adam

http://www.chicagobears.com/news/NewsStory.asp?STORY_ID=4659

Just click the thumbnail for the larger pic.

I would have a gun in Philly if I was him too. One report says it was at 5 pm, kind of an odd time for a shooting.

Yeah, it makes sense, pretty easy to calculate. I've just seen them where it is weighted near the top. Just PM you the list?

Wow, so Animal House was #1 even though it was never rated higher than the 2nd best movie from anyone? Seems kind of odd.

The player that gives the Bears the best chance to win needs to start.

Didn't Orton start most of 2005?

You can make a case for Week 14. In Week 11, even with a decent QB Rating, he only threw for 119 yards (1 play accounted for 57 of those yards). So he was basically a non-factor because the Defense pitched a shutout. We won so it didn't matter. In Week 12 he regressed with 3 INTs, 0 TDs, and a fumble in a loss to the Patriots. Then in Week 13, he hit rock bottom (unless you count the Arizona game). Rex throws 3 INTs and for only 34 yards with a 1.3 QB Rating. He only had 6 completions. Even with that type of performance, he was bailed out by RMJ and Hester. He didn't get benched because Lovie did not want to mess with a team that was 10-2. In hindsight, it was actually a good move because we ended up 13-3 and got to the SB. Would a QB change have made a difference? I highly doubt it.

Orton only played in 3 games? The first game, he didn't play very well, but we had the lead going into the 4th quarter. Also, our leading rusher for that game (AP) had 26 yards. What I can't understand is how Orton only gets sacked 2 times in 3 games, yet Grossman gets sacked 25 times in 7 games? There is something grossly wrong there. Grossman is just very inconsistent, and when you take all the injuries into account, its pretty amazing that he is still in the NFL. If he could do what he did during the couple of games before he was injured again (shocker), then that would be enough for the Bears to make a serious run.

This seems to be Grossman's last chance. Either he wins the starting job, or spends one year holding a clipboard before he is out of work.

Would it be possible to make a bracket of the Top 16 choices, and have us vote every couple of days until we get a winner. It would be interesting to see if the order would change based on head to head popularity.

CC/knightni, What format do you want the lists in (just text, Excel, etc)?

http://www.sportsline.com/collegefootball/story/10808112

I see your point about Albert, but even down the line I don't see him being the best of this draft. I am sure he has the ability to be a Pro Bowler, but the same gut feeling you have is telling me he is going to disappoint some people. He just feels like too much hype for me. It could be completely warranted, but more times than not players do not live up to their hype. Check this out, again from the NFL.com page, this is talking about Albert: Sounds a lot like what everyone was saying about Williams, yet you never hear this about Albert.

I am completely tracking with you on this. The only concern I had about Albert was that he was not even on the radar until the combine. He wasn't even listed in the First Round until recently. Teams assessed him and said they believe he can be really good at OT, and that is when his stock soared. My question is if he was so good, why was he playing OG in college? There was too much inflation there for me. Guys like Clady, Williams, and Otah had been there in the first round forever. Check out these career notes from NFL.com: Williams: Williams has registered 181 knockdowns with 21 touchdown-resulting blocks while averaging 84.9% blocking consistency over the last two seasons as the team's full-time starter at left tackle...Allowed just two quarterback sacks over a span of 1,558 offensive snaps. Albert: During his final two seasons, Albert registered 94 knockdowns, coming up with key blocks on 21 touchdown drives...Graded 83.23% for blocking consistency over his last 25 games, as he allowed 6.5 quarterback sacks, but no pressures on 773 pass plays. Seem pretty close, but Williams was doing it at OT. Also, everyone was concerned about Williams BP reps of 21, Albert only did 23. Williams scored 32 on the Wonderlic, Albert scored 23. So I just don't see how Albert can be considered better than Jake Long, when he doesn't even look better than Williams.

True, and I am all for that. We haven't seen the plan to address QB. Picking up some UDFA's is not an answer. Since we didn't draft one, there needs to be a play for someone after the June 1 cuts, or a trade prior to the season.

I didn't include Albert because he was a Guard. He only started two games at Tackle. There is no way you can project him to be an NFL Tackle this early. Also, a good portion of Tackles actually move inside from College to the NFL, not the other way around. So he has less of a chance to become a dominant Tackle than the others that have already played the position. Physically, he may have the best traits, but being a Tackle, especially a Left Tackle requires a lot more than that. I also don't see how he can be better than Long, especially when you are comparing Guard play to Tackle play. What are you basing your assessment off of?

http://imageshack.us does not require an account.

Ouch. At least now we can get the RB who torched us (Rhodes). The 2 INTs and fumble by Grossman didn't help either.

So if we draft Woodson in the 6th, that makes the draft a success?

Fluke, one shot wonder? 2001 would be a better year to call a fluke. We were 5-11 in 2000 and 4-12 in 2002. In 2005 we won the Division, then in 2006 we won the NFC. How is that a fluke? That seems like progress to me. Then in 2007 we take a step back like so many other teams have done after losing the Super Bowl. The good thing is most teams rebound the following year, which we should as well. Actually the ultimate goal is to win the SB, but teams are built to make the playoffs. It is a new season at that point. The Giants barely made the playoffs, yet they won the SB.

Probably a really good idea. He would also be able to adapt to the NFL and get to know the playbook.

Getting to the SB is meaningless? Well, you can't win one unless you get there, so that is a pretty odd statement.

The one problem I see about changing draft picks, is from that point on, there is a chance that almost every other pick would change as well. So you cannot even determine what the team would look like if we grabbed McNabb or Palmer. Also, if we gave away future draft picks, then did not play well those following years, we would not even be able to use the high draft picks to rebuild. That reminds me of what SF did. They trade away their 1st to New England to move into the 28th slot of the 1st Round in 2007. Then they have a bad year and Joe Staley could've been Sedrick Ellis.

I think your years are messed up. We had #26 in 2006 and traded to the 2nd round, and this draft was 2008.