Jerry Angelo's draft picks (bad)

[Bears4Ever_34]

I wanted Cadillac as well, right after I wanted Mike Williams haha.

[daa84]

I agree its too early to tell on bazuin, and i think its too early too tell on dusty too....

 

the bears need desperately to draft O-line...its generally a low risk pick...i look at new england and they drafted the left side of their studly line in the first and second rounds of the last two drafts....light and mankins...they also got koppen a few years ago...this is where we need the most help...and waiting til the 4th round to get guys like beekman isnt going to help...

 

where has beekman even been this year? generally when you draft an olineman you expect him to be ready to play....john st. claire started over him the other day...is he injured or something? i would expect us to at least get a look at josh if we are getting a look at orton

[jason]

nfoligno

Disagree.

 

One. While TJ did not have a bad year, it wasn't believed he was a special back either. A servicable, or even good back, maybe, but not a special back.

 

Two. To that point, TJ had not shown an ability to stay healthy, nor had he proven capable of being a workhorse. The 240 carries he had that year were nearly double his career high.

 

Three. It is very easy to say it was a mistake today as we have seen Benson play, and at this point, it is hard to even think much less recall what was said about his them. Benson was a very highly rated RB. He was considered a special RB. In fact, as I recall, several publications had him being one of the best RBs to hit the draft in years.

 

At the time, there is no way anyone can convince me that the Bears should have drafted a RB at 4. I had more than one friend - fans of other teams - call to laugh about it. It was a horrible decision, and I was on record numerous times stating it. It's akin to changing the oil on a burning car. Sure, the oil might need to be replaced, and that new 10W30 looks like it might make the car run great, but there are other things that need more attention.

 

RB was not our #1 need, but at the same time, you hate to pass on a player you feel is a franchise player that can carry the franchise because he have a decent player at that position.

 

This is the only valid and acceptable answer to the scenario. I hate it, but it's true. One can't fault an organization for attempting to draft that special player. It just sucks that the Saints hit on Bush, the Vikings got a jackpot in AP, and the Bears crapped-out with Benson. And, despite the fact that I agree in majority with your parallels, notice the one major difference in the "special player" category: game breaking ability. Benson was a stud coming out of college, but there is no way in hell I thought he was one of those "special" talents that the Bears simply had to have. In fact, I have a hard time believing anyone thought that at the time. I watched his highlight reel stuff, and saw a ton of his games on TV, but never did I think he was something other than a great college player who would probably turn into a good-to-very good pro RB.

[balta1701-A]

You know, looking back at that draft, the guys who went in the first 10 really haven't shown that much at all.

 

1 San Francisco Alex Smith - QB 2 Miami Ronnie Brown - RB 3 Cleveland Braylon Edwards - WR 4 Chicago Cedric Benson - RB 5 Tampa Bay Carnell Williams - RB 6 Tennessee Adam Jones - CB 7 Minnesota Troy Williamson - WR 8 Arizona Antrel Rolle - CB 9 Washington Carlos Rogers - CB 10 Detroit Mike Williams - WR 11 Dallas Demarcus Ware - DE 12 San Diego Shawne Merriman - OLB 13 New Orleans Jammal Brown - OT 14 Carolina Thomas Davis - S 15 Kansas City Derrick Johnson - OLB 16 Houston Travis Johnson - DT 17 Cincinnati David Pollack - DE 18 Minnesota Erasmus James - DE 19 St. Louis Alex Barron - OT 20 Dallas Marcus Spears - DE 21 Jacksonville Matt Jones - WR 22 Baltimore Mark Clayton - WR 23 Oakland Fabian Washington - CB 24 Green Bay Aaron Rodgers - QB 25 Washington Jason Campbell - QB 26 Seattle Chris Spencer - OC 27 Atlanta Roddy White - WR 28 San Diego Luis Castillo - DT 29 Indianapolis Marlin Jackson - CB 30 Pittsburgh Heath Miller - TE 31 Philadelphia Mike Patterson - DT 32 New England Logan Mankins - OG

Don't really get a pro-bowler until pick 11 -13 with Ware, Steroids, and Brown.

[jackie hayes]

You know, looking back at that draft, the guys who went in the first 10 really haven't shown that much at all.

