jason

I haven't looked at the rising and falling stocks after I posted it originally. At the time, they fit in most mocks at that spot. As for a 1-2 of Oher and Duke, I'd pass out and miss the rest of the draft. That would be an absolute A+ draft without going any further. The Bears could literally pick exclusively from the OVC from that point forward, and the overall grade could drop no lower than a B+ in my mind. Hell, they could draft 5 straight QBs after that, and it'd be an A-.

This line of reasoning - in bold - is infuriating. What are you basing this on!? ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. When given the chance, Wolfe has done really well. He's looked fast, elusive, and competent. He's not a short-yardage, up the middle back. When he's used against the Vikings on a goal line situation, what the heck do you expect of him? Also, let's not forget that the Bears coaches haven't exactly been finding offensive diamonds in the rough, or showing any sort of competency when it comes to choosing starters and devising game plans. If the Bears had Darren Sproles instead of Wolfe, it'd be the same thing. Everyone saying he can't do this, can't do that. The difference is, Wolfe sits on the bench as the Bears show incompetency on offense, and continue to give opportunities to a guy who has reached his absolute apex - Adrian Peterson. Meanwhile, Sproles is on San Diego getting franchised because he rips up the field when he has been given a chance. Why do you guys hate the idea of Wolfe so much? It's absolutely without foundation from my point of view.

Hell yes. He'd be the perfect inside route runner that would... A] Give Devin more one on one opportunities B] Show Davis and Bennett a thing or two C] Open up the seam routes for Clark and Olsen I know he's lost a step, but I don't think he's gone so far down hill that he can't be productive. His stats weren't that bad last year for a #2 WR, which is what he was considering rise of Reggie Wayne.

WOOOOOOOOOOOHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!! Please.Please.Please.Please.Please.Please.Please.Please.Please.

Watching NFL Live tonight...saw that quite a list has developed on the FA market. Chris McAlister Dre Bly Sam Madison Leigh Bodden Drayton Florence Adam 'Pacman' Jones I wouldn't mind seeing one of the first three on the Bears, for the right price.

END OF THREAD

*cough* *cough* mock draft below

The answer to your Urlacher for Gross question is simply, yes. I hate the idea of getting rid of franchise guys. If Urlacher were in favor of it, I'd be disappointed. If it happened, I'd be even more disappointed.

Yes, because a pissed off Anquan Boldin on a Bears team that has a highly inefficent passing game behind a below average OL and an average QB is really going to take this team to the championships. If you're really in favor of this move, then surely you were in favor of getting Moss and/or TO in FA a few years ago. Afterall, if all that matters is winning, then why should it matter who the Bears sign or throw under the bus.

I think you're right, and that's what I'm afraid of.

Maybe you're content with St. Clair at RT, and Garza even being on the field, and being risky with Williams, but I'm not...and I'm fairly sure that any sane person who watched the Bears' offense last year realizes the OL has major deficiencies. I'd prefer to have another solid OT, and then let the situation dictate which one of the two legit, first round OT talents plays on the left, and which plays on the right (although I hope that Williams simply is considered the LT, and the pickups/moves are for RT and G). St. Clair can move to OG.

You may "digress" all you want, but you can't disagree with the fact that he was the best safety on the team last year. His skills have deteriorated, but he's still the best safety from the team last year. And when he was playing at the beginning of the year, he was playing fairly well. If the plan is to move Daniel Manning into that spot, then it's a mistake.

I don't know about you, but I view loyalty as one of the things I cherish. I hear over and over on this board about how they don't want player X or player Y because they are bad guys, or are in the media. That's an aspect exterior to the actual playing field. If you want to uphold that image, then keeping your career, face of the franchise guys is part of it. You don't send Montana to KC. You don't send Favre to NY. And you don't send Urlacher to Arizona. To do so would be a horrible PR move for the team and the majority of Bears' fans.

Agreed x 2.

So, you think the Bears should have... Hester Davis Bennett Holt AND Robiskie or Barden I just don't think that much is necessary. Who starts? We have to assume that Hester starts. And if Holt is picked up, then he starts. So, what you're saying is, we just throw away the Bennett pick...not to mention probably throwing away the Robiskie/Barden pick.

I don't get this move. He may be injured a lot, but some of it's just plain bad luck. The Lorenzo Neal thing was a cheap shot. And through all that, he was still THE BEST SAFETY THE BEARS HAD. Horrible move when considering the other needs of this team.

This comes as no surprise, and is not a big disappointment to me. Good luck to Tait in the future. If the Bears don't draft OL heavy NOW, then this front office is dumb as hell. One of guys who was considered one of the better members of the OL is leaving, and he didn't even play that well this year. That should be a big flashing sign to invest in the OL through FA or the draft.

I completely disagree with the major point of the writeup. In summary: 1) Benson will never come back to the Bears 2) The Bears would never pick up Benson 3) The problem wasn't really the RBs, it was the OL (big surprise) 4) The Bears may already have a complimentary RB (Wolfe), but the OC staff is incompetent and doesn't put their players on the field to give them shots. (Which is nearly the same reason that a WR that started most of the season got cut - Booker, and another had tons of drops - Davis, while a promising rookie languished on the bench.)

I don't disagree with the idea that we need WR help. However, it sure would be nice to see Bennett get on the field before the Bears chuck a high pick on a WR.

Good question. Somehow guys with good hands come to the Bears and lose their hands. I won't make excuses for the WRs, but I'd say it probably has something to do with the fact that the combination of the overly conservative offensive scheme, the poor OL and average QB not providing for the chances of specific routes that other teams typically run, and the horribly inconsistent OC causes understandable complacency.

I know what you're saying, but that's not the point. The poll is for the Bears, in the current situation. And in this current situation, drafting Crabtree at #1 makes very little sense. And if by some chance that someone did grade Crabtree as head and shoulders above other studs at their respective positions, I'd question their grading scheme.

I'm completely baffled at how you guys can actually choose Crabtree. First of all, the Bears could never pass on a franchise QB at the #1 spot. How many more years must we see the graphic of how many QBs the Bears have run through while Farv has been playing? Passing on him would be a horrible PR move. Secondly, with the current setup of the Bears, the OL position is a much more desparate need. Adding a monster LT like Andre Smith would stabilize the OL for years to come, reaping benefits on the running and passing games like. To pick Crabtree first would be a horrible move.

I don't think Furrey is an upgrade to Booker. Sounds like a pointless move to me. As for Earl Bennet, I haven't heard what you are claiming. I know that everyone has their panties in a bunch to get a WR, but maybe, just MAYBE, the sure-handed WR the Bears need is actually already on the roster. Hmm? Using his lack of playing time as your justification is laughable at best considering this coaching staff's inability to judge offensive talent. It's even more comedic when one considers the fact that the anemic Bears' offense SHOULD have had some changes that never took place. It'd be different if the offense was actually good last year.

My signature line should clarify how I feel.

1. The running into the holder call was correct. That's why it's called "running into the holder". If you don't agree, you don't know the rules. He just can't plow the guy who is on his knee like that. There is a reason why that player is specifically allowed to be on his knee and in possession of the ball, without being considered down. And that is why he is afforded protection. 2. The roughing the passer call was complete garbage. I know people will say that a team has to overcome those calls, but when they come at the wrong time, it can destroy a team. Momentum is a real deal, and more than one team has lost when they were set up for success...because of a bad call. The rest? I would say that they were for the most part correct. Meh. I'd say that Pittsburgh clearly got more of the crucial calls, but Arizona clearly made more stupid plays.