The Offense

[Wesson44]

We have an offense that needs help. So what do you do as the GM. IMHO i would look what we have left in FA and get the cheapest but best player out there like Starks from Pitt,Scott from Indy or the Seahawks Locklear or the guy from the Chargers Olivera (or somthing to that nature) Then I would go drafting. I would get Clady(OT) in the first RD. Flacco (QB)in the second RD, Charles or Johnson(RB) in the third McGlynn(G/T) in the fourth, Hubbard or Hall(WR) in the fifth, six and seventh best player in those rounds. We might need to get and extra DT and FS too

[AZ54]

No to Flacco in Rd 2. Grab a RB there or an OG, or WR.

[Wesson44]

Why you don't like Flacco?

[Guest TerraTor]

We have an offense that needs help. So what do you do as the GM. IMHO i would look what we have left in FA and get the cheapest but best player out there like Starks from Pitt,Scott from Indy or the Seahawks Locklear or the guy from the Chargers Olivera (or somthing to that nature) Then I would go drafting. I would get Clady(OT) in the first RD. Flacco (QB)in the second RD, Charles or Johnson(RB) in the third McGlynn(G/T) in the fourth, Hubbard or Hall(WR) in the fifth, six and seventh best player in those rounds. We might need to get and extra DT and FS too

 

I think we really need to get some FA Olineman. Olivea was great and for some reason tanked and rode the pine the rest of the season.

 

As for the draft, unless we get OL thru free agency, i know the staff will select an OT. However, i still think we need a weapon at RB, because right now, we could have a high quality OLINE but they're blocking for nobody. Also we need a good young reciever. no more reaches in the 2nd for guys like mark bradley. I like the idea of flacco in the second too. We need to get more speed and power at S as well as DT depth.

 

As for my RB ploy, I doubt well see mendenhall. But i have been watching alot of tape on Matt Forte and man does he look tuff and fast too.

[fenom283]

I think we really need to get some FA Olineman. Olivea was great and for some reason tanked and rode the pine the rest of the season.

 

As for the draft, unless we get OL thru free agency, i know the staff will select an OT. However, i still think we need a weapon at RB, because right now, we could have a high quality OLINE but they're blocking for nobody. Also we need a good young reciever. no more reaches in the 2nd for guys like mark bradley. I like the idea of flacco in the second too. We need to get more speed and power at S as well as DT depth.

 

As for my RB ploy, I doubt well see mendenhall. But i have been watching alot of tape on Matt Forte and man does he look tuff and fast too.

Mendehall is a dream pick but we would need to get a OT first for that to happen. Running backs are coming out of the wood works now but i would love a game changer. I was a huge advocate for Stewart but he has the same bruising style as Benson who we are not cutting this year, Mendenhall is a better compliment and future replacement for Benson.

[nfoligno]

Is that draft realistic?

 

Clady is expected to be gone by our pick, and I personally even think Williams will be gone. Flacco is now said to a late 1st rounder, and Charles has had a good offseason and could well be a 2nd rounder.

 

I would love Clady - Flacco - Charles, but I am not sure any of the three will be available w/ those respective picks.

[balta1701-A]

At least 2, preferably 3 new Offensive linemen. That's the Bears' biggest need. By far.

[nfoligno]

At least 2, preferably 3 new Offensive linemen. That's the Bears' biggest need. By far.

 

While you will not get an argument from me about OL being a massive need, or w/ the idea of taking 2 or 3 OL in the draft, I do have to question the "biggest need, by far" thought. I am not going to argue OL, but..

 

WR - Do we have the worst WR corp in the NFL? Even for those like myself who were/are very high on the Booker/Lloyd signings, the reality is Booker was signed to a 2 year deal and Lloyd got a 1 year deal for the vet minimum. Neither are more than short term help. Bradley has shown so little, it is a joke, and was frankly, in need of loads of development entering the league. Hester is a gifted athlete, but we have no clue whether or not he is a WR. And now we read Davis could be gone.

 

This is just ugly. There is little to love short term, or long term.

 

QB - Wow. How pathetic has this franchise been, and today, does it look any different?

 

RB - Hey, I am a Benson fan, but even I admit he is on his last chance, and as little as the offense appears to be upgrading, I doubt we will see greatness from Benson, which means we again will be looking for a new RB.

 

I am not arguing against OL. I was screaming to draft OL this time last year. My point is only that, as bad as the OL is, the whole offense is pretty freaking awful.

[balta1701-A]

QB - Wow. How pathetic has this franchise been, and today, does it look any different?

 

RB - Hey, I am a Benson fan, but even I admit he is on his last chance, and as little as the offense appears to be upgrading, I doubt we will see greatness from Benson, which means we again will be looking for a new RB.