 

1 San Francisco Alex Smith - QB 2 Miami Ronnie Brown - RB 3 Cleveland Braylon Edwards - WR 4 Chicago Cedric Benson - RB 5 Tampa Bay Carnell Williams - RB 6 Tennessee Adam Jones - CB 7 Minnesota Troy Williamson - WR 8 Arizona Antrel Rolle - CB 9 Washington Carlos Rogers - CB 10 Detroit Mike Williams - WR 11 Dallas Demarcus Ware - DE 12 San Diego Shawne Merriman - OLB 13 New Orleans Jammal Brown - OT 14 Carolina Thomas Davis - S 15 Kansas City Derrick Johnson - OLB 16 Houston Travis Johnson - DT 17 Cincinnati David Pollack - DE 18 Minnesota Erasmus James - DE 19 St. Louis Alex Barron - OT 20 Dallas Marcus Spears - DE 21 Jacksonville Matt Jones - WR 22 Baltimore Mark Clayton - WR 23 Oakland Fabian Washington - CB 24 Green Bay Aaron Rodgers - QB 25 Washington Jason Campbell - QB 26 Seattle Chris Spencer - OC 27 Atlanta Roddy White - WR 28 San Diego Luis Castillo - DT 29 Indianapolis Marlin Jackson - CB 30 Pittsburgh Heath Miller - TE 31 Philadelphia Mike Patterson - DT 32 New England Logan Mankins - OG

Don't really get a pro-bowler until pick 11 -13 with Ware, Steroids, and Brown.

Braylon Edwards is definitely Pro Bowl worthy, and Brown was performing at that level before the injury.

[balta1701-A]

Braylon Edwards is definitely Pro Bowl worthy, and Brown was performing at that level before the injury.

Damn, Angelo should have known to trade up

[BearSox]

I wouldn't say any of the picks were completely brutal, it was just some were reaches at the time.

 

If any, the Benson pick was probably the worst. The 4th pick was huge, and the Bears already had TJ, which made the pick even more worthless.

Okay, who do you take instead of him?

 

Also, Benson was the most logical pick anyway. He was a beast in college and looked like a sure thing.

[BearSox]

Another note about draft picks... While Angelo may have been "GM" since 2001, he did not have full GM powers until after Jauron (he had a clause in his contract where he had power over any decisions about the roster, Angelo basically was just the head scout with the title of GM) was fired and 2004 was his first real draft where he got to make all the decisions.

 

ALL PLAYERS DRAFTED THAT WERE REALLY DRAFTED BY ANGELO:

2004 (In parenthesis, first number is round #, second is overall pick #)

Tommie Harris (1-14)

Tank Johnson (2-47)

Bernard Berrian (3-78)

Nathan Vasher (4-110)

Leon Joe (4-112)

Claude Harriott (5-147)

Craig Krenzel (5-148)

Alfonso Marshall (7-215)

 

2005 (3rd rounder used w/ Booker to get Ogunleye)

Cedric Benson (1-4)

Mark Bradley (2-39)

Kyle Orton (4-106)

Airese Currie (5-140)

Chris Harris (6-181)

Rod Wilson (7-220)

2006

Danieal Manning (2-42)

Devin Hester (2-57)

Dusty Dvoracek (3-73)

Jamar Williams (4-120)

Mark Anderson (5-159)

J.D. Runnels (6-195)

Tyler Reed (6-200)

2007

Greg Olsen (1-31)

Dan Bazuin (2-62)

Garrett Wolfe (3-93)

Michael Okwo (3-94)

Josh Beekman (4-130)

Kevin Payne (5-167)

Corey Graham (5-168)

Trumaine McBride (7-221)

Aaron Brant (7-241)

[jackie hayes]

Damn, Angelo should have known to trade up

Umm...you said top 10, not 4-10. I'm just saying.

[DABEARSDABOMB]

I disagree...they would have chosen Cadillac Williams who, while not being amazing, has been much better than Benson.

Aside from his rookie season has he really been that much better than Benson? Williams is coming off a very severe injury (more so than Benson's) and was given a steady dose of carries from the get-go. I'm not necessarily makinga case that he is hands down better then Ced, but I think it is realistic at that this point in the career had Ced received a similar amount of carries that they would statistically have similar careers (but than again, I think Benson can be an above average back with a solid line and he showed to me this season that he can do good things when he gets some blocking; he just can't be effective when he has a horrid line, but most backs can't be).

[DABEARSDABOMB]

Who drafted Devin Hester?

