jason

Yep, still me. a) While you and I both realize that I nearly despise Benson, I want the Bears to be great...and I honestly feel they are not that far from being great. I don't think there are NEARLY as many holes as most think (I actually only see major holes at OL and QB right now). It's just that the OL & RB combo did crap this year. Since Benson is under contract still, and has shown glimpses in the past, it's best to overhaul the OL. That way, not only does the running game improve, the passing game improves in two ways (the affect of a positive running game & more time for a QB to throw). I NEVER wanted to draft a RB in the first. I absolutely hated when the Bears drafted Benson, and told everyone on the board it was a horrible move. I was right. Michael Turner would be nice, but I'm not keen on giving big money to someone who hasn't proven his abilities over a longer period of time, and while starting. Besides, with a good OL, even average RBs in the NFL look good (see Jamal Lewis in Cleveland). And a great OL makes can make average to good RBs look incredible (see Emmitt Smith and his semi truck holes to run through). And I don't think I've ever called for the outright release of Benson, despite how much I dislike his blase attitude, apparently poor work ethic, and lack of production. As a final thought, I'd lile to mention that I would love to see Wolfe get the ball more. He has something that can't be taught: shiftiness. Assuming he can deal with another 5-10 hits per game, there is a good chance he'll produce plays like Darren Sproles did for the Chargers the other day. Just give him the ball, give him room, and watch what he can do. Just, for goodness sakes, don't run him up the pipe like he's damn Earl Campbell.

I think the majority of the recent 1st round OTs are proof that taking an OT in the first round is not a stupid move. With the exception of a few, most are great, and the rest are still very good. Sure, you can pursue OLinemen in FA, but that doesn't mean the Bears will get them. Drafting them ensures that you have that guy. If Berrian leaves, then the Bears have to address WR a little sooner, but if he stays, I'm fairly confident that Berrian, Bradley, Hester, Davis, and MuhMuh can produce big time numbers if the OL and the QB improve. Of course, if the OL improves, then the QB automatically improves. So, basically, improve the OL = improved QB because he has more time = more time for WRs to get open. I guess it comes down to whether or not one thinks the WRs are good. I happen to think that this group of WRs is good, but just not given much of a chance with inconsistent QB play behind a weak OL that doesn't allow for many 5 or 7 step drops for the patterns that take a bit longer to develop.

To be honest, I would neither like nor dislike this draft. I don't like the RB pick at 2. That's my biggest grief. The first two rounds make or break this draft for me. Also, I'm not a big fan of Hardy. There should be much better talent in the third round. Last but not least, I don't think Schuening will last until the Bears' 4th. Most of the stuff I've seen says he'll go early to mid third...could be wrong. Mine: Round 1: Miller has to leave. ASAP. Move Tait back to RT, let the rook learn on the job at LT. There is little chance that Long or Clady will be there; however, if either are, then the Bears' pick should not actually be a Chicago Bear Jeff Otah Round 2: I'd love to see Sam Baker or Chris Williams fall to the Bears here. Maybe they sit for a year, and the Bears have bookends on their line for years to come. But, I think that might be too risky having two young OTs and Tait, who is still very good. So, I think the best bet is to go with the best OG on the board: Duke Robinson...he's a road-grader. Round 3: BPA. There are just so many ways to go with this pick. There is a ton of OLB talent, a few promising FBs, a few nice looking Safeties, and maybe even another offensive lineman. This is a tossup pick for me, but I can't say that I would be upset with anything here. Maybe even Chris Johnson, the lightning-quick RB out of ECU? Chris Johnson Round 4: I want a QB with potential here. I would like Brennan, Dixon, Flacco...in that order Colt Brennan - Rocket arm, accurate, quick reads...is he a system QB? I don't think so. Round 5: The Bears need a quick, tough, big hitting, big play making, smart, strong against the run safety. Tom Zbikowski - Also, he's played both safety positions. Weakness: Kind of like Archuleta, not as great in coverage. Round 6-8: BPA. However, I wouldn't mind seeing a WR (maybe North Dakota WR Weston Dressler - game-breaking speed), another OL prospect, and finally a bruising FB. These three can be in any order.