 

I am not arguing against OL. I was screaming to draft OL this time last year. My point is only that, as bad as the OL is, the whole offense is pretty freaking awful.

In terms of these 2 positions specifically...I would argue that it was the complete disaster that was the O-Line last year that kept them from looking better. I could well be proven wrong in that assessment, but I'm not willing to write off any of the guys the Bears have in their backfield when Benson was being hit 2 yards behind the LOS every play and Grossman was making half his throws on the way to the ground.

[adam]

In terms of these 2 positions specifically...I would argue that it was the complete disaster that was the O-Line last year that kept them from looking better. I could well be proven wrong in that assessment, but I'm not willing to write off any of the guys the Bears have in their backfield when Benson was being hit 2 yards behind the LOS every play and Grossman was making half his throws on the way to the ground.

It also comes down to the play calling as well. The Bears telegraph too many of their plays.

 

A solid O-line with some aggressive play calling makes RBs and QBs much better. If Rex can just play pitch and catch, he is pretty damn good, but when he can't even get to a 3 step drop before having to bring the ball down, something is wrong. If Benson gets through the DL, he normally has some pretty good runs. The problem was he was almost always hit at or near the LOS.

[nfoligno]

I am not writing off the backfield either, but our two starting WRs are gone, and the group we have may be the worst in the league. At QB, even if we build an OL and Rex improves, he is under contract for only this year.

 

I am not saying OL isn't a need, or even our top need, but I do not think it is far more so than WR or QB.

[Guest TerraTor]

I am not writing off the backfield either, but our two starting WRs are gone, and the group we have may be the worst in the league. At QB, even if we build an OL and Rex improves, he is under contract for only this year.

 

I am not saying OL isn't a need, or even our top need, but I do not think it is far more so than WR or QB.

 

This is my view too. I am not and never will be a fan of drafting OL in the 1st or even 2nd round. i dont care if we could even get Jake Long. Like i have said a milllion times, we have no threats at any offensive position right now (not including TE). Benson would be terrible playing behind the 1995 Cowboys OL. And regardless of his rediculous contract, losing Berrian is going to kill us.

 

We need to get some FA's for the Oline, the 05' and 06' seasons we had one of the best OL in the league (not to mention a well above RB) and they were all from free agency, except for Kruetz of course, who was 3rd Round. I think we should go this way...........

 

After FA.

 

1. Mendenhall

2. (If Flacco is gone) Best WR - Malcolm Kelly or Hardy

3. DT / OL

3. Ol / SS

4. DT/OL/LB

[nfoligno]

Wow now Terra. I was making the argument our offense is so weak that several units are equally as much a need as OL.

 

That does not affect my position on the OL though. You and I strongly disagree. I am all for drafting OL. Heck, I have said I would trade up for Clady, and would not mind taking Williams at 14. If we trade down, I would love to add Otah or Albert later.

 

I want FA OL too, but that is in addition to, not instead of, drafting OL.

 

You believe that a great OL can not make mediocre players look better. I disagree. You believe the 1995 Dallas OL wouldn't make Benson look good. I disagree. I believe that if you build a great OL, the offense will follow. I believe that great talent w/o a good OL is wasted.

 

If we trade down, other than QB, OL is what I would be targetting.

 

No need to argue. I know well you opinion. We simply disagree. I just wanted to make my point clear as you seem to think we agree. We don't.

[Guest TerraTor]

Wow now Terra. I was making the argument our offense is so weak that several units are equally as much a need as OL.

 

That does not affect my position on the OL though. You and I strongly disagree. I am all for drafting OL. Heck, I have said I would trade up for Clady, and would not mind taking Williams at 14. If we trade down, I would love to add Otah or Albert later.

 

I want FA OL too, but that is in addition to, not instead of, drafting OL.

 

You believe that a great OL can not make mediocre players look better. I disagree. You believe the 1995 Dallas OL wouldn't make Benson look good. I disagree. I believe that if you build a great OL, the offense will follow. I believe that great talent w/o a good OL is wasted.

 

If we trade down, other than QB, OL is what I would be targetting.

 

No need to argue. I know well you opinion. We simply disagree. I just wanted to make my point clear as you seem to think we agree. We don't.

 

 

Alrighty, i should remember no-one agrees with me ever, haha, except Trav D.... and MadLithuanian once in a while

[madlithuanian]

I'm with you on this one TerraTor!

 

Mendenhall in the 1st!

 

Alrighty, i should remember no-one agrees with me ever, haha, except Trav D.... and MadLithuanian once in a while

[AZ54]

Why I don't like Flacco as a first or second round pick:

 

1) Left Pitt because he couldn't win competition against a guy nobody is talking about for the draft. Big red flag IMO.