Aside from the Garret Wolfe pick, there wasn't a pick I hated/disliked more than the Hester one. Hell, that alone shows just how much I know

[jason]

Okay, who do you take instead of him?

 

Also, Benson was the most logical pick anyway. He was a beast in college and looked like a sure thing.

 

Wrong. Unequivocally wrong. The Bears had TJ at RB, and they had nearly no talent at all at WR.

 

The most "logical" pick was clearly Mike Williams. And while he hasn't panned out, he was easily the most logical pick.

 

As a side note, I would like to point outthat no player can be gauged in conjuction with a team he has never played for. Additionally, we can't go back in time and change the picks. So, to say that Mike Williams or Cedric Benson would have stunk if put on different teams is just conjecture. A ton of stuff can change with a change of scenery, change of supporting cast, and change of coaching. Who's to say that Mike Williams wouldn't have meshed perfectly in Chicago, the coaching perfect for him, and the limelight more suited for his style? We don't know. I still think the kid has a world of talent and some of the best hands in the NFL. Like Bradley, Berrian, Hester, Wolfe, and Olsen...Mike Williams has been misused.

[brletich]

Like Bradley, Berrian, Hester, Wolfe, and Olsen...Mike Williams has been misused.

 

That just tells me he would have stunk here...knowing Turner he would have just sent him on fly patterns every snap...Just like Wolfe up the gut from the 2 or that G**D**M bubble screen to Hester...I HATE that play!!

[dasox24]

Another note about draft picks... While Angelo may have been "GM" since 2001, he did not have full GM powers until after Jauron (he had a clause in his contract where he had power over any decisions about the roster, Angelo basically was just the head scout with the title of GM) was fired and 2004 was his first real draft where he got to make all the decisions.

 

ALL PLAYERS DRAFTED THAT WERE REALLY DRAFTED BY ANGELO:

2004 (In parenthesis, first number is round #, second is overall pick #)

Tommie Harris (1-14)

Tank Johnson (2-47)

Bernard Berrian (3-78)

Nathan Vasher (4-110)

Leon Joe (4-112)

Claude Harriott (5-147)

Craig Krenzel (5-148)

Alfonso Marshall (7-215)

 

2005 (3rd rounder used w/ Booker to get Ogunleye)

Cedric Benson (1-4)

Mark Bradley (2-39)

Kyle Orton (4-106)

Airese Currie (5-140)

Chris Harris (6-181)

Rod Wilson (7-220)

2006

Danieal Manning (2-42)

Devin Hester (2-57)

Dusty Dvoracek (3-73)

Jamar Williams (4-120)

Mark Anderson (5-159)

J.D. Runnels (6-195)

Tyler Reed (6-200)

2007

Greg Olsen (1-31)

Dan Bazuin (2-62)

Garrett Wolfe (3-93)

Michael Okwo (3-94)

Josh Beekman (4-130)

Kevin Payne (5-167)

Corey Graham (5-168)

Trumaine McBride (7-221)

Aaron Brant (7-241)

So, using that list, I guess I'd have to say...

The Good:

Tommie Harris

Bernard Berrian

Nathan Vashar

Devin Hester

Mark Anderson

Greg Olsen

Trumaine McBride

 

The Bad:

Tank Johnson (just awful character)

Leon Joe (only b/c he didn't even make the team out of training camp and was a 4th rounder)

 

The rest is To Be Determined. I think we need another year to know what to consider Benson, Dvoracek, Manning, Bradley, Bazuin, Wolfe, and Orton. They all have a chance to prove themselves, so none can be considered a bad pick yet. i.e. If Bradley plays like we've seen at times; Bazuin becomes an Alex Brown-type - decent pass rusher and run stuffer --> does neither thing exceptionally well, but good enough to be a good/very good starter; Wolfe develops niche as a 3rd down, scat back; Manning locks up the FS spot with better tackling and recognition of plays; Benson runs like the was beginning to in that last 2 games before he got hurt. I have to believe he'll be better next year with a hopefully re-vamped and improved O-Line)

 

And I really can't consider anything after the 4th round a "bad" pick b/c those guys don't typically ever contribute, if they make the team at all.

[LT2_3]

Wrong. Unequivocally wrong. The Bears had TJ at RB, and they had nearly no talent at all at WR.

 

The most "logical" pick was clearly Mike Williams. And while he hasn't panned out, he was easily the most logical pick.

