jason

Serious question: What's the benefit to rushing him? I don't get the whole IR timeline stuff. I mean, other than some snaps, why not just chalk it up as a red-shirt season if there is any chance he isn't 100% fully healthy?

Puhlease. If Cutler had rolled right and thrown left, and ANYTHING bad had happened, you would have watched the replay over and over again, mumbling, "I told you so...I told you so...I told you so," while booting up your computer with tears of joy streaming down your face.

It wasn't because I couldn't handle the pressure. It was because I didn't want to debate finer points of football and the Bears, two things I love, with someone like you. You too often are completely ignorant on a point, and often post as if you aren't even a fan of the Bears. On a Bears website, it's really irritating. As for the draft being a crapshoot, there have been numerous statistical analyses posted on this site from a variety of perspectives that prove the draft has advantages the higher a pick is made. Sure, a HOFer can be found in the 5th, or whatever, but statistically it has been proven that higher picks have a better chance of panning out.

I think you play him as the #1 RB and give Langford about 25% of the snaps. This is good because: 1. Forte is better than Langford overall 2. Forte deserves respect from the Bears and to earn his new contract...either in Chicago or elsewhere. 3. It saves some snaps for Langford's future.

I understand the other side on this as well. But for clarification, I don't think they learned anything in the sense you're referring. Sure, guys got valuable snaps for experience, and the coaches realized a blind guy with a seeing eye dog could do better than Mariani, but my point isn't about that. It's purely about wins, losses, and draft position. Higher draft position yields better players statistically and higher draft trade value. The Bears need better players. And they need a lot of players. The Bears aren't currently a good team. They're a very well coached average team that needs an infusion of talent and youth. Losses this season are better for the franchise moving forward.

Why must you constantly be a moron? I don't want them to lose. But it's probably better for the franchise in the long run because of the draft picks. Look no further than how the Cubs are being turned around for a good example of how a team is built. It takes some growing pains to accumulate young talent via the draft. It's not an apples to apples comparison, but the concept is the same, and it's true. Nowhere you ever played is comparable bacause there wasn't a draft, there wasn't a constant team for more than at best four years, there was no franchise, and, honestly, did it matter who won or lost when you were sitting on the bench?

Great comeback. Showed true grit. Showed fight. Showed Cutler is a MF'ing stud. Yes, I said it. Showed Langford has burst. In the long run, however, the 2-pt conversion failure is better for this team in the future. I'm proud of how the Bears fought today.

DING! DING! DING! The announcers have even mentioned the fact that he can't set his feet today. This game shows the Bears are definitely not deep, and need several positions to make themselves a true playoff team. Losing for one year is better than squeaking in and thinking they are better than they are, then perpetually being somewhere in the Lovie-zone around .500. There are holes at OL, DL, LB, DB, WR, just take your pick.

FINALLY. The guy who replaced him doesn't look like a world-beater, and I don't like the fact that he takes it out of the EZ when 7 yards deep, but he looks to have better vision on the first two returns.

We all want th Bears to win, but every game we have major issues at multiple positions. This team would be better served by losing a few and getting a higher draft pivk than they would barely missing/making the playoffs.

Very happy about the change at returner. Very unhappy with whoever the hell Prosinski is and how he plays. No way the Bears win this.

I admit that I was a fan of his out of college. I think he's a great backup for the Bears because he can play pretty much every position. I can't believe he's terrible now. Unless injuries just did him in. I wouldn't mind seeing him get a shot at RG if along stays at RT.

Seriously? That's insane. That one handed catch was ridiculous. Cutler put heat on the ball, and it was high. Incredible hands, focus, and coordination. As for the long TD, it was bad defense. True. But most TEs get caught from behind on that play. What was amazing was that he looked genuinely fast, especially for a TE.

In my analogy, Bennett is the stud. Based on the last two weeks, however, Miller is a stud waiting to happen. All he needs is a healthy season and enough snaps.

I think Miller will be more expensive than we expect. But not as expensive as Bennett. Bennett has another year, but it's expensive.

Yeah, my comment was misleading. I meant that they are as incomplete as box score numbers. They don't tell the whole picture. PFF just adds in some BS and bias to make it seem like their stats are legit.

I hate the "New England did it!"-argument. The Bears are not New England. Nobody is New England. Cutler is not Brady. Nobody is Brady. Etc. I'd rather have the single stud TE, and a cheap big-boy who blocks. Or a cheap backup who has potential. The Bears don't need to spend money on two high-priced TEs. I'd rather see the money spent on multiple RBs since they are more likely to get injured, or, surprise, surprise, better OLinemen so the stars of the team don't get injured/hit as often.

The problem with PFF is, and always has been, all about context. Their stats are box-score type data, where you try to assess data based on the numbers, and then add in some personal bias. Then do some pseudo math related to whatever "stat" being compiled, and bam, rating. It's hot garbage. Any rating system that gives Webb multiple good games and gives a negative score to a QB who has absolutely lit it up is just a flawed system.

Oh, it's possible, but prepare for the fury if the Bears invest heavily in OL. I like the middle of the OL: Slausson, Grassu, Long. Sign the best available OT and draft one in the first round. Then grab another guy somewhere in the 4-6 range.

I'm happy with how Langford has looked, but what you said about Carey is why I didn't want Langford. If Carey had received the snaps Langford got, it's likely Carey would be the breakout star we are talking about, and the Bears would have one extra player elsewhere helping the team.

Two TE sets are not something nearly any team does with success. And when they do, one of those TEs is really just a lineman who is eligible to catch a handful of passes a year. Further, the miles on RB legs mean the Bears should spread the load as much as possible to save the miles. What I'm advocating is just clearing cap space. Marty is under contract next year, but if he's dumped the dead money is minimal and the cap saving is substantial. You said what I'm advocating: "it is also a business and if (Zach Miller) look capable and can do it for peanuts, you go that route and invest the other resources in other spots, such as the oline or defense."

PFF = Garbage

Why is the "it is so much better to have two good TEs" a valid argument, but it is never brought up for Forte and RBs?

LOL. You mean bring back Toub. (Edited because I twisted the names in my head)

Two games is pretty much all I need to see. The TD last week showed he has crazy hands. The TD this week showed he has great speed for a TE. Bennett is owed $6M+ next year on the cap. I think it would be wise to cut him at the end of the year and focus that money elsewhere, particularly on both lines. If the difficult decisions are being made, and moves like cutting Forte are being considered, then I think this is fair game. Bennett means far less to the Bears than Forte, and we've seen a similar sample size in their respective replacements.