL to get worse.

I heard he didn't go to a knee when proposing; he did it off his back foot.

Overall I don't hate it. But I do dislike it for two reasons: 1) I don't want the trade down. There will be an OT there. 2) I don't want a LB in the third. ESPECIALLY if there is a trade down. At that point the OL needs more attention. This is particularly true if they are honestly thinking about moving Williams to Center.

I think it's risky to lose either of them. Toub - He's dominated year after year after year. Dude is the best ST coach in the NFL. For as long as he's been here, the Bears have not only returned well on kickoffs and punts, but they have covered extrememly well. Martz - Has shown past brilliance, and was essentially hog-tied in his offense because of one of the worst OL in NFL history. Showed the ability to adjust when his offense wouldn't work and was directly responsible for a philosophy modifcation that changed the Bears' season. On top of that, do the Bears really need to change offensive schemes AGAIN? It would be nice for Cutler to get a chance with the same offense for more than one year. I'm pleased with the coaches on offense and special teams.

I approve.

I've seen several mention the hope that the Bears do not reach on draft day. This is especially true with the first round pick. Made me think of the following question: Would any of these guys be a reach? Tyron Smith Anthony Castonzo Nate Solder Mike Pouncey Gabe Carmini Derek Sherrod If the answer is yes, then it's a bit of surprise to me. But that's player evaluation for you. People disagree. If the answer is no, then there is no reason one of those guys shouldn't be available when the Bears pick. And the guy who they have rated the highest should be selected.

It doesn't surprise you because it's a move that would potentially piss off a lot of Bears' fans, and the drafting habits over the last several years have done just that. Unless there is a serious run on OTs, then we shouldn't hear those words.

Yes...this team is stacked with young, promising talent and there is a satisfactory backup at most positions.

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!

To me the schedule looks tough... ATL W - I watched them beat the Bears last time. They could do it again. But they don't have homefield. NO L - New Orleans is just a better team in my opinion. GB W - Home vs. GB, win. CAR W - Carolina sucks. DET W - This game scares me. I know it's Detroit, but this is a MNF game. The Bears are atrocious on MNF. MIN W - I don't think MIN will be nearly as good this year. TB L - Let down game because 1) London, 2) The Bears will be looking ahead to the bye PHI L - MNF vs. Philly, after London, this could be an ass whoopin DET W - Still Detroit, and in Chicago SD L - SD had the best offense and defense last year according to stats. Theire ST is horrible. But the new rules minimize the Bears' advantage OAK L - Long flight, rowdy crowd, improved team that can run with aggression. Lot of speed. KC L - Same formual as with Oakland, but they also have Bowe. DEN W - I see Cutler ripping their asses apart SEA W - I'm continually unimpressed by them, but I think Lynch could give the Bears' D problems. GB L - Away vs. GB, loss. MIN W - MIN will be out of the playoff hunt, and the Bears will be fighting to get in or improve position

http://espn.go.com/blog/chicago/bears/post...k-by-week-picks http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/break...6916046.graphic 10-6 and 9-7. I'm more inclined to agree with the latter.

Nice article, completely disagree with the premise on multiple points. First, who's to say "drafting for the future" doesn't also satisfy the present needs? The two are not mutually exclusive. Second, taking BPA as a hard and fast rule doesn't make sense if a team already has great strength at that position. That creates a situation in which the flaws are magnified because the players "drafted for the future" may never help the team on the field because they'll be forced to sit behind players for several years. Sure, it worked for GB with Rodgers, but that's probably the exception to the rule. Third, good LBs are a dime a dozen. Especially in this scheme. Those guys can easily be found in mid/late rounds. Not to mention the fact a significant number of NFL LBs on rosters who went undrafted. Finally, this line of reasoning only works when the holes aren't glaring. Little holes are easy to fix. It can sometimes be done with scheme. Medium holes may require a free agent stop gap and scheme. But buying deck chairs and a band for future guests on the Titanic doesn't stop the water from gushing through the massive hole in the side of a sinking ship. Make no mistake. The OL is the Titanic. Worst in the NFL by far. Potentially one of the worst OLs in NFL history. It needs help fast and often, or the conductor of the ship (Cutler) and the primary motor (Forte) won't be serviceable for very long.

I would jizz on the TV if that draft happened.

Hey guys...just thought I'd fill you in on something I heard over the weekend. I was at an officiating clinic where there were several big names in college and the NFL. Officials mostly, but there were a few director of officials and assorted leadership there as well. Aside from a bunch of great football talk, I heard the following tidbit: Just in case the labor problems continue, the NFL already has an 8 game schedule in place for the following season. Does that mean it'll happen? Not necessarily. But the way I heard it, they are preparing for the worst, and an 8 game schedule - which would start at what would normally be week 8 or 9 - is definitely a gloomy scenario.

I like this one.

But that's COMPLETELY different. The NFL wants the rookies to attend the event that is held every year (i.e. the draft and all that comes along with it). The NFLPA is attempting to create a rival product to persuade the rookies away from the draft.

First, I'm glad we don't have the #1 pick, and these aren't the selections. I saw where this was going before voting. CB - Not as big of a need, and won't impact the game like a #1 should. Would be underutilized in the cover-2 anyway. WR - Not as big of a need, and won't dominate like a #1 should. Would have to fight through a WR log-jam and produce for coaches who aren't fond of rookie WRs. DT - Need, AND has a better chance of dominating like a #1 should. He'd start Day 1 and produce immediate results. This is a no doubt slamdunk.

Now THIS, I disagree with. Is DT help needed? Yes. Clearly. Is DT help needed more than OG or OT? No. Period. Unless there is a massive, unforseen run on OGs and OTs, the Bears should grab whichever OL guy is there at the end of the first. There should be more than one to choose from.

Yes...the three-technique DT is absolutely essential for Lovie's version of the cover-2. Either that or get two 2-gap guys built like Ted Washington and Keith Traylor, and move shift one of them closer to a double-team in the B gap. The former collapses the pocket and forces the QB into the DEs going wide, the latter shuts down internal running and allows a LB to get on the QB Autobahn. The problem the Bears have right now is that they're going with the former, and none of their guys can really attack the B gap with enough force to make the DE's path to the QB worthwhile.

Good stuff, Tom, and I happen to agree. While Martz may employ the deep drops more than others, if the interior of the line holds up, there would have been countless opportunities last year for Cutler to step into a comfortable pocket to make a throw. At that point all the OTs have to do is protect against the interior spin while they ride the DE out wide. I know this because the way the Bears run their defense creates a picture perfect example of how a QB can step into a pocket where the DTs haven't gotten through. I mean, how often have we seen the the Bears' DE's go around wide, see the DT's get nearly no pressure, and see a QB step forward calmly for a completion? All too often unfortunately. Hell, it seems that every time the Bears' play a journeyman type QB the guy has a great day and the announcers fall in love with how "well" the guy is playing (while ignoring the Bears' lack of interior pressure). If a high rated OG or OT is available in RD 1, the Bears need to draft him.

I've been saying it all along. We do not need a big WR. The WR position is not the problem. I think it's just a lot easier to be enamored with the idea of a stud WR than it is a stud player on the OL. No matter which WR the Bears add, if the OL is not addressed, the WR will not be a stud. This is nearly unequivocal. When Cutler was given ample time last year he carved secondaries apart. Unfortunately, he didn't get ample time all too often. Again, WR is not a big need. Maybe 4th or 5th in the pecking order.