jason

Just thought I'd share two nickames I've read over the past few days for Fred Miller. 1) False Start Fred 2) Drive Killer Miller 3) Turnstile Miller

Like Mariotti or not, he's got some very good points in this article. 1) What happened is that the Bears fell in love with Williams, who filled a desperate need, while underplaying the possibility that a herniated disc could burn them. Sure enough, they were scorched on the second day of training camp, when Williams suffered a new injury to the same disc. It led to surgery that will sideline him for most, if not all, of his first season. Granted, anyone who suggests Angelo wasn't aware of the injury isn't being fair. On draft day, he pointed out that the team's medical staff examined the back ``once, twice and a third time'' -- I love it when he borrows from old Lionel Richie songs. But where Angelo blew it is when he shrugged off those three examinations as if they were frivolous when, in fact, the necessity of three exams only screamed potential trouble. Aside from the Lionel Richie thing, I don't see where this is wrong. 2) Point is, Angelo never has manufactured enough credibility as a drafter (on offense) to allow himself the benefit of doubt to gamble. (insertion mine) Once again, this is dead on. Angelo has a horrible record of drafting offense while here.

Notice I never chimed in on this one. HOWEVER, when two players are similarly rated, the best bet, the move with the most common sensical foundation, is to draft the player out of the two who is not, and has not been injured. It's not all that difficult of a decision to make, to be quite honest. If JA did know, then he probably should have gone after one of the other two or three guys still there if they were ranked similarly on the overeall draft board.

If the Bears got a top 5 pick, I'd be ill. If the Bears then picked a damn WR with a top 5 pick, I'd be friggin' pissed off.

I keep reading reports and articles about this Bolt guy. I know he's the fastest man in the world, and it doesn't appear to be close. His races have been amazing, and his size is impressive. The thing is, I keep hearing/reading stuff about this guy becoming an NFL receiver. For instance: Bolt as a WR. What do you guys make of the idea? Willie Gault turned out pretty good for the Bears. Imagine a guy who is not only easily faster than gault, but also bigger and stronger? I don't think the Bears should do it considering their WR logjam, but it's an interesting idea. Nobody in the NFL could cover him one-on-one.

That's pretty much the reason why I have optimism, and why I tell people that the Bears will be back. They got severely discounted last year because of the injuries on defense, and nobody seems to be aware of that. Without the injuries, they should be a top defense again, will have the top ST again, and with a semi-competent offense, they'll be a tough team. I hope people keep doubting...

Amen. Preach it. I am constantly disgusted by the fact that the DEs do the outside, speed rush 99% of the time. Also, the fact that the Bears DBs are never near the WRs when the play starts is infuriating when the opposing defenses seem to have such success with slants and quick-outs against our D. Can we please have some defensive adjustments in game?

What I know is this: When Bradley is on the field, he looks to have a better combination of speed, strength, explosion, and size than any other Bears WR. I hope they don't cut him, and that he doesn't get hurt - knock on wood. He has all the tools to be a star...if he could ever stay on the field.

After watching only the first quarter in the NFL replay, one thing became abundantly clear: Rex Grossman is scared. Even though he was facing heat the entire first quarter, Rex Grossman was throwing like he had a gun pointed at him. Timid movements, bad mechanics, late reads, and unsure throws combined to make him look rough. With or without pressure, an NFL QB needs to be more pocket aware, needs to understand when a sack is better than a lame duck pass, and what to do to avoid either the sack or the intentional grounding. There is absolutely no mystery why Kyle Orton was named the starter.

no way it's that bad. 8-8

Nonetheless, they were both 1st round WRs selected in the previous two years, and pretty much made it impossible for Mike Williams to have any major impact. I'd disagree with you on MWilliams, however, I think the guy was damn good coming out of college, and had one of the best sets of hands in recent college football history. In a different situation, where he was the red-zone go to guy (like he would have been with the Bears), I think it would have been different.

It's cool...I admit that he would be considered one of my "misses". However, like I have said, and since that which has never happened can't be proven or disproven, it's an unknown. On the other hand, I was screaming for Randy Moss, and absolutely despised the Curtis Enis pick...proven by the following that was submitted years ago. Say It Ain't So - Curtis Enis Essentially, what you are saying is what I agree with. It's impossible to know whether or not a player would have done well with another team. Moss ended up on the Vikings and became one of the best WRs in history, IMHO. If he had come to the Bears, there's no guarantee he would have done the same thing, something with which you agree. I'll tell you though, I'll take the talent Moss has from the knees down over an entire team of Curtis Enis' all day.