Jones, Romo, Snyder...I could care less. What I care about is the fact that Farv is winless at Dallas, and they posed the best chance at stopping the packers from making it to the Superbowl. I cheer for the Bears first, and for any team that will hinder the packers second. I'm slightly upset that the Cowboys lost, because I really think that they would have handled the packers. Now, with the Giants playing well, there is still a chance that the packers lose (the snow doesn't matter to a team from NY). However, it would have made me feel much better to watch the packers lose early, and ugly. Each game closer to the Super Bowl they get, is one more gut punch to me as a Bears fan.

Well, that we can agree upon. However, he probably sucked much less than most of the OCs the Bears have had over the last two decades. if Crowton were given a few more years, and a little more talent, I feel he would have turned into the next Mike Martz, Bill Bellichek type. He would have been thought of as an offensive genius. Give Shoop more time and more talent, and he'd still call for the bubble-screen on 3rd and 14.

Wolfe may have been caught from behind, but the fact remains that he made the huge play, a play that Benson and AP probably don't make. Wolfe is fast enough, definitely shifty enough, and strong enough to play RB splitting carries. If anything, he showed more potential than either Benson or AP this past year. He's not going to plow through guys, so the runs up the middle with a weak OL were a mistake. But it sure does seem like when he was given the ball in space, he made big moves and big plays.

Game. Set. Match.

I'd love to get Otah in the first. He should be a solid tackle for years to come. And, with any luck, he can play the left side. I'd also like the Bears to use two more draft picks on OL, unless otherwise addressed in FA.

Wow. Thsoe videos are awesome. Actually, just about all Hester videos are awesome. Watching these videos just makes me want to punch Peter King in the balls even more. Cribbs over Hester?! Are you F'ing kidding me!?!?

One, I have forgotten nothing when it comes to the Shoop era. I have never hated someone associated with the Bears more. Booker did OK, but that was more a result of the fact that the Bears had to pass some time, and Booker was the primary target. It's the inverse of Crowton, except that the passing game produces large chunks ang deceives about how successful a team/player is. Two, I didn't forget the Jauron nonsense. Remember, I hated them both (and Blache to a lesser extent). But I was willing to give Jauron and his bogus coach of the year award another chance if he dumped Shoop. He didn't , and he was rightfully sent packing. Three, I think it is odd that Crowton was able to be aggressive (over aggressive) with nearly the exact same players that Shoop had. There is absolutely no excuse that is acceptable. I think you, and anyone else that sides with Shoop, forget how stupid conservative he was. It wasn't about taking more chances, it was about taking any chances. If Shoop played poker, he'd fold pocket aces before the flop, just to be on the safe side. When he came in people were happy that the Bears had a running game, and at first I liked the idea. I wanted more balance as well. But when I realized he was going to coach like a frightened 10-year old, I knew it was going to be a horrible tenure. Plain and simple, Shoop and Crowton are polar opposites - Crowton took nothing but chances, and Shoop took none. I'd rather have a guy who takes chances as opposed to a timid bitch like Shoop. At least then there is the potential for big scoring and a dangerous offiense. Afterall, if the purpose of the Shoop "strategy" is to save the Bears' defense, which it surely didn't do with the perpetual 3 and outs, then you might as well throw caution to the wind and try to score a ton...either way you're leaving the defense out to dry.

