jason Posted May 20, 2014 Author Report Share Posted May 20, 2014 Call me whatever you like, it's still pure conjecture on your part. Nobody else offered him a contract. Didn't he work out for the Vikings? Maybe even do a physical for them? No offer. The Bears were already well aware of his shape. They could've easily seen something during that off season where his physical abilities "rolled off the table" and you simply think you know better, as usual. My guess is also just that, a guess. But you won't admit it about your bullshit. Let's face it, you simply don't know jack-all about the situation but your man-love for BU won't let you let this one die. Anyone here mentions Brian and you get all weepy and start defending him. Your case is weak and you ain't selling me or most folks here. It doesn't matter what his stats were in 2012, he was already old for an NFL linebacker and there was another off season where he got somewhat older. As to what Briggs said about it, irrelevant. It's like me giving props to my best buddy when he's looking for a job and I'm doing a reference for him. What do you think I'm going to say? So stats don't back you up and what happened in 2013 doesn't either. The team started out played pretty well on D before the shit hit the fan. I could play the conjecture game too... What if they signed Brian for another year and he was injured in game 1 and didn't suit up again? Do you think the Bears kinda thought he was just trying to milk them for another paycheck? They apparently did. And they weren't going to allow him to drag them through the sewer in the press. Game over. Get your tongue out of the guy's rectum for a few minutes and you might be able to see better. How are the 2012 stats conjecture? They aren't. And when you build a case on Urlacher's production, it's not conjecture to say he would have had a great impact on the defense. When you have that much factual information and statistics behind your argument, it's called a pattern. It's a rock-solid case. It's the basis for nearly all forms of quantitative study. As for your conjecture, if Urlacher played in one game and then got injured, statistics say the Bears would probably have been better in the game he played than in the average of the remainder of the season. Finally, if your hypothetical dreamland scenario of Urlacher having a massive issue between the 2012 season and the time he negotiated before the 2013 season existed, it would have leaked by now. Sorry, but we know about things way too quickly, with way too many media, twitter, etc., for something like that to have remained unknown or hidden. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scs787 Posted May 20, 2014 Report Share Posted May 20, 2014 Whats getting lost in the whole "Team was better with Brian on the field" argument is the fact that they had to trot out Geno Hayes for 3 starts, he was awful, and then Blake Costanzo for the 4th, again awful. Brian may have been on the decline but he was still better than the likes of Geno Hayes and Blake Costanzo, so I'm not sure that whole argument is any good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adam Posted May 20, 2014 Report Share Posted May 20, 2014 Urlacher was let go a year too early, I can't believe this is already the 2nd season post-Urlacher. He was worth more than they were willing to pay him and the transition from post-Lovie would've been smoother with him in the middle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scs787 Posted May 20, 2014 Report Share Posted May 20, 2014 Urlacher was let go a year too early, I can't believe this is already the 2nd season post-Urlacher. He was worth more than they were willing to pay him and the transition from post-Lovie would've been smoother with him in the middle. Sadly we'll just never know if that is true or not. Had he signed elsewhere and balled out then yes your statement could be definitive but as Cracker has said we're not the ones who know what his situation was physically. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madlithuanian Posted May 20, 2014 Report Share Posted May 20, 2014 Thank you. This too shall pass. Onward and upward. Thank you Brian. Now it's someone else's turn to try to help get us a championship. Sadly we'll just never know if that is true or not. Had he signed elsewhere and balled out then yes your statement could be definitive but as Cracker has said we're not the ones who know what his situation was physically. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adam Posted May 20, 2014 Report Share Posted May 20, 2014 Sadly we'll just never know if that is true or not. Had he signed elsewhere and balled out then yes your statement could be definitive but as Cracker has said we're not the ones who know what his situation was physically. It is better to let go a year early than a year late, but at least Urlacher can say he was not part of that train wreck of a defense last year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scs787 Posted May 20, 2014 Report Share Posted May 20, 2014 It is better to let go a year early than a year late, but at least Urlacher can say he was not part of that train wreck of a defense last year. Ya....Injuries blow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrackerDog Posted