 

As a side note, I would like to point outthat no player can be gauged in conjuction with a team he has never played for. Additionally, we can't go back in time and change the picks. So, to say that Mike Williams or Cedric Benson would have stunk if put on different teams is just conjecture. A ton of stuff can change with a change of scenery, change of supporting cast, and change of coaching. Who's to say that Mike Williams wouldn't have meshed perfectly in Chicago, the coaching perfect for him, and the limelight more suited for his style? We don't know. I still think the kid has a world of talent and some of the best hands in the NFL. Like Bradley, Berrian, Hester, Wolfe, and Olsen...Mike Williams has been misused.

 

Interesting use of the word "logic" along with a splash of revisionist history. You obviously think that teams should draft based on need regardless of whether the best guy on the board at the top need position is ranked where the team is picking or not. Even though I disagree with that concept, WR wasn't the biggest need at the time of the draft. At RB, all we had were TJ and AP while we had just signed Moose to a large contract to be our "Posession" receiver. Even if I bought that a WR was the top need, Williams would have been the wrong type. The need would have been a speedster and the top prospects would have been Troy Williamson or Mark Clayton. Mike Williams would have been redundant with the signing of Moose.

 

Your opinion of MW is bizarre. Before that draft, I didn't like MW at all. In fact, I believe I said something along the lines of "Mike Williams won't make it in the NFL as a WR with his inability to keep weight off. He's young and his frame can handle extra weight too easily. He'll probably make someone a good TE someday once he gets over the idea that he's a WR at this level - and it probably won't be with the team that drafts him."

 

As for your concept that Williams would have worked out differently if drafted by the Bears, I laugh. There is some validity to your concept, but NOT when taken to the extreme. Mike Williams has been a failure on 3 teams in 3 years. I just don't see how that can be spun positively.

[adam]

Okay, who do you take instead of him?

 

Also, Benson was the most logical pick anyway. He was a beast in college and looked like a sure thing.

WR would have been a more logical position to select, but like I said in another post, he was probably the "best available". I guess it was a good thing that we did not draft a WR, because it would've been Mike Williams.

[flea]

I think I wanted us to trade down at the time & take Clayton(went to Ravens)

[nfoligno]

This is the only valid and acceptable answer to the scenario. I hate it, but it's true. One can't fault an organization for attempting to draft that special player. It just sucks that the Saints hit on Bush, the Vikings got a jackpot in AP, and the Bears crapped-out with Benson. And, despite the fact that I agree in majority with your parallels, notice the one major difference in the "special player" category: game breaking ability. Benson was a stud coming out of college, but there is no way in hell I thought he was one of those "special" talents that the Bears simply had to have. In fact, I have a hard time believing anyone thought that at the time. I watched his highlight reel stuff, and saw a ton of his games on TV, but never did I think he was something other than a great college player who would probably turn into a good-to-very good pro RB.

 

Okay, lets us then skip the rest, and agree to disagree on whether RB was a need, or to what level. Let us simply say RB was not a need, and go from there.

 

You did not then, and absoluteldy not now, believe Benson ever had the look of that "special back". While I understand that, and it is your opinion, it was not the consensus. The consensus then was that he was in fact a franchise back. That he was the sort of player you could not only use as a workhorse, but one you could build an offense around. I know the style RB you like, and the examples listed above (Bush/AP) absolutely fit into your ideal RB. One w/ the potential to hit a homerun on every carry, but that is not the only style franchise back, at least not to most, especially in Chicago where you play the majority of your games on a slower surface and often in bad weather.

 

I remember some years ago when Tomlinson was in the draft. Some felt he would be that special back, while others were far from certain. He came from a smaller school, weaker competition, and a non-pro style offense. Many of his runs were pitches, and he had not proven himself as an inside rusher or receiver. Hard to imagine that now, but it was true then. Regardless, many scouted him as a franchise RB, thus why SD was willing to pass on Vick. I think they got the better end of the deal, especially since they also got Brees w/ Atlanta's other pick.

 

So I go back to this. While you never felt Benson was that franchise back, many did, including our staff. As of this moment, it appears they were wrong, but that doesn't mean the thinking behind the pick was wrong. Only the scouting. While I personally like to factor need in the draft, as I am not a pure "best player available", but at the same time, if you believe there is a franchise player available, you take him. The only exception I would make is if you already have a franchise tier player at that position. For example, right now CB is far from a need, but if we had a player we were looking at who we felt was the next Deion Sanders or Champ Bailey, I would be hard pressed to pass. Not close to a need, but sometimes you simply can't pass.