First and foremost, I never said that Crowton didn't make mistakes. With an inexperienced QB, and a good D, he should have run much more than he did. However, the fact that he was able to get such stats from the team he had, proves his quality as an OC. I think you misinterpret what I want and like. I like the explosive style homerun hitters; you have that right. But I like a team that produces. What we have had for far too long in Chicago is a team that doesn't produce on offense. As a result, I want and like any coach willing to come in, give it a chance, take some risks, and try to win. I don't want a coach like John Shoop who called games like an absolute pussy. I despise the playing not to lose mentality, the game-manager mentality, the passive "if we score 20 we should win" mentality. The offense is named such because of what it is supposed to do; it is supposed to go on the offensive. At least you had that part right - the reason I liked Crowton was that at least he tried. He may not have done everything the smartest way, but at least he took shots. In other words... Crowton is to Jalen Rose as Shoop is to Trenton Hassell. Crowton/Rose score because they take lots of shots, some not so well thought out. Shoop/Hassell don't score because they don't take shots. To be honest, it makes me think of Brett Farv. He continues to sling it all over the field, and despite the fact that he's more likely to throw into triple coverage than any QB in history, he puts up stats because he keeps winging it in there. As for styles, I could care less as long as the team produces. If Benson produced at the rate of a good back (4+ypr), and the Bears continued to win as they ran out the clock, I'd be elated. I would know the Bears still had a chance to score, but were also grinding the clock. In fact, I'm snickering right now just thinking how nice it would be to have our version of Mariano Rivera, knowing that if we get up by two scores, we can run with success and win the game. For the past 20 years or so that strategy would not have worked. Unfortunately, the Shoop types still try that strategy even though the attempts are unsuccessful, and the 3 and outs pile up. Crowton types get up by 20 and think about the next way to step on the opponent's neck, going for the kill, trying to demoralize the opponent in case there is a rematch. Last but not least, how could the Bears have avoided the turnovers? Well, it's exactly as you said, max protect the young QB (something I couldn't figure out either), and throw to MRob & Engram. Find the TE a bit more. Run a bit more. It was obvious even to the biggest Crowton fan that the Bears' offense was unbalanced.

I will literally protest the Bears next season if they draft a RB in the first round. I will not watch one game. Period. The RB situation may be a problem, but we'll never know if the OL sucks. In order to really determine if Benson's a flop, the OL needs to be fixed. Just look at Jamal Lewis this year. Before the year, you would have been hard-pressed to find more than a handful of people on his side. But with that line, all the sudden he is rejuvenated. The same holds true for this team. For any of you to suggest that the Bears should go after a RB in the first is pure insanity. If the Bears get a RB in the draft, it should be a mid to late round upside guy, someone who has the incredible speed to take it to the house, but for some reason or another wasn't the #1 all the time or wasn't highly regarded for some minor reason. If the Bears go after a RB similar to Benson, it'll be incredibly stupid, a waste of money, and self-defeating. OL, OL, OL...fix the problem up front, and I guaran-damn-tee the running game and the passing game improve exponentially.

Yeah, because it's Crowton's fault that the offensive players couldn't hold onto the ball, and the QBs couldnt' stop throwing it to the other team. Cut the number of turnovers and there is almost a guarantee that there would have been substantially more scoring with all that yardage. Afterall, the field length never increases. Let's just say that we cut 20 turnovers from the numbers...less than half that year (32 fumbles & 22 INTs). And let's just say that only 15 of those drives were in scoring position...which is also modest considering the yardage totals (all the "good" drives weren't 99 yarders). Then let's say that one 3 of those 15 were TDs, a VERY low extraploation. Last but not least, let's say that of the remaining 12, only 8 were converted as FGs. That's 45 more points. That moves the Bears into the middle of the NFL as far as scoring. I realize it's extrapolation, but it's not all that unreasonable.

1. The defense he wore down was the Bears' defense. And, his offenses didn't suck, but they weren't the best in the league either. If I recall correctly, the Bears had a top-5 passing offense while he was in Chicago. Also, the team was top 10 in yardage. I remember that time vaguely, but what I do remember was the Bears getting a lot of yards, and not getting the points to go along with the yards. Mostly I remember that being the result of turnovers, as our quarterbacks just handed the ball over to the other team via interceptions and fumbles. Given another few years, I think the TDs would have caught up to the yardage. 2. Ron Turner's former status as an offensive mind was revoked after the pathetic year of work he put in this year.

You can go back to the old boards. I was always on the side of Crowton. I said that he hurt the team at times by wearing out the defense, but he was also the only offensively minded coach we have had in the past 20 years. To be honest, I never really had a problem, even back then, with a majority passing offense, a "non-Bears" offense. Also, the only difference between the pathetic offenses that we've seen fairly recently and Crowton's offenses is that while both wore out the Bears' defense by putting them back on the field more frequently, at least Crowton's did it with scoring.