 

2) When he left Pitt did he go to another big name school to prove himself? Nope, took the easy road where he could start guaranteed at a school that was basically back home. Makes me wonder if he's afraid of competition. How is that going to play out in the NFL where every pass is scrutinized?

 

3) Played against weak competition (William&Mary, West Chester, Rhode Island, Towson (has anyone besides me know where that is?), Monmouth, New Hampshire, Northeastern, Navy, James Madison, Richmond) all games where he had excellent completion % ~65% or better except James Madison where he had 55%.

 

 

4) Against better competition his completion % dropped significantly (Villanova 46%, and playoff games Delaware St 55%, Northern Iowa 55.6%, Southern Illinois 55.3%, Appalachian St 48%). I'm sure somebody will say he didn't have first rate WRs and for sure we're not talking about drafting his WRs. Then again we're not talking about drafting the DBs he faced either. Nor any of the players he went up against and the NFL is a huge leap in speed and scheme just from a top flight school let alone what he's seen on the field.

 

5) Slow release. I can rebuild a levee in New Orleans in the time it takes him to throw the ball. Ok maybe just a couple shovels worth of dirt but his release is about 3x of Rex's.

 

6) Not very accurate based on the Delaware St game but I'll admit one game isn't enough to make a full judgment.

 

7) Telegraphed passes (see slow release) will make it easy for NFL DBs to get a jump on the ball making any out pattern a gamble.

 

8) He's at least a two year project more likely 3 years with too many question marks in my opinion to warrant a day one pick. Our QB situation is terrible with Rex on a 1 year deal and Orton on a 2 year deal. Both could flame out this year. If we're giving up a day one pick I want a guy more ready to start next year or at worst after two years. That means someone who's faced better competition.

 

9) He runs ok but I don't see him as a great scrambler. Not so much a knock as he has better mobility than any of our current QBs. Does he know when to run and when to stay in the pocket? I just view this as part of his learning curve.

 

10) Beware the fast rising player in the draft who jumps up a lot AFTER the games are done!

[nfoligno]

Ignore duplicate post

[nfoligno]

1) Left Pitt because he couldn't win competition against a guy nobody is talking about for the draft. Big red flag IMO.

 

Maybe no one is talking about Palko, but I believe when Flacco was there, Palko was the set starter, and even their team MVP back in '04. Flacco may have been the better QB, but when you are behind a more established QB, you often do not have the opportunity to prove it.

 

2) When he left Pitt did he go to another big name school to prove himself? Nope, took the easy road where he could start guaranteed at a school that was basically back home. Makes me wonder if he's afraid of competition. How is that going to play out in the NFL where every pass is scrutinized?

 

He wanted to play. He plays a position that only starts one person, and plays a position college's scout and bring in scholorship players to play it. I do not see this as a big deal. I mean, he wanted to play football, and went to a school that was going to give him the opportunity to do so. You can say he avoided competition, but I am sorry, in college, you do not see the big schools host that much of a QB competition. Like in the NFL, colleges have the prospects they bring in and give scholorships to, and those are the kids that are essentially names the starters.

 

3) Played against weak competition (William&Mary, West Chester, Rhode Island, Towson (has anyone besides me know where that is?), Monmouth, New Hampshire, Northeastern, Navy, James Madison, Richmond) all games where he had excellent completion % ~65% or better except James Madison where he had 55%.

 

His competition is absolutely a concern. If he put up the stats he did, w/ his size and arm strength, against top competition, he would be a top 5 pick, and not in our reach. Because he did it against lower competition, there is that question mark, and thus a player we have a chance to take. That is not to say we should take him, but only to say we would not even have an opportunity if he did it against top competition.

 

Also, on level of competition, a key for small school prospects is how they perform at the senior bowl when matched up against upper end competition. According to every source, he was the best looking QB, and one of the best looking prospects in general, at the senior bowl. He was facing top end competition, and performed very well.

 

4) Against better competition his completion % dropped significantly (Villanova 46%, and playoff games Delaware St 55%, Northern Iowa 55.6%, Southern Illinois 55.3%, Appalachian St 48%). I'm sure somebody will say he didn't have first rate WRs and for sure we're not talking about drafting his WRs. Then again we're not talking about drafting the DBs he faced either. Nor any of the players he went up against and the NFL is a huge leap in speed and scheme just from a top flight school let alone what he's seen on the field.