Read the whole thread thus far...thoughts... 1) I say it's a combination of bad talent (i.e. drafting) and bad coaching. So, blame lands on JA for drafting (or not drafting) an adequate number of talented OLinemen, as well as Lovie and staff for not competently preparing the guys they have. 2) If the Bears do stunt in practice and preseason, I know that I can't recall seeing it more than a handful of times over the past several years. It's something I've screamed for, especially considering the fact that any of our DEs can just be pushed up the field on their outside rush move. 3) No man who is married truly wears the pants in the family.

The Bears v. Seahawks replay is tonight at 11pm (CST).

Maybe all of the Bears' failures at QB development will change now that Kyle is in there. The kid didn't look that bad as a rookie, and I have wondered why he hasn't been given the nod over Rex. Now we'll get to see what he can do with the starting reigns, and the hesitant approval of the coaches.

I'm done debating this with you. You continue to use ignorant arguments, and have them thrown in your face, but you retort with ad hominems and unrealistic situations. You act like all GMs are gods, but somehow they all make decisions that contradict one another. Berrian is a great example. Thomas Jones is a great example. If JA, or any GM for that matter, was that great, the changeover wouldn't be nearly what it is. And there sure as hell wouldn't be a consistent flow of players who leave the Bears and start for other teams. There sure as hell wouldn't be free agents every year who get paid huge by one team when nearly all other GMs scoff at the deal and roll their eyes. The Theo comparison was a bad one, and I displayed why it was a bad one. But you can continue believing in Santa and unicorns, thinking it's all because Theo had nerve, or drive, or whatever...I'll choose to live in the real world where there are connections and nepotism, a world that most definitely gave Theo an advantage in all of this. Last but not least, I never said that I am a GM for the NFL, and the fact that you can't see that does make you ignorant of the debate. The debate is, can an average Joe who loves and knows about sports do as good a job as an NFL GM when making selections. I'd say the fact that someone was given the opporunity, Theo, and succeeded, proves that the old-guard doesn't necessarily know what's best, and a relative outsider can come in and excel. I'd also say that the hit-miss ratio for GMs in the NFL isn't that good, further proving their less-than-perfect ability. Looking back at the Bears' selections over the last 20 years, one would have to be damn near retarded when it comes to football knowledge to do much worse. Luckily for us, JA has turned the tide, and hopefully continues to put together a good, albeit one-sided, team. I don't see why you put them on such a pedestal when it is clear that they constantly screw up, constantly get replaced, and constantly get fired. The mere changeover of GMs proves that there is a ton of room for improvement, and I see no reason why an avid football fan with in depth understanding of football strategy and rules couldn't do just as good of a job as most GMs, if not better in some situations.

Way to be ignorant. Check out his bio a little bit before saying something like that. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theo_Epstein The dude was born into a rich family on several levels and went to an Ivy League school, thereby pretty much guaranteeing him any job he wanted. He chose to intern with the Orioles; the Orioles didn't choose him. He chose to work at the Padres PR department. How many Ivy League guys apply as lowly PR guys? Are you kidding me? That's the kind of job that thousands apply for, and he got it because of A-the degree he earned from his school, and B-he has connections. Aside from that, Lawrence Lucchino has Yale connections with Theo and brought him along for the ride. This dude has had connections his whole life, and his meteoric rise to fame is due in large part to the opportunities he was given, opportunities the average Joe doesn't get. Ignoring all of that, the mere fact that Theo Epstein went from a rookie PR guy to the GM in seven years, ABSOLUTELY PROVES THAT YOU ARE WRONG. If given the chance, why couldn't another do it?! Seven friggin' years! And before you start talking about how smart the guy is, which he very well may be, read the paragraph that starts with, "Under the direction of Henry, Werner, Lucchino, and Epstein..."