I don't understand the hatred for Wolfe. Seriously, what games were you guys watching?! Whenever he was given a chance in space, he made things happen. Hell, I'd go so far as to say that he actually broke more tackles than Cedric Benson! He may not have run anyone over, but he juked them enough to break an arm tackle. Furthermore, he made a few really great, shifty, potential-showing plays when he was in there. What the hell did Benson do? What the hell did Peterson do? The guy has the ability to make defenders miss. That is not something that can be taught. He's also quick/fast enough to make a small play turn into something big...or maybe that wasn't him busting out a large gain while I was screaming from the stands at the Saints game. I just don't get why you guys are so ready to get rid of him already. Suppose he gains 15 pounds of muscle and learns to block better (not that Benson is a good blocker with the added size)...does he then get to stay? Personally, I see just as much potential with Wolfe as I do Benson.

Unfortunately, we can shelve that pipe-dream; Mike Martz just went to the Niners. Why is it that the Bears can never get an offensive coordinator who is capable of turning the offense into a weapon feared throughout the league? Oh, wait, we had that guy, and he just got done engineering a great game to win the BCS Championship last night. (Hate how un-Bearlike it may have been, and how it put the defense in bad shape at times, he made our offense a threat that it hasn't been since, and hadn't been for some time before.) Look forward to seeing Turner next year.

That's just ridiculous. Berrian is FAR better than a third WR. He has serious abilities, but can't showcase them enough in a stagnant, no-passing, bad OL, inconsistent-QB led offense. He's AT LEAST, and possibly a poor man's #1. What do you expect of the guy? On the Bears... ...he's the only WR who gets open consistently. ...he's the only WR who provides a consistent deep threat. ...he's the only WR who makes big plays and great catches continuously. I hope we keep him, shore up the line, and show other teams how good the Bears offense can be.

Drafting a RB in the first round would be just plain stupid, but from a team-building standpoint and a salary cap standpoint. Even if the Bears move down, there are other holes to fill, and tying all that money up in two 1st round RBs would be a huge mistake. Besides, like others have said, Benson was a stud in college, and if given a halfway decent OL to run behind, should produce. I'm one of the biggest anti-Benson guys out there...but I remember the glimpses he showed last year, especially a few against the Saints, and I believe he could do big things if the opponents actually feared the Bears' passing game and the OL was better.

Within the realm of reality, what is your dream offseason? I think I'd like to see the following: FA Faneca, Starks, Flozelle, or Gross Draft RD1: OL (depending on FA targets/probabilities) RD2: OL (depending on FA targets/probabilities) RD3: QB (Brennan, Dixon, or Flacco (in that order)) RD4: S (Targeted BPA) Team Turner = FIRED Mike Brown, Tommie Harris, Dusty Dvoracek, Dan Bazuin = Healthy MuhMuh = Demoted Olsen = Promoted QB Position = Open TC Battle

I think our differences of opinion on the line will have to stand. Aside from Brock who was average, the rest of the line was pretty damn good. Big Cat may have been on the way down, but he was dominant. Add a young Kreutz, a mean Tucker, and Villareal and you have a very good line. You're just plain wrong on Jim Miller. Please see the end of the 1999 season when he tore it up under Crowton as proof. Also, remember if it weren't for injuries - which I can't deny - he would have remained the starter and probably put up some more good games. Hell, Miller only had one 300+ yard game under Shoop, and he threw 49 times - clearly indicating that this wasn't the common Shoop game - to be honest, I don't know what happened during that game. I can't remember. But there is a good bet that either Shoop was sick, kidnapped, or mute that week. I think you misunderstood me on ATrain. I didn't mean to imply that he was tearing it up when I said "putting up stats". I meant to imply that he is still a good NFL player, a serviceable NFL player. I would also like to add that Shoop gets no credit in this. The formula is not rocket science. When ATrain got the ball a lot, he ran well for a lot of yards. It's not surprising. He did so the few times Crowton gave him a chance. Hell, he put up a few good games last year with Buffalo! Simply calling X number of running plays is not something for which credit is deserved. To speak of Shoop's system is fallacy. It's simply "hand the ball off"..."hand the ball off"..."bubble screen"..."bubble screen". Repeat ad nauseum. As for running what Jauron said, this may have some validity. Although, Shoop hasn't exactly lit it up since his time with the Bears either. I don't know how much of the plays Shoop called, how much of the gameplan he was responsible for, but I do know that Jauron eventually had to take the axe because of his loyalty to Shoop. Had Shoop been dumped, Jauron would have saved his job. Last but not least, the free agency. Well, there is nothing to debate here. We agree. For some reason there was a point at which the Bears organization just said, "Screw it. We're not going to be cheap any more. We're spending."

I'm amazed at the short memories of Bears' fans. I realize that we've had to endure some horrible offensive coordinators without imagination or gameday skill/knowledge, but for you all to forget the travesty that was John Shoop is just unforgiveable. This man's OWN TEAM was YELLING AT HIM!!! He was, is, and forever will be, the worst OC the Bears ever hire. Period. This is not up for debate. As for having nothing to work with, I call BS on that. He had a stud OL to begin with: LT Blake Brockermeyer, LG Rex Tucker, C Olin Kreutz, RG Chris Villarrial, RT James "Big Cat" Williams. Also, Jim Miller was a decent NFL QB capable of putting up good numbers if given time. Also, let's not forget the fact that Shoop had no clue how to use TEs or WRs, evident by the fact that Dez "Stone Hands" White continued to start. Oh, perhaps everyone forgot about A-Train, who is still putting up stats when given the chance on the Bills. Did you forget about the 3-yd pass on 3rd and 12? Did you forget about the fake to the exact same place the play went to?! Did you forget about the 3-yd pass on 3rd and 12? Did you forget about the ubiquitous bubble-screen? Did you forget about the 3-yd pass on 3rd and 12? This is the same guy who would protect a 6 point lead in the second quarter! Maybe a few of you forget, but there was not such vehement hatred for a coach in these parts in a long time, and the clown would have been fired if not for being lucky and hitching a ride aboard the dual-Buddha led defense that allowed Urlacher to roam free, and the team to virtually stop all opposing scoring. Some others may have been bad, but there is no way in hell any Bears' OC has been worse, or will be worse than John Shoop. Never. When the team has an on-field mutiny about Turner, give me a call.

Brennan just doesn't do anything for you!!!!!!????? Are you serious?! I can understand someone being a system QB, but that kid has all the tools. He's a stud, and will play in the NFL. One does not become the most prolific passing QB in college history without having skill. As a rookie, he'd be comparable to what Rex Grossman and Kyle Orton are now. It's not like they make great reads or anything. Hell, Grossman has been with the team a few years now and still makes bad reads and stupid throws.

As for next year, I have high hopes. I'm looking forward to... 1) Mike Brown being healthy 2) An open QB competition with a good rookie 3) A retooled OL 4) A motivated and healthy Benson with Wolfe as a legit 3rd down RB 5) A new OC 6) A healthy Tommie Harris 7) A healthy Dusty Dvoracek 8) A healthy Nathan Vasher 9) A new starting safety combo 10) A promise of an explosive WR-corp with Hester getting more offensive touches 11) A proper usage of an incredible weapon in Greg Olsen 12) A relatively high first round draft pick 13) A completely healthy Urlacher 14) A distraction-less situation with or without Lance Briggs 15) A return to prominence Just think, the Bears will essentially be getting seven high draft picks back (the actual 1st rounder this year, Tommie Harris, Mike Brown, Nathan Vasher, Cedric Benson, Dusty Dvoracek, Dan Bazuin). Look for the Bears to be back in a HUGE way next year.

Same thing I was thinking...we don't need a first round running back anyway (just like we didn't need Benson). It'd be a waste behind the present OL. Draft OL, OL, OL as far as I'm concerned...maybe Flacco or Brennan in the 3rd/4th.