adam

Actual height is sort of deceiving because some guys have no neck and are 2 inches shorter than the guy next to them but their shoulders are at the same height. So if he has good arm length, it can negate some of the height issues.

Wow, I really like this signing. He was mainly cut due to cap reasons and is an actual upgrade over Roach for a lot less money. Starting LB's looks pretty solid: Briggs-Williams-Anderson. Then we draft an LB and we are looking pretty good. Jason, this really adds to our draft flexibility now. We are now forced to take an LB early unless it is a great value. I know health will be a concern, but that would be the same with Urlacher. Taking a step back and looking at this, Williams/Anderson > Urlacher/Roach, especially considering what we paid for them.

Absolutely, anything is possible, but Arians brought Stanton over from Indy, so I don't think they would trade up to draft a QB. They still will draft one, but I don't see it being in the first few rounds.

I would take Brown, Minter, Ogletree, Bostic, or Reddick for MLB, or take one of these guys, stick him on the outside while he learns the defense, and plug Williams in the middle for this season.

I would not be upset with that draft. OLine would go from a weakness to a strength with the addition of Bushrod, Warford, and Schwenke. I am growing on Austin and wouldn't mind Bailey, Minter, or Amerson with pick 50 either.

That is great, we have enough youth in that position.

Arthur Brown?

The funny thing about the Urlacher situation is that he could have accepted the offer and then the Bears would've been blasted for bringing him back or lauded for their loyalty. Seems like a lose lose proposal to me. It was Urlacher's choice not to accept what he considered a low-ball ultimatum.

Stinger, good analysis. I believe that SF would be the most logical trade partner for a bunch of teams. I see them wheeling and dealing often as they would not have the roster space for 14 new players. I see them coming down to 8-10 picks, with probably 2-3 trades, or one monster trade. For BUF and ARZ, they have so many needs, it is hard for me to see them drafting early in the 1st, then moving up and taking 20 while losing other picks. I would assume they would trade out of the top 10 with someone else looking to move up, then taking their biggest need. Also, from what I have read, ARZ is pretty happy with Stanton at QB. So MIA would be the other logical trade partner since they have 11 picks.

I like this scenario the better, but the Raiders have pick #66, the 49ers don't pick until #74.

Here is a new look on draft value: http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcwest/post/_/id/...ick-value-chart

For our 20 and 50, we could get their 31, 34, 128 (4th), 157 (5th), and one or two of their 7th rounders (they have 4). I am assuming they want to shed some picks and not necessarily make a trade where they only lose one pick.

Seems like a low risk move. If he plays up to his potential, it will actually be an upgrade over Roach.

Wow that is barely above league minimum.

Jason, Denver's blown coverage had more to do with their run than Lewis. They allowed 30 pts in 2 playoff games, including the SB. Not really a defensive performance to be proud of.

To me this just seems like Trestman is just giving the other teams more to think about. The best part is that Trestman seems genuinely excited about working with Cutler. I just hope Gannon and Young are right, and that Cutler will flourish under Trestman's tutelage.

NICE!

Back to the topic. Looking around the league, I am not surprised the Bears are that high. Seems to be right around where they should be. Funny how the Power Rankings don't reflect the same thing.

How-to insert links: After hitting reply, one of the buttons above your reply box (or quick reply) is for "Insert Link". It is right next to the emoticons drop-down in the normal reply box, or next to the U for underline in the quick reply. You also have the ability to insert image, email link, quotes, and code tags. After you type something like this, you can click on the button, it prompts you for the full URL (which you can copy and paste from the browser URL bar), then hit OK, another window will popup that allows you to label the link like this. This is the button: The text should then have a hyperlink like this For an image link from another website, use this button: To quote text, highlight the text then select this button: Sorry to thread cap and go all Forum Instructor on you all.

Jason, I am on the side of believing that it was a bad move to not sign him for at least one more year. On your list, #3 for me seems to be one of the biggest losses. He was the defensive QB, and his experience in the Cover-2 will be almost impossible to replace. Especially considering we lost Roach as well. Out of all the factors, the loss of Roach makes this a bad move. I will answer the rest: 1) We don't really know this, definitely an assumption, could be Cutler's team now (scary I know)? 2) Pure speculation, I have seen this mentioned before on other moves, even the Kruetz non-signing. Players know this is a business and Urlacher could've accepted the offer. Franchise players leave their original teams all the time. 3) This is undeniable, his knowledge and experience in the system will be sorely missed. Maybe he can be added as an Asst. LB Coach for $2 mill? 4) Hindered? LB was a need anyway, we lost Roach and Hayes. With us addressing OT and TE, LB seemed like a non-brainer regardless of Urlacher situation. 5) Mixed reviews so far. Some will miss him and immediately call it a bad move (me included), and others were tired of his act and his declining play on the field 6) It's business, and we don't have that much cap room. $1 million would've been almost 20% of the remaining cap space. If he was such a leader, where are the other players offering to restructure to fit him in a la Brady? Not a word from a bunch of guys breaking the bank. 7) Hindsight is always 20/20, not all contracts will be perfect, and you will not always pay someone what they are worth. 8) Actually, the Lewis contract actually supports the Bears decision. He only played in 6 games during the regular season. 9) Urlacher wasn't as bad as PFF makes him out to be, but he was nowhere near where he was expected to be. I think that is the misconception. He was not his normal explosive self, but still better than a league average player. 10) I don't about this one, but I don't remember any TE's going off against the Bears in 2012 either.

Here ya go for the link: Rotoworld Pre-Draft NFL Lineup Rankings 1. SEA 2. DEN 3. SF 4. NE 5. GB 6. BAL 7. CHI 8. ATL 9. WAS 10. NYG Bears writeup:

Truly an end of an era. I wish he went out on better terms, but it is easier to part ways now with a new regime then try and do it later. We will have to see who is brought in before we pass judgment on the move. I don't like it but if it makes our team better in 2013 and beyond, great, but with 2 LB holes to fill, and very little cap room, I am not too optimistic.

Lewis' cap hit was $4.95, so basically $5 mil. Urlacher should come in between 3-4 million per year, and just like Lewis, it should be for 2 years to allow for a lower cap hit this year.

If they do a 2 year deal, they can reduce the cap hit for this year and then cut him before next year with minimal dead money. So I figure 2 yrs/8 million deal with a cap hit for less than $3 million this year. He gets a couple of million guaranteed and the average salary looks decent even though most it will not be paid unless he miraculously becomes ultra healthy (need more Deer Antler Spray). To me this is the high end of the deal.

We have to fill Urlacher and Roach's starting positions and Hayes as a backup. So we need 3 LB's, 2 if we sign Urlacher. We still have Costanzo, DeCicco, Thomas, and Trahan on the roster. Though they are mostly SP, reserve, and practice squad.