May 20, 2014 Report Share Posted May 20, 2014 Finally, if your hypothetical dreamland scenario... Dreamland? Dude, at that age it wouldn't need to be anything catastrophic. At best the Bears thought he might have one year left in him and they were more than happy to go with unproven players over him when he turned down their offer. What does that tell you about what they already knew about his condition? Maybe nothing but it suggests to me that they had strong reservations. Would we know or not is hard to say because the rumor mill doesn't seem to function the same way under Emery as it did under Smith/Angelo. All I'm saying is you ought to consider the possibility that Urlacher might not have been the capable of performing at his 2012 level. Would he have been better than some of the turds we put out there? Very likely. But hindsight is always 20/20. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted May 22, 2014 Author Report Share Posted May 22, 2014 Dreamland? Dude, at that age it wouldn't need to be anything catastrophic. At best the Bears thought he might have one year left in him and they were more than happy to go with unproven players over him when he turned down their offer. What does that tell you about what they already knew about his condition? Maybe nothing but it suggests to me that they had strong reservations. Would we know or not is hard to say because the rumor mill doesn't seem to function the same way under Emery as it did under Smith/Angelo. All I'm saying is you ought to consider the possibility that Urlacher might not have been the capable of performing at his 2012 level. Would he have been better than some of the turds we put out there? Very likely. But hindsight is always 20/20. Thanks for finally seeing my point of view. I've understood yours all along, and players naturally deteriorate, but Urlacher was a HOF talent whose diminished abilities were still better than the guys on the field, and he would have had significant impact on the field as a result. You've basically agreed with me. He would have lined up the players better than Briggs. He would have patrolled the middle better than whomever. He would have recognized the offensive audibles faster. He would have been a leader. Unfortunately for him, Urlacher wasn't picked up anywhere else. I guess it's fortunate for us, because it would have sickened me to see him in another jersey. In the end, Adam nailed this thread twice: once when he said that Urlacher was let go a year too early, and then again when he said it's better to make a move a year early than a year late. The former helped lead to the catastrophic defensive year the Bears saw last year. The latter is to be seen, but I like the way Emery is setting things up for this franchise's future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BearFan2000 Posted May 22, 2014 Report Share Posted May 22, 2014 After the historically atrocious defensive display we put on last season, I think 12 is fairly fair for us. That puts us a bit below the middle of the top half of the league. We made a lot of changes in both FA and the Draft that should positively impact and improve our D. The Bears look like a vastly improved team on paper till we consistently show it on the field I wouldn't expect us to be ranked super high. You can add a lot of talent but if it doesn't gel and work together in real life all you did is throw money and bodies at the problems. I think we will vastly improved and if our D can be average or above look out because our offense will be able to build on last years success hopefully taking the next steps. I'm drinking the kook-aid but at the same time want to see results on the field. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrackerDog Posted May 22, 2014 Report Share Posted May 22, 2014 Thanks for finally seeing my point of view. LOL! OK, that's a wrap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adam Posted May 22, 2014 Report Share Posted May 22, 2014 Thanks for finally seeing my point of view. I've understood yours all along, and players naturally deteriorate, but Urlacher was a HOF talent whose diminished abilities were still better than the guys on the field, and he would have had significant impact on the field as a result. You've basically agreed with me. He would have lined up the players better than Briggs. He would have patrolled the middle better than whomever. He would have recognized the offensive audibles faster. He would have been a leader. Unfortunately for him, Urlacher wasn't picked up anywhere else. I guess it's fortunate for us, because it would have sickened me to see him in another jersey. In the end, Adam nailed this thread twice: once when he said that Urlacher was let go a year too early, and then again when he said it's better to make a move a year early than a year late. The former helped lead to the catastrophic defensive year the Bears saw last year. The latter is to be seen, but I like the way Emery is setting things up for this franchise's future. I know a lot of what-ifs, but if Urlacher plays and keeps the defense respectable, who knows what we do this off season. We would've potentially made the playoffs, got worse draft picks, and possibly an even tougher schedule. His early departure coupled with the defensive