DABEARSDABOMB

I don't think the Bears ownership group will force any candidate. I think any roster decision will be made by the GM. I think that is evidenced by the fact that Ballard is even considering this job (since he's turned down jobs where that wouldn't necessarily be the case).

Below were what I found most interesting: http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2015/01/07/dur...-gm-cap-issues/ This is code for...cap is going to go up pretty significantly...see my comments later on Cutler, but really this means we could definitely be in a position to take on Cutler's dead money (now...with the assumption we are building more towards 16 / 17). To be frank, if we aren't going to contend and if we add a young QB to the roster, this isn't necessarily a bad thing. We'd have a young QB on the cheap so really outside of the pick going to QB (when it could go elsewhere) we really aren't any different off financially than we would have been and beginning the following year, you get a potential competitive advantage (a lot of that depends on whether your QB still looks like a potential franchise guy...in which case you can have a relatively cheap QB and spend money elsewhere...see Seahawks). This also would mean that between Jay / Marshall, you pretty much have to move each by early March for it to be as cap friendly as possible (I believe). I still believe we could get a pretty good pick for Jay (e.g., 2nd rounder).

Very very smart, but as I said, I don't want that type of guy running the franchise. It is also why I have zero interest in the Texans guy. The Texans guy didn't have any off the field issues, but the Dolphins signficantly ignored character concerns on their drafts. Marc Ross is a high caliber guy but I just don't get the feel that he's all that gung-ho about leaving the Giants. I really do like the Giants approach to drafting though and just the way the organization goes about its business. If we weren't going to get Ballard, Ross would have to be the guy. Dawson and Gaines just reak of mediocrity. The Saints guy is intriguing though. Given that we haven't interviewed Ross, it better darn well be Ballard, haha.

He stunk too. I don't know what the cap impacts would be but I thought he was a huge part of those big plays and he tended to play like he didn't care. He had a good run with the Bears, but I am okay dumping him (unless it is a major cap hit). Again, Emery sure jacked up things last off-season. I again point to his inability to even evaluate current talent as being extremely flawed, imo. Part of that was probably due to pressures from Bears brass to stick with vets, etc. We need a clean start and I think Ballard will do that (he seems to have confidence that he'll get a job at some point and is ensuring whatever job he takes is going to allow him to do what HE thinks is best). I don't know if it will work but I like everything about him. Where is our resident capologist to tell me the impacts of cutting him.

You are probably right. I think we will take an olineman somewhere in the first three rounds. Otherwise, I expect the rest of the picks to be on the defensive side of the ball. I do think that tackle is our biggest need though and tackle is the toughest position to find outside of the first round and the bulk of the elite ones are taken early in the 1st, which is why I'd be able to justify going OT @ 7.

Well in Rodgers and Romo's case they have generally had bad lines. Romo finally got a good line this year and the team focused more on the running game and welp, they finally win a playoff game. Rodgers is just insane. I couldn't even imagine how good he'd be with a real line. Dude is unbelievable. Manning & Brady though, well we saw what Brady was able to do prior to the Pats stabilizing their line around the mid-season point. I won't go as far as saying people will fall in love with Jay, but we certainly can win with him, especially with an improved line and a concerted effort of running the football, establishing play action, moving the pocket, etc. But I think it is very clear that if you put Cutler in Green Bay, they wouldn't be near the team they are today. Jay, while he is the closest thing to Rodgers from a football tools perspective, doesn't have near the football IQ that Rodgers has nor the leadership. I think if you put Cutler on the Packers, to be frank, they are a 7 win team. Basically, the Packers aren't that differently constructed as the Bears, from the perspective that they have a lot of flaws on that roster (defense is slightly better...our skill positions are slightly better...and olines are pretty similar). Whatever we do, we can't try to build a team and rely on offense with Jay. If we are going to win with Jay, we will need a strong defense and just an overall good team with Jay being good enough to win and really be able to play off those other strength's (and that isn't a bad thing...its worked for Flacco and to an extent Manning). Jay is fully capable of getting hot, just as those guys did. And I don't consider either of those guys elite by any stretch of the imagination.

I think it all comes down to leverage. I think the best we could hope for is a 3rd rounder, but I'd be thrilled with a 2nd rounder. With a 2nd rounder, I actually think we might end up upgrading the team. My presumption is, if the new group decides his lockeroom issues outweigh his on the field production, it is more realistic we'd see a 3-5th round pick. I have no basis for that, but rarely do we see players traded for high picks. Given our needs, would be great if we could add a 2nd round pick though.

I really have a hard time arguing picks 1, 3, and 4. That said, I don't want to ignore defense and would definitely use picks in the 2nd round. I'm also okay trading down, depending on who is there at 7. I don't anticipate a significant difference in the caliber of player we get at 7 and say 15. Just a matter of whether a need position is there for another team (that isn't us) where they have use for that 7 pick. I think with our holes, we need more picks.

By all accounts, Jameis is very strong between the ears on the football field. So I don't think you can compare him to Vince Young. However, I do agree that being strong between the ears is extremely important in succeeding in today's NFL at the QB position.

Thankfully I don't think we are as far off from fixing the line as we were in previous years, but I don't believe you can consistently win without strong lines. And regardless of who are QB is and what direction we are headed, we need a strong line so the way I see it, if that is what grades out the highest at 7, that is who we should take. You add an LT who turns into an above average player (hopefully he is better than that but at least above average) and than put that with Kyle Long and move Bushrod to the other side and you than have 3 guys who should grade out above average at their respective position, with Long hopefully down the path of being elite (i.e, one of the 2 or 3 best at his position). If you surround those guys with average players, the overall line is above average. I think what you need are some anchors on the line and if you have that, largely speaking, the rest of your line will be good. Than you see if Mills can work out on the inside and coach him, Garza kind of works (although it would be nice to find a new center in the latter rounds) and even Ola at times showed some potential but hard to really stand out when you were constantly switching positions, etc, and working with different pieces. I think if we can hit on a LT, it would work wonders for the long-term and really give us two long-term anchors on our oline.

One thing I do know, is whomever we hire, they better be on board with running the damn football and winning the game at the lines. I want to be a physical football team on both sides of the ball. Do I want big plays, certainly, but I also want to be able to out-physical and wear out teams so that we can pull away late in games and be well prepared to destroy teams in Chicago when the weather gets cold. I don't want an OC who think it is a good idea to throw the ball 40-50 times a game.

Who are some of the top OC candidates out there? Big name I can think of is Gary Kubiak, however, the only way you are getting him is if Shanny is coming too. If the coach is Toub, is there a Reid disciple that he's worked with that he might pull? Clearly wouldn't be someone from the Bears organization, haha. I can think of a lot of good potential DC candidates, but the list would appear to be a lot shorter on the offensive side of the football.

I think someone else had posted this on the board, but thought it might deserve its own thread. We have talked about Frazier and Wade Phillips and I think a lot of this comes down to whether we switch to 3-4 (vs. staying at 4-3) but if we were to stay with a 4-3 defense, we have two excellent candidates to choose from between Frazier and Fewell. Before someone says the Giants D stunk this year, consider the below and the overall impacts to injuries as well as Fewell's overall track record for having strong defenses: The Giants' defense ranked eighth in the NFL in total yardage in 2013 but took a major step back in 2014 amid season-ending injuries to three of its top four cornerbacks, middle linebacker Jon Beason and defensive ends Mathias Kiwanuka and Robert Ayers.

Here is another article talking about Bears being done with BMarsh. Bottom line, we will know what happens with Marshall by the end of February. To do it right, decision should be made prior to March 1st. Cost to the Bears is relatively minimal prior to that point (if they opted to outright release him). My personal belief is Marshall will be somewhere else. I think one of the first things that will be done is that the Bears are going to clean up the lockeroom and send messages in there. I really hope Kyle Long can establish himself as a leader on the offensive side of the ball (kind of like Kreutz used to). Long reminds me of Kreutz in many ways. http://dawindycity.com/2015/01/07/report-c...andon-marshall/

I am in the camp that if he is there, you take him at 7. I hate saying it too, but I think he has all the tools to be a bonafide star. The key is that you are comfortable with him maturing, etc, and obviously you get comfort on his off-the-field matters. I believe him to be the best QB to come out since Luck and one of the best QB talents of the last 10 years. PS: I don't expect him to be available at 7 and he's the only QB I would pick this early. I've also said if Hundley is their in the 2nd, I take him. As a whole, someone could say QB isn't our biggest need, and I'd agree, but I think his football skills grade him out as a worthy #1 overall pick at a huge impact position. I don't pass up on that. I want the Bears to look to the future vs. trying to half ass their way to a 9 win season and the playoffs. We need to focus on being great and if that takes a little longer, so be it. If he's not there, I look at LT & Dline. I think the talent typically at those spots can warrant impact production. I'm also okay with going with LB. I know safety is a huge need, but if we are taking a safety, we need to move down in the draft. My personal belief is that a safety is not worth a top 10 pick.

I really like the fact that Ballard seems very decisive in terms of what he wants and he is not going to accept anything less than full control. I think he knows what he wants and his overall confidence is very valuable and much different from what some of our past candidates and GM's have had. We haven't had a guy come in and grab full control in an extremely long time. We know if Ballard gets the job, he's getting full control. That much is evident based upon the opportunities and situations he has turned his nose at (Philly / Jets this year; Tampa last year).

We need our offensive line fixed and a lot of help on the defensive side of the ball. I'd also go as far as saying if a QB slides to our 2nd round pick (or to be frank if one of the top 2 guys is there at 7 and we like him), we have to think very hard about taking them given the current situation. I don't envision us picking this high again next year. Do I envision the playoffs, way too early to say that, but I certainly am not going to peg us to win 5 games again and be picking at 7. I think we are better than that. I won't be picking us for a superbowl either though.

I think a lot of assumptions have been made by the media based upon the fact that he used to work here. I don't think the Bears had necessarily decided on anyone prior to, of course they might have had a lean and that usually is the case. We aren't talking about of unknown candidates that you have never met. I am directly involved in certain hiring decisions at my work and when I go through a stack of candidates, I typically have a lean to which ones I'm going to like more based upon that. Doesn't mean that is who I ultimately hire but you normally start an interview process with some form of a lean a certain direction (and that is if you don't know any of the candidates). In the case of a small league like the NFL, you already have heard quite a bit and might have met a lot of these people already or talked to people who have and thus are going to have a definite lean.

http://www.csnchicago.com/bears/why-one-ex...ka-impact-bears Interesting article talking about how Tommie Harris thinks that Toub could have Ditka like impact on the Bears.

Either way, new group comes in and they could be sly and say, we really like what we have seen from him, blah blah blah. We'll listen to all offers but are happy with him on our team.

On a sidenote, one of the reasons he was believed to be fired by Miami was due to the # of poor character guys the Dolphins brought in during that tenure (not necessarily 100% on him). I really am not a fan. I think if I were to look at anyone outside of Ballard, it would be Ross of the Giants (and Gamble who is now available from the Eagles). But for me my 1/2 is Ballard / Ross and there really isn't anyone very close to either of them.

See article I posted. No idea what is true vs. what isn't, but I don't find what Hub is saying to be unfathomable. I think part of it also comes down to how will he handle himself when the next coach comes in and truly holds him accountable. I don't know that answer but toxic can be toxic and I think one of the many areas Trestman failed at, was his inability to get rid of toxic players, no matter who they were. If you are going to change a culture to the one you want in the organization, sometimes that means you got to get rid of guys who are talented / better than other options, but the long term gain is worth it.

http://www.chicagofootball.com/2015/01/05/...rshall/ami5l7j/ That is the article I mentioned in my previous post from Hub.

Hub Arkush has indicated the lockeroom wasn't happy with Marshall and he can be extremely difficult to deal with. He is all over the place in terms of his attitude, etc. All that said, I don't think any decision has been made on BMarsh and that decision will be made by whomever the next GM and HC are. I would presume it would include speaking directly with Marshall (but also gathering various intel on how he behaved). I do think as incoming HC / GM, you need to set the tone and an easy win (if BMarsh is truly a problem) would be to move Marshall (for a late round pick) or cut him. Reality is, the top teams in the league aren't built at the skill-position, they are built at the lines, QB, and on the defensive side of the ball, imo. Plus, we still have Jeffrey, Bennett and Forte so it isn't as if we have a bunch of turds behind Marshall. I do really respect Marshall for his work ethic though. But again, I think this lockeroom needs to be cleaned up and messages need to be sent, however, those decisions should be made by the group of people hired these next few weeks.