[brletich]

He had a better rookie season and that's the only thing better he has done.

 

Overall he has been a better back than Benson so far. The future is in question because of that knee injury, but thus far caddy has been better.

[balta1701-A]

This is the only valid and acceptable answer to the scenario. I hate it, but it's true. One can't fault an organization for attempting to draft that special player. It just sucks that the Saints hit on Bush, the Vikings got a jackpot in AP, and the Bears crapped-out with Benson. And, despite the fact that I agree in majority with your parallels, notice the one major difference in the "special player" category: game breaking ability. Benson was a stud coming out of college, but there is no way in hell I thought he was one of those "special" talents that the Bears simply had to have. In fact, I have a hard time believing anyone thought that at the time. I watched his highlight reel stuff, and saw a ton of his games on TV, but never did I think he was something other than a great college player who would probably turn into a good-to-very good pro RB.

Right now, Bush isn't looking like the hottest player in the world like he was coming out of USC. And I still am less than convinced that Peterson can stay healthy.

[DrunkBomber]

Wrong. Unequivocally wrong. The Bears had TJ at RB, and they had nearly no talent at all at WR.

 

The most "logical" pick was clearly Mike Williams. And while he hasn't panned out, he was easily the most logical pick.

 

As a side note, I would like to point outthat no player can be gauged in conjuction with a team he has never played for. Additionally, we can't go back in time and change the picks. So, to say that Mike Williams or Cedric Benson would have stunk if put on different teams is just conjecture. A ton of stuff can change with a change of scenery, change of supporting cast, and change of coaching. Who's to say that Mike Williams wouldn't have meshed perfectly in Chicago, the coaching perfect for him, and the limelight more suited for his style? We don't know. I still think the kid has a world of talent and some of the best hands in the NFL. Like Bradley, Berrian, Hester, Wolfe, and Olsen...Mike Williams has been misused.

I agree. I wanted Williams too and we desperately needed (need) WR help and most draft boards had him listed as the top player in the draft. The only difference if we would have drafted Williams instead of Benson we would have a real running back instead of Benson and would have more than likely cut ties with Williams by now.

[jason]

Interesting use of the word "logic" along with a splash of revisionist history. You obviously think that teams should draft based on need regardless of whether the best guy on the board at the top need position is ranked where the team is picking or not. Even though I disagree with that concept, WR wasn't the biggest need at the time of the draft. At RB, all we had were TJ and AP while we had just signed Moose to a large contract to be our "Posession" receiver. Even if I bought that a WR was the top need, Williams would have been the wrong type. The need would have been a speedster and the top prospects would have been Troy Williamson or Mark Clayton. Mike Williams would have been redundant with the signing of Moose.

 

Your opinion of MW is bizarre. Before that draft, I didn't like MW at all. In fact, I believe I said something along the lines of "Mike Williams won't make it in the NFL as a WR with his inability to keep weight off. He's young and his frame can handle extra weight too easily. He'll probably make someone a good TE someday once he gets over the idea that he's a WR at this level - and it probably won't be with the team that drafts him."

 

As for your concept that Williams would have worked out differently if drafted by the Bears, I laugh. There is some validity to your concept, but NOT when taken to the extreme. Mike Williams has been a failure on 3 teams in 3 years. I just don't see how that can be spun positively.

 

You know, LT2, I remember you saying that. However, aside from you and about two or three guys who thought it would be a good idea to get Benson, nearly everyone else was saying that the Bears needed something else. The overwhelming majority wanted Mike Williams during all the debates.

 

Williams was one of the most dominating players in college, and nearly all thought he would end up doing so in the pros. While he may not have been the burner that would have been preferred at the time, he was nonetheless an incredibly talented WR, a position in which the Bears were not that good.

 

There is no revisionist history there.

 

You and I may disagree on the concept of "what if player A had played on Team B", but that will be the agree to disagree moment. I truly believe that many of these pros are so fragile mentally, with inflated egos and self-worth, not to mention just plain being stupid a lot of the time, that if there is any failure whatsoever, they buckle, the crumble under the weight of their disappointments. They simply aren't accustomed to being anything other than the Big Man on Campus.

 

I believe Mike Williams to be a perfect example of this mindset. His talent and teams' needs allowed him to get to the NFL, and he probably didn't have to work hard until the NFL; he has probably been getting his ass kissed since he was 10. Not so much in the NFL, and it has destroyed him.

[jason]

Okay, lets us then skip the rest, and agree to disagree on whether RB was a need, or to what level. Let us simply say RB was not a need, and go from there.

 

You did not then, and absoluteldy not now, believe Benson ever had the look of that "special back". While I understand that, and it is your opinion, it was not the consensus. The consensus then was that he was in fact a franchise back. That he was the sort of player you could not only use as a workhorse, but one you could build an offense around. I know the style RB you like, and the examples listed above (Bush/AP) absolutely fit into your ideal RB. One w/ the potential to hit a homerun on every carry, but that is not the only style franchise back, at least not to most, especially in Chicago where you play the majority of your games on a slower surface and often in bad weather.

 

So I go back to this. While you never felt Benson was that franchise back, many did, including our staff. As of this moment, it appears they were wrong, but that doesn't mean the thinking behind the pick was wrong. Only the scouting. While I personally like to factor need in the draft, as I am not a pure "best player available", but at the same time, if you believe there is a franchise player available, you take him. The only exception I would make is if you already have a franchise tier player at that position. For example, right now CB is far from a need, but if we had a player we were looking at who we felt was the next Deion Sanders or Champ Bailey, I would be hard pressed to pass. Not close to a need, but sometimes you simply can't pass.

 

1) I don't think Adrian Peterson had too much problem accellerating on the slow surface in Chicago. I've also noticed that Devin Hester seems to be pretty fast in Chicago. In other words, that logic is faulty. Sure, it's great to have that bruiser in the one or two games a year when Soldier field gets messy, if it even happens, but it's probably better to have a guy like Devin Hester who has the potential to change a game on every play. Aside from Jamal Lewis, Lendale White, and maybe one other, the top 15 RBs in the league, statistically by yardage, are all faster, quick-hitter-types.

2) In all honesty, I wouldn't mind a plodding, blasting, Earl Campbell franchise back. If the guy can keep the chains moving with constant four and five yarders, causing the safeties to creep up and allow the passing game holes, I'm all for it. But usually the guy who does that in college doesn't do that in the pros. That's why the quick-hitters are typically better pro RBs.

3) Like I said before, I agree with you. If a team thinks they have a franchise guy on the board, and he is a can't miss, sometimes you gotta go BPA. If you know Peyton Manning is going to turn into Peyton Manning, and you happen to have a Carson Palmer, you might just have to draft Manning and find a trade-partner for Palmer, despite the fact that he is great in his own right. I just didn't think Benson was that guy. And from what I remember about all the debates back then, most thought he was good, but not as special as the Bears' staff apparently thought. As you said, it appears that those of us who thought Benson was a wasted pick are right. With that said, I hope he proves me wrong next year.

[ChileBear]

1) I don't think Adrian Peterson had too much problem accellerating on the slow surface in Chicago. I've also noticed that Devin Hester seems to be pretty fast in Chicago. In other words, that logic is faulty. Sure, it's great to have that bruiser in the one or two games a year when Soldier field gets messy, if it even happens, but it's probably better to have a guy like Devin Hester who has the potential to change a game on every play. Aside from Jamal Lewis, Lendale White, and maybe one other, the top 15 RBs in the league, statistically by yardage, are all faster, quick-hitter-types.

2) In all honesty, I wouldn't mind a plodding, blasting, Earl Campbell franchise back. If the guy can keep the chains moving with constant four and five yarders, causing the safeties to creep up and allow the passing game holes, I'm all for it. But usually the guy who does that in college doesn't do that in the pros. That's why the quick-hitters are typically better pro RBs.

3) Like I said before, I agree with you. If a team thinks they have a franchise guy on the board, and he is a can't miss, sometimes you gotta go BPA. If you know Peyton Manning is going to turn into Peyton Manning, and you happen to have a Carson Palmer, you might just have to draft Manning and find a trade-partner for Palmer, despite the fact that he is great in his own right. I just didn't think Benson was that guy. And from what I remember about all the debates back then, most thought he was good, but not as special as the Bears' staff apparently thought. As you said, it appears that those of us who thought Benson was a wasted pick are right. With that said, I hope he proves me wrong next year.

 

 

It's just unfortunate that Benson is such a bust. And worse, we are going to be stuck with himas THE RB for next season.

[BearSox]

Yes, Benson is a bust... yeah, um, BULLSHIT!