Dude, do you know what hypocrisy means?! How can you say that JA is so great, and the guys doing the job are so knowledgable, and then give credit to another team that did something in direct opposition to what JA did!?!? Make up your mind! Are they all knowing, or are they not? The fact that you give credit to the Vikings for doing something that JA and the Bears refused to do, when the clearly could have, just shows even more that it's a lot more of a crap-shoot than you care to admit. It's management, talent evaluation, and a combination of finances and contracts. You say Benson was the right decision at the time, I completely disagree. The Bears had TJ, and some on the old board thought he was good enough to carry the load. I happened to be one of those people. We happened to be right. Sure, JA and the Bears can't be blamed for Benson being a bust, and he was a great prospect at the time, but I thought it was a horrible move. Two sidebars 1) Regarding the OC/DC stuff you and nfo brought up: I don't think I could do as well as the majority of OCs and DCs in the pros, but there have been several that have been bad enough to make me think that it's just like any profession: people get hired to their highest level of incompetence. Ignoring all the fancy lingo, it comes down to understanding football - some don't seem to understand common sense solutions to their problems, and get caught up in the X's and O's of it all, without simply making the smart decision. Bill Simmons on ESPN thinks there should be a "GM of Common Sense" appointed to each pro sports team, and I agree with him. Someone to say things like, "You want to trade the entire draft for Ricky Williams?! C'mon, there is no way we are doing that." Or, "You want to run Wolfe up the middle twice, on the goalline, against the best run D in the entire NFL, with our weak OL?!" 2) The whole "why don't you do it" strawman is garbage and you know it. The great majority of people don't have the advantage and privilege to just pick up in the middle of life and make a major career change like that. The education required to even start on the lowest level as a high school coach would cause at least a two or three year gap from work and pay, and people just can't do that. I often wish I would have taken a different route, as I'm sure nearly everyone wishes, but it's just not realistic to do so, and to act as if someone can is the very definition of a strawman argument that you seem to like mentioning.

Completely disagree. Even with Tait doing worse, and Williams being injured, this OL needed more help. Kreutz is on the backend of his career, and the two guards are average at the very best. I seem to recall that everyone knew he was a possible problem child before he was even drafted. What wasn't, and still isn't known, is what he can do on the field. And that's because the OL sucked. Also, doesn't your "good source", who you seem to insinuate had more inside knowledge than our front office, contradict your entire premise in this discussion? If your "good source" knew this, and the Bears didn't know it to the exact same extent or better, then your whole "they work in this industry so they know more" argument is automatically invalid to a certain extent. Your point of view reminds me of how the news industry felt before the onslaught of independent bloggers began to uncover stories and scoop the mainstream on very important issues not too long ago. They may still look down upon the bloggers and such - mostly because of a superiority complex of sorts - but now they know there are non-professionals who can do just as good of a job as the "insiders". The point is, if anyone worth a shit was being released, 95% of the time it would already be known. Furthermore, the point about knowing it "right now" is inconsequential. If I did this stuff for a job, and that's all I did, then it would simply be a matter of memory. And, don't act like JA or any other GM knows everything. Nobody knows who is on the Pats injury list for sure. Nobody knows what's going through the mind of other GMs and teams. We'll just disagree here. You say anyone who isn't already a GM couldn't do worth a damn, and I say otherwise. But, I will address one of your comments. If the roster is made up of players deep in the draft, is that necessarily a good thing? I don't think so. I think it shows a certain amount of incompetence, specifically with drafting in the early rounds, but also in player development. Not to mention the fact that the Bears haven't exactly been a powerhouse for an extended period of time. Is it a source of pride or superiority to have a bunch of low-round guys on the team? Maybe THAT'S the problem - too many guys are on the team simply because they got drafted by the Bears, and would have been cut by many other teams. How many other teams would Rex or Kyle start for? Not many. Are those teams the model after which the Bears' front office should model their franchise? Probably not. Fun is not the same as consistent winning. I'm sure Cubs fans - and I am one - would have a lot more fun if they were winning as often as Boston and NY recently. I chose not to address it. I haven't really been a JA basher like others, and for the most part I'm happy with how well the team has done the last FEW years, but they need to do it several years in a row, and develop some sort of a pro offense before I am satisifed. It's the same old stuff: Defense, Defense, Defense. It'd be nice to have a complete team once or twice a decade.

1. I've never claimed anything about the injury. I never bashed the pick. Please pay attention before throwing ignorant claims around. I liked the pick. I would have liked Otah maybe a thismuchmore, but I was happy with Williams. 2. None of us are involved in the inside stuff, but what we see on the field is supposed to be the best the Bears have. And as far as the OL goes, that was total shit last year. If you couldn't see this, then you dont' know football. 3. The Forte pick happened to just work out perfectly for the Bears. At the time, I felt it was too high of a pick for a RB, but since Benson screwed up again and then got cut, the Forte pick was seemingly prophetic. At the time, however, the Bears didn't really know what they had in Benson or Wolfe, and to a lesser extent AP, and it was because the OL sucked last year. A RB who isn't superhuman (see Payton, Sanders) can't properly be evaluated with a garbage OL. Highly rated or not, need has to be factored in significantly when considering major holes on a team. That's just common sense. 4. The FA stuff is a wash and you know it. VERY RARELY is there a surprise FA. We know nearly the same time as the teams do because of the proliferation of inside sources and breaking updates on the ESPN ticker. Furthermore, the salary cap is easily known, and often times (see LT2 on this board), it's more comprehensive than the news outlets. Say what you want dude, but it's not bullshit. And it's anything from clear as to whether or not I've been right or wrong more often than those running the franchise. With access to the former boards, it's really easy to see that I - and many other members - have been right on just as consistent a basis as JA and the Bears, if not moreso. Neither you nor I can prove it one way or the other, so we don't know for sure, but I'm absolutely positive that over the years I would have put together a more consistent, more solid team than those in charge of the Bears. Sure, we wouldn't have had some of the guys we now love, but I think overall we would have had a better team consistently. That has nothing to do with being smarter than another person. It has something to do with the saying, "Too far into the forest to see the trees." A lot of times, these guys overthink things instead of just making smart decisions. Anyone with half a brain knew that Shaq going to the Suns was a bad idea, but the people running the franchise did it anyway. Horrible decisions like this take place every year, in every sport. I don't see why it's so hard to believe. I think that a team is mismanaged if they aren't pretty consistently good, but maybe you, along with most Bears fans, have become apathetic towards expectations. The collective of Bears' fans is slowly turning towards the same mindset that has created the loveable losers that are Cubs' fans.

Come on man...we've hardly asked for championship football consistently over the last 20 years. Sure, we've been upset quite a bit, but at this point I feel that we do deserve a much better product consistently. We should expect up and down years, but there have been far too many down years over the last two decades. The one thing I do agree with is optimism. Nobody thought the Giants would do it last year, why not the Bears this year? The D/ST is enough to carry the team through, and Eli's numbers last year looked VERY similar to Grossman's the year before last when the Bears were in the SB.

One of my good friends, a Seahawks fan, was at the game this weekend. Immediately after completion he texted me four messages. 1) Seahawks D > Bears O 2) Bears D > Seahawks O 3) Seahawks scrubs > Bears scrubs 4) Please tell me that isn't your starting OL I could care less about the first two messages, because they're the equivalent of saying "the sun is hot", and the third may or may not be true. The fourth statement, however, really troubles me. I called him later and he said that there were no holes to run through, and no pass blocking for the QBs to use. He said he didn't even see a Bears RB appear to have any impact. While we sit around and talk about what a steal Harrison and Davis are, I sit back and think, "Man, it sure would be nice to have a solid OL instead of a third TE and a non-starting rotational DT." Considering the fact that Idonije seems to have taken a step and Dusty has "recovered", the DT situation seems to already have a nice rotation. Considering the fact that the Bears gave Clark a contract extension, and Olsen is obviously the TE of the future, the TE situation seems to be set as well. ...sure would be nice to have another OLineman.

Bingo. That's it. And for me, to be quite honest, it has a little bit of "I told you so" in it. Sue me. It's just irritating to be right more often than the actual people running the team is all.

1) QBs:I'm not necessarily saying Rex or Kyle are better than Pennington, but with the pressure they face, they have even less time, and even less field to distribute the ball. Pennington's arm absolutely sucks, and I'm convinced he would be a disaster for this year. The Bears can still sign Culpepper...and probably should have done it a while ago. Now, however, it is too late for him to truly come in and be the starter. Nice insurance policy though. 2) WRs:"Bryant Johnson, Bernard Berian, Hester, Davis, Booker and Hass" - I don't see how that's all that different than what the Bears have now. Either way, there is a lot of unproven talent that will have to split time, thus minimizing their impact. And on top of that there is a garbage OL and an inconsistent (at best) QB throwing the ball. What this means is, the Bears don't know what their WRs can do...or would do with your group. 3) Briggs: I don't see a problem with releasing Briggs if you spend elsewhere on offense. 4) Dez Clark's extension: I agree with this one. The double-TE set sure as hell better show up this year or it's a complete waste. 5) Hester: I think your decision, while normally something I agree with, would have ultimately lost Hester for the team. And that would be horrible.