 

While these were not his highest completion percentage games, I think it also worth noting he still played well in most of those games. In 4 of the 5 games you mentioned (his last 4) he still had pretty good games w/ QB ratings of 150, 128, 126 & 113. He also threw zero picks in those games. So while his completion percentage may not have been as high (though only in Appalachian was it low) he still had pretty good games regardless.

 

 

5) Slow release. I can rebuild a levee in New Orleans in the time it takes him to throw the ball. Ok maybe just a couple shovels worth of dirt but his release is about 3x of Rex's.

 

I hadn't read that his release is so slow. I have read he has a unique release/throwing motion. I have read his release isn't fast, but I have not read it is slow. What I have read is that his throw speed, or RPM as scouts talk about, is so good that it offsets the release. He may not get the ball out as quick as some, but the ball gets there quicker than most, and thus the two are offset.

 

6) Not very accurate based on the Delaware St game but I'll admit one game isn't enough to make a full judgment.

 

As you said, it was just one game. Accuracy is considered a huge asset for Flacco. Not only that, but I think you need to take a closer look at the Delaware St game. He had a freaking 150 QB percentage. He didn't rack up huge stats, but that may have something to do w/ a RB putting up nearly 300 yards, and the game being a total blowout. They were up 44 - 0 until a fumble recovery was returned for a TD in the 4th quarter, giving State their only points for the game. Not sure why you would pick this game as an example.

 

And by the way. You mention his 55% being low. Rex had better than 55% only twice this entire year.

 

7) Telegraphed passes (see slow release) will make it easy for NFL DBs to get a jump on the ball making any out pattern a gamble.

 

This could be a legit issue, though I have not read a lot about his telegraphing passes. At the same time, he has so many positives, including arm strength and football intelligence (from what I have read), I wonder how great of an issue this is.

 

8) He's at least a two year project more likely 3 years with too many question marks in my opinion to warrant a day one pick. Our QB situation is terrible with Rex on a 1 year deal and Orton on a 2 year deal. Both could flame out this year. If we're giving up a day one pick I want a guy more ready to start next year or at worst after two years. That means someone who's faced better competition.

 

You say he is at least a 2, or maybe 3, year project, but what QB is different? I don't just mean this year, but any year. While there have been exceptions, I would argue that most any QBs take 2 or 3 years to develop. It doesn't matter if they come from USC or Appalachian State. QB is not a position many come in and are simply ready. I always laugh at that idea, and point to how Cade McNown was said to be the most NFL ready QB in that class.

 

Also, if not now, when? Any QB we take later in the draft will have just as many question marks, and likely not as high of a ceiling. If we simply pass on QB this year, we only prolong the whole process.

 

W/ all that said, I think it comes down to football IQ. I honestly do not know enough about him to speak on this. Is he considered a smart QB who picks up the offense and truly knows it, or is he a QB that somewhat struggles w/ the playbook? Is he the sort that not only learns his offense, but also can read a defense. That is the sort of QB, regardless from what level of competition, that I think develops quicker in the NFL. I honestly do not know where Flacco is in football IQ.

 

9) He runs ok but I don't see him as a great scrambler. Not so much a knock as he has better mobility than any of our current QBs. Does he know when to run and when to stay in the pocket? I just view this as part of his learning curve.

 

From what I have read, he is not a threat to run, but is pretty solid avoiding the rush, throwing on the run and stepping up in the pocket to buy time. One thing I read in this area that is as positive as anything is when they talk about how he will stand strong in the pocket, and doesn't seemed flustered by the rush. That is key for me, as it goes to the mental aspect. I remember when Simms came out. I said I didn't want any part of him because I watched him a lot, and anytime he was rushed, he simply broke down. He lost sight of the field and seemed to get that 'deer in the headlights' syndrome. From what I have read, Flacco is quite different. That is the sort of QB I want.

 

10) Beware the fast rising player in the draft who jumps up a lot AFTER the games are done!

 

I am always hessitant for fast risers too, but small school prospects may be a different matter, at least to a degree. Small school prospects are not as highly scouted during the year, and do not have the name recognition due to where they play. Scouts talk about this all the time. Teams focus on the big schools, and small school prospects don't get the notice or review, and thus do not start out as highly rated. He finished the year as about a 3rd round prospect, but then rose due, as much as anything, to finally getting a lot of notice and analysis. Then he goes into the senior bowl and plays against the top competition he had not faced before, and looked great. That jumped his grade considerably, as it should. He is now considered a late 1st, early 2nd prospect. That is a pretty big jump, but again, I think it has more than anything to do w/ being a small school prospect, and that is simply how things go.

 

I am not 100% sold on him, but I like him quite a bit. I feel it is an absolute must that we find a QB this year and begin developing him. We need to find our franchise QB, and the longer we wait, the longer the develop process.