fallout might actually turn this thing around sooner than originally planned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stinger226 Posted May 23, 2014 Report Share Posted May 23, 2014 I agree with everything except the bolded part. It has been shown before that the Bears were better with Urlacher on the field than without in 2012. He certainly lost effectiveness if compared to his peak, but statistics clearly show he was effective. What's more, he was trending up before he got injured. Dislike him all you want off the field, but his impact on the Bears defense in 2012, and the likely compounding affect of his absence in 2013 (which you noted), can't be questioned. In 2012 I will give you he was the team defensive leader but his stats were far from great. He had a few big plays, 1 int.,2 FFs, and 2 FRs. but he was ranked 29th in the league against the run for inside LBs, that doesnt not lead me to say he was special. He didnt play in 2013 and the only team interested in him were the Bears. There were giving a former hero a chance to retire a Bear and the whiny little bitch was insulted by a min. deal. You cant say he would have played well, that didnt happen. Injuries took there toll on my favorite player for many years and cant sit there and say he was great looking threw rose colored glasses. I could see him fade and so did everybody GMs in league. The NFL is a meat market if they thought he could play, someone would have offered him a contract. That happens to be the fact, you cant discount. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scs787 Posted May 23, 2014 Report Share Posted May 23, 2014 In 2012 I will give you he was the team defensive leader but his stats were far from great. He had a few big plays, 1 int.,2 FFs, and 2 FRs. but he was ranked 29th in the league against the run for inside LBs, that doesnt not lead me to say he was special. He didnt play in 2013 and the only team interested in him were the Bears. There were giving a former hero a chance to retire a Bear and the whiny little bitch was insulted by a min. deal. You cant say he would have played well, that didnt happen. Injuries took there toll on my favorite player for many years and cant sit there and say he was great looking threw rose colored glasses. I could see him fade and so did everybody GMs in league. The NFL is a meat market if they thought he could play, someone would have offered him a contract. That happens to be the fact, you cant discount. Was that a PFF reference? God I hope we get another PFF argument outta Jason, that was fun last year.... This time we have an interesting plot twist as Stinger joins the analytic side of things.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stinger226 Posted May 23, 2014 Report Share Posted May 23, 2014 Was that a PFF reference? God I hope we get another PFF argument outta Jason, that was fun last year.... This time we have an interesting plot twist as Stinger joins the analytic side of things.... Stats are part of arguments, but to use that as your only tools of the opinion is lame. For example, Webb looked the part, but his heart wasnt in it, so you can throw out all the stats you want but your eyes dont lie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BearFan PHX Posted May 23, 2014 Report Share Posted May 23, 2014 Sheesh Jason is a dick. Dude, there are many decaffinated brands that taste almost as good as the real thing. Is Urlacher your Webb? Urlacher had nothing left in the tank, you could see it in the way he moved. And NO ONE gave him a contract. That's the facts of this. He got old, no matter how many of his jerseys you have, the Bears did the right thing. Frankly, the 2 million dollar offer was generous of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scs787 Posted May 23, 2014 Report Share Posted May 23, 2014 Stats are part of arguments, but to use that as your only tools of the opinion is lame. For example, Webb looked the part, but his heart wasnt in it, so you can throw out all the stats you want but your eyes dont lie. Eyes can be deceiving. You see someone have a couple awful games and it kinda "sabotages" your opinion. But I'm not getting into this again....I was hoping to see someone else get in this type of argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaskan Grizzly Posted May 23, 2014 Report Share Posted May 23, 2014 Urlacher had nothing left in the tank, you could see it in the way he moved. And NO ONE gave him a contract. That's the facts of this. That was only proven because he didn't play last year. Hypothetically, if he had what would have happened? Jason's points (and I agree) were that the defense probably would have been better aligned for the plays they were defending. I'm fairly certain that 'fumble' by Rodgers late in the season would've been better handled. Brian probably would have outperformed both Williams and Bostic...last year. Because, as Jason pointed out and I've said before, a degraded Urlacher is better than many 'mediocre' linebackers. Buuuuutt..... As Adam said had Urlacher not left the team when he did, where would he and the team be today? The dominoes probably would have fallen different. No Allen, no Houston...who knows what else. He got old, no matter how many of his jerseys you have, the Bears did the right thing. Frankly, the 2 million dollar offer was generous of them. True. But I didn't buy his jersey until after he left the team. Same reason I have a Payton and a Butkus jersey. Same reason I'll someday own a Tillman one. They are part of Bears lore and it's history. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LT2_3 Posted May 23, 2014 Report Share Posted May 23, 2014 I have a couple possible scenarios that could have happened had Url been re-signed. 1) Url could have gotten injured and missed some or all of the season. It's not out of the realm of possibility. 2) He could have had a negative effect on the locker room by not buying in to the new regime - like Peppers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mongo3451 Posted May 23, 2014 Report Share Posted May 23, 2014 Stats are part of arguments, but to use that as your only tools of the opinion is lame. For example, Webb looked the part, but his heart wasnt in it, so you can throw out all the stats you want but your eyes dont lie. Well said... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stinger226 Posted May 23, 2014 Report Share Posted May 23, 2014 That was only proven because he didn't play last year. Hypothetically, if he had what would have happened? Jason's points (and I agree) were that the defense probably would have been better aligned for the plays they were defending. I'm fairly certain that 'fumble' by Rodgers late in the season would've been better handled. Brian probably would have outperformed both Williams and Bostic...last year. Because, as Jason pointed out and I've said before, a degraded Urlacher is better than many 'mediocre' linebackers. Buuuuutt..... As Adam said had Urlacher not left the team when he did, where would he and the team be today? The dominoes probably would have fallen different. No Allen, no Houston...who knows what else. True. But I didn't buy his jersey until after he left the team. Same reason I have a Payton and a Butkus jersey. Same reason I'll someday own a Tillman one. They are part of Bears lore and it's history. If you bought it after he left, then it must have been in the discount pile. Woulda., shoulda, coulda, he didnt play , nobody wanted him. It was over and everybody can pretend he would have been good. facts are nobody of importance cared enough to take a chance. Fans opinions very but the people that do it for a livin decided Urlacher no more, so if anybody wants to live in fantasy land, have fun, because that isnt reality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaskan Grizzly Posted May 24, 2014 Report Share Posted May 24, 2014 If you bought it after he left, then it must have been in the discount pile. This talk of fantasy world coming from someone who was an active participant in the mock drafts. I wouldn't normally waste my time with a reply but knowing you would: You're a lout. Psychoanalyze that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaskan Grizzly Posted May 24, 2014 Report Share Posted May 24, 2014 I have a couple possible scenarios that could have happened had Url been re-signed. 1) Url could have gotten injured and missed some or all of the season. It's not out of the realm of possibility. 2) He could have had a negative effect on the locker room by not buying in to the new regime - like Peppers Fair enough...Like my 'well educated" colleague Stinger would say; "woulda, coulda, shoulda". But to you I say, good points. Peppers didn't 'buy in'? I hadn't heard that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ASHKUM BEAR Posted May 24, 2014 Report Share Posted May 24, 2014 Urlacher sucked, was overrated and a locker room cancer. Just like all the washed up Bears and the soon to be like Cutler and Briggs. As you can see, I am being sarcastic and don't understand the lack of appreciation it seems a lot of Bears receive. I understand the Bears trying to move on like a Pittsburgh would do. I think they went about it in the wrong way. They shoulda being more clear before negotiations about there intent to move on and tried to force him into retirement. From my understanding, Brian wasn't going to put his body through another year of NFL without great compensation. In his eyes, he felt his body would play for 5 million, the Bears wouldn't budge off two. He was upset there was no counter offers. So be it... he is retired Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaskan Grizzly Posted May 24, 2014 Report Share Posted May 24, 2014 Urlacher sucked, was overrated and a locker room cancer. Just like all the washed up Bears and the soon to be like Cutler and Briggs. As you can see, I am being sarcastic and don't understand the lack of appreciation it seems a lot of Bears receive. I understand the Bears trying to move on like a Pittsburgh would do. I think they went about it in the wrong way. They shoulda being more clear before negotiations about there intent to move on and tried to force him into retirement. From my understanding, Brian wasn't going to put his body through another year of NFL without great compensation. In his eyes, he felt his body would play for 5 million, the Bears wouldn't budge off two. He was upset there was no counter offers. So be it... he is retired Well played sir. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts