The draft that could have been

[nfoligno]

Overall, I thought it was a pretty good draft, looking at the individual players we got. At the same time, I can not help but feel this draft will go down as the draft that could have been. I feel we missed the bus on some players, and while there are later picks I like individually, I question the selections due to who we passed on.

 

1st - I like Williams. I like him a lot. At the same time, I can not help but feel Albert will be a far better player. Williams may indeed be the better, immediate, prospect, but down the road, I think we look back and wonder why we didn't take Albert

 

2nd - Forte - I like Forte. I think most do as well. This fills a need, and w/ a player most like. At the same time, I feel it was a massive mistake passing on Brohm. For years and years, we have suffered as the media continually posted the stat showing how many QBs we have started in the time Farve has started for GB. W/ a group of QBs on the roster that make us a league wide joke, we pass on what I believe will be a franchise QB. Worse, GB ends up getting him. So while I give Forte a solid grade, I just can not escape the feeling we missed out on Brohm.

 

3rd - Bennett - I love this pick. Not a burner, but runs crisp routes and can use his route running to get open downfield. I see him as a Booker like Wr, maybe more. Some say Hines Ward, and i have seen others compare him to Boldin. Point is, while not a burner, he knows how to get open and use the field, and could become a damn good WR for us.

 

W/ that said, we could have gone Brohm/Jamal Charles w/ these two picks, which I feel would have been far greater than Forte/Bennett.

 

3rd - Harrison - I called it prior to the pick, at least to those I was watching the draft w/. I just knew Angelo would go DT here. He can't help himself. While many love this pick, I do not. The off-field issue isn't the biggest for me. It was a single issue, and he does not seem like a consistent problem player. At the same time, I hate when I read about a player w/ a questionable motor, and who brings inconsistent play to the field. Further, I just do not get the fit. He is considered a run stuffing DT. I thought we liked gap shooters. We sent Ian Scott packing, and I am not sure I see that much difference.

 

While we were looking at a #3 DT, we still had big needs at OG.

 

4th - Steltz. Individually, I like Steltz. At the same time, I question our need for yet another in-the-box safety. Arch is not a factor, but we do have McGowan and Payne, who has yet to really get a shot. S was a need, but IMHO, the need was at FS, not SS. I simply do not believe we needed to be adding another in-the-box SS who struggles covering routes. Again, we ignore the OL, and instead draft a position I do not feel was a need.

 

5th - Bowman - Maybe my most hated pick. Talk about drafting at a non-need position. We have two young, solid, starting CBs who are signed long term. We drafted a CB last year (McBride) who started over a veteran when Vasher went down w/ injury, and looked damn good. Also have Graham in depth. Everyone talks about Bowman's potential and upside, but his injury history is not minor. Blew out his knee one year, and Patella tendon the next. Further, as he was a junior college transfer prior to that, and played little after the transfer due to injury, this is a major project player. So we drafted a big time project, w/ major injury history, at a position we were already solid.

 

This is the sort of pick you do not mind when you are coming off a SB win, w/ few needs, and are in position for luxury pick/gambles. We still had big needs to address, and I just do not feel this was a good pick. People talk about his potential, but w/ Vasher and Tillman locked in, what is his potential. Nickel DB? And that is if he can stay healthy and develop. Huge gamble at a non-need position. Huge mistake, IMHO.

 

5th - Davis - First, is he a TE or DE. He played both as a senior. My 2nd most disliked pick. We just drafted Olsen in the 1st, and re-signed Clark. Could use a 3rd TE, but seriously. St. Clair is still our starting OG, and we have no depth on the OL, and yet we are drafting a #3 TE?

 

7th - Baldwin - Entering this draft, the three positions I would have said we were most stocked would have been CB, TE and DE. Well, we just drafted a CB and TE, so it only makes sense to now draft a DE, right? Brown and Wale starting, w/ a great #3 in Anderson. Bazuin was just drafted, and no clue how we find a way to get him on the field w/ the other three on the team. Baldwin may be a good player, but you can only have so many players at one position. How does Baldwin fit in?

 

7th - Adams - We finally draft an OG, and not a very good one. Big OG, but considered very unathletic. One review said it best. Big boy w/o athleticism, but will likely make the roster due to a lack of depth. Not exactly a glowing endorcement.

 

7th - LaRocque - When listing the need positions, I guess I forget LB, but Angelo didn't. To continue the trend, Angelo looks at what positions are non-needs, and drafts a prospect.

 

7th - Barton - Actually love this pick. Not very athletic, but a blue collar sort of worker who find a way to get the job done.

 

7th - Monk - Another pick I love. Hell, I love the name. Injuries in his senior year killed his stock, but he has plenty of upside at a major need position. PRIME candidate for Angelo's red shirt program. Spend a year on IR to further allow the knees the regain health and strength, while he learns and develops through practice and study.

 

If I simply look pick by pick at the individual players, I actually like most all of them. Davis is a great example. I actually very much like Davis, and think he could develop into a nice TE, and was a good value. At the same time, I just have to question drafting a #3 TE over other need positions. People talk about taking the BPA, but you can only have so many players on the roster, or at various positions. You are not going to start 3 TEs (though that could be interesting) and taking a deep depth chart guy over positions where you still need a starter is highly questionable, IMHO.

 

Here is the draft, IMHO, that could have been. This is not simply using hindsight, as these were the picks I was calling for when they were happening.

 

1st - Albert - I have no problem w/ Williams, and Williams may actually be better for us this year. I simply believe that in years to come, Albert will be a pro bowl starter, and Williams will not. I think we drafted Blake Brockermeyer (who I actually felt was a damn good LT) over a player who has the potential to be a Walter Jones.

 

2nd - Brohm - You want to win, you need a QB. There have been exceptions to the rule, but they are exceptions. If you want to win and be a long term successful team, you need a franchise QB. We do not have one, and passed on one here. Worse, our rival took him.

 

3rd - Jamal Charles - Frankly, I like Forte better, but Brohm/Charles is a great combo IMHO. The difference between Forte and Charles is simply not close to enough to pass on a QB like Brohm.

 

3rd - Caldwell - Solid WR prospect w/ speed to get downfield, and YAC ability to make a short pass into a big gain.

 

4th - Collins - I do not trade down, and instead, draft Collins, who I was very high on. In Collins, you get a guy who can challenge inside for a starting job, but otherwise would be the #3 OT w/ big upside. Everyone agrees he left school a year too soon, and needs to develop him game more, but is a great prospect to grab and do this. Provides solid a solid backup OT, which we do not have, and may potentially replace Tait down the road.

 

5th - Schuening - OGs tend to slip in the draft, and I feel this way about Schuening. He was a top 5, if not top 3, graded OG that was there in the 5th. IMHO, he could have come in and strongly challenged for the starting job at LG. Instead, we took a major project CB.

 

5th - Barrett - Okay, I said this is what I would have actually done. Barrett did not end up getting drafted until the 7th, after at least one of our picks, so this would have been a reach. Soid in-the-box safety, but if knee is an issue, we red shirt him.

 

7th - Hillis - He was the lead blocker for McFadden and Jones. Could challenge McKie as a rookie.

 

7th - Schwartz - Taking projects now. College OT who may need to move inside w/ a lack of lateral mobility.

 

7th - Barton - That's right. Yet another OL. I am stockpiling OL at this point. I am filling our depth chart out, and loading up the practice squad w/ prospects.

 

7th - Monk - I loved this Angelo pick.

 

Hey, I am not trying to pretend I am such an expert that all these players are going to be NFL studs. At the same time, I feel this would have addressed needs far better and found more productive players for us.

[madlithuanian]

nfo...

 

I wish you drafted for us instead. At least right now!

 

Overall, I thought it was a pretty good draft, looking at the individual players we got. At the same time, I can not help but feel this draft will go down as the draft that could have been. I feel we missed the bus on some players, and while there are later picks I like individually, I question the selections due to who we passed on.

 

1st - I like Williams. I like him a lot. At the same time, I can not help but feel Albert will be a far better player. Williams may indeed be the better, immediate, prospect, but down the road, I think we look back and wonder why we didn't take Albert

 

2nd - Forte - I like Forte. I think most do as well. This fills a need, and w/ a player most like. At the same time, I feel it was a massive mistake passing on Brohm. For years and years, we have suffered as the media continually posted the stat showing how many QBs we have started in the time Farve has started for GB. W/ a group of QBs on the roster that make us a league wide joke, we pass on what I believe will be a franchise QB. Worse, GB ends up getting him. So while I give Forte a solid grade, I just can not escape the feeling we missed out on Brohm.

 

3rd - Bennett - I love this pick. Not a burner, but runs crisp routes and can use his route running to get open downfield. I see him as a Booker like Wr, maybe more. Some say Hines Ward, and i have seen others compare him to Boldin. Point is, while not a burner, he knows how to get open and use the field, and could become a damn good WR for us.

 

W/ that said, we could have gone Brohm/Jamal Charles w/ these two picks, which I feel would have been far greater than Forte/Bennett.

 

3rd - Harrison - I called it prior to the pick, at least to those I was watching the draft w/. I just knew Angelo would go DT here. He can't help himself. While many love this pick, I do not. The off-field issue isn't the biggest for me. It was a single issue, and he does not seem like a consistent problem player. At the same time, I hate when I read about a player w/ a questionable motor, and who brings inconsistent play to the field. Further, I just do not get the fit. He is considered a run stuffing DT. I thought we liked gap shooters. We sent Ian Scott packing, and I am not sure I see that much difference.

 

While we were looking at a #3 DT, we still had big needs at OG.

 

4th - Steltz. Individually, I like Steltz. At the same time, I question our need for yet another in-the-box safety. Arch is not a factor, but we do have McGowan and Payne, who has yet to really get a shot. S was a need, but IMHO, the need was at FS, not SS. I simply do not believe we needed to be adding another in-the-box SS who struggles covering routes. Again, we ignore the OL, and instead draft a position I do not feel was a need.

 

5th - Bowman - Maybe my most hated pick. Talk about drafting at a non-need position. We have two young, solid, starting CBs who are signed long term. We drafted a CB last year (McBride) who started over a veteran when Vasher went down w/ injury, and looked damn good. Also have Graham in depth. Everyone talks about Bowman's potential and upside, but his injury history is not minor. Blew out his knee one year, and Patella tendon the next. Further, as he was a junior college transfer prior to that, and played little after the transfer due to injury, this is a major project player. So we drafted a big time project, w/ major injury history, at a position we were already solid.

 

This is the sort of pick you do not mind when you are coming off a SB win, w/ few needs, and are in position for luxury pick/gambles. We still had big needs to address, and I just do not feel this was a good pick. People talk about his potential, but w/ Vasher and Tillman locked in, what is his potential. Nickel DB? And that is if he can stay healthy and develop. Huge gamble at a non-need position. Huge mistake, IMHO.

 

5th - Davis - First, is he a TE or DE. He played both as a senior. My 2nd most disliked pick. We just drafted Olsen in the 1st, and re-signed Clark. Could use a 3rd TE, but seriously. St. Clair is still our starting OG, and we have no depth on the OL, and yet we are drafting a #3 TE?

 

7th - Baldwin - Entering this draft, the three positions I would have said we were most stocked would have been CB, TE and DE. Well, we just drafted a CB and TE, so it only makes sense to now draft a DE, right? Brown and Wale starting, w/ a great #3 in Anderson. Bazuin was just drafted, and no clue how we find a way to get him on the field w/ the other three on the team. Baldwin may be a good player, but you can only have so many players at one position. How does Baldwin fit in?

 

7th - Adams - We finally draft an OG, and not a very good one. Big OG, but considered very unathletic. One review said it best. Big boy w/o athleticism, but will likely make the roster due to a lack of depth. Not exactly a glowing endorcement.

 

7th - LaRocque - When listing the need positions, I guess I forget LB, but Angelo didn't. To continue the trend, Angelo looks at what positions are non-needs, and drafts a prospect.

 

7th - Barton - Actually love this pick. Not very athletic, but a blue collar sort of worker who find a way to get the job done.

 

7th - Monk - Another pick I love. Hell, I love the name. Injuries in his senior year killed his stock, but he has plenty of upside at a major need position. PRIME candidate for Angelo's red shirt program. Spend a year on IR to further allow the knees the regain health and strength, while he learns and develops through practice and study.

 

If I simply look pick by pick at the individual players, I actually like most all of them. Davis is a great example. I actually very much like Davis, and think he could develop into a nice TE, and was a good value. At the same time, I just have to question drafting a #3 TE over other need positions. People talk about taking the BPA, but you can only have so many players on the roster, or at various positions. You are not going to start 3 TEs (though that could be interesting) and taking a deep depth chart guy over positions where you still need a starter is highly questionable, IMHO.

 

Here is the draft, IMHO, that could have been. This is not simply using hindsight, as these were the picks I was calling for when they were happening.

 

1st - Albert - I have no problem w/ Williams, and Williams may actually be better for us this year. I simply believe that in years to come, Albert will be a pro bowl starter, and Williams will not. I think we drafted Blake Brockermeyer (who I actually felt was a damn good LT) over a player who has the potential to be a Walter Jones.

 

2nd - Brohm - You want to win, you need a QB. There have been exceptions to the rule, but they are exceptions. If you want to win and be a long term successful team, you need a franchise QB. We do not have one, and passed on one here. Worse, our rival took him.

 

3rd - Jamal Charles - Frankly, I like Forte better, but Brohm/Charles is a great combo IMHO. The difference between Forte and Charles is simply not close to enough to pass on a QB like Brohm.

 

3rd - Caldwell - Solid WR prospect w/ speed to get downfield, and YAC ability to make a short pass into a big gain.

 

4th - Collins - I do not trade down, and instead, draft Collins, who I was very high on. In Collins, you get a guy who can challenge inside for a starting job, but otherwise would be the #3 OT w/ big upside. Everyone agrees he left school a year too soon, and needs to develop him game more, but is a great prospect to grab and do this. Provides solid a solid backup OT, which we do not have, and may potentially replace Tait down the road.

 

5th - Schuening - OGs tend to slip in the draft, and I feel this way about Schuening. He was a top 5, if not top 3, graded OG that was there in the 5th. IMHO, he could have come in and strongly challenged for the starting job at LG. Instead, we took a major project CB.

 

5th - Barrett - Okay, I said this is what I would have actually done. Barrett did not end up getting drafted until the 7th, after at least one of our picks, so this would have been a reach. Soid in-the-box safety, but if knee is an issue, we red shirt him.

 

7th - Hillis - He was the lead blocker for McFadden and Jones. Could challenge McKie as a rookie.

 

7th - Schwartz - Taking projects now. College OT who may need to move inside w/ a lack of lateral mobility.

 

7th - Barton - That's right. Yet another OL. I am stockpiling OL at this point. I am filling our depth chart out, and loading up the practice squad w/ prospects.

 

7th - Monk - I loved this Angelo pick.

 

Hey, I am not trying to pretend I am such an expert that all these players are going to be NFL studs. At the same time, I feel this would have addressed needs far better and found more productive players for us.

[Chitownhustla]

NFO,

 

I would have loved your draft, but will say that i do like our draft.

[Controlled Chaos]

NFO...well done. I also wish you were drafting!!!!!

[nfoligno]

NFO,

 

I would have loved your draft, but will say that i do like our draft.

 

I have actually given our draft a B minus, for what that is worth. Frankly, throwing out the "what could have been" aspect, I would give our top 3 picks an A minus grade. For me, the draft grade drops from there, and then if I factor who we could have gotten, it drops further.

 

Still, at the end of the day, I do very much like our top 3 picks. I hate that we drafted a few other players due to ignoring needs, but individually, do like some of those players. For example, I would not have drafted Steltz, but I do like him. Ditto w/ the TE Davis.

 

But in the years to come, while there will be some good players out of this draft, I fear it will be remembered as the year we passed on Brohm (or any QB for that matter).

[nfoligno]

Madman/CC,

 

Thanks for that. I do not pretend to be Kiper Jr., or McShay. Nor do I think I could ever be a GM. Hell, I liked the David Terrell pick and hated the Briggs pick (not to mention Hester would have never been a bear).

 

At the same time, this is not so much about specific players as it is about needs. I am sure our scouts love the potential and upside of our 2nd day picks. That may be true, but if they develop (and that is a big if) they are still likely only good depth. Meanwhile, we ignore the most position in the draft.

 

You don't have to be a GM to question our lack of respect for the QB position.

[daa84]

I have actually given our draft a B minus, for what that is worth. Frankly, throwing out the "what could have been" aspect, I would give our top 3 picks an A minus grade. For me, the draft grade drops from there, and then if I factor who we could have gotten, it drops further.

 

Still, at the end of the day, I do very much like our top 3 picks. I hate that we drafted a few other players due to ignoring needs, but individually, do like some of those players. For example, I would not have drafted Steltz, but I do like him. Ditto w/ the TE Davis.

 

But in the years to come, while there will be some good players out of this draft, I fear it will be remembered as the year we passed on Brohm (or any QB for that matter).

i feel like the first 3 picks were solid picks...and id grade them out as a B...nothing jumps out and says wow, but i can't knock any of the picks...all three will be solid contributors....

 

after the top 3, this is where I actually love our draft. Harrison and Bowman are 1st round talents we got in late rounds...which is exactly the type of players you want to target late...if they never pan out, oh well, they were low picks...but both guys could end up being solid starters...Steltz fills a position of need and he is a perfect safety for our system, his scouting report says he rarely bites on play action and gets good reads, which for a deep cover 2 safety makes up for a lack of speed, especially if we apply pressure as we should up front....

 

i know nothing about the OG from georgia or the DE from michigan state, but they were 7th round picks, so im not even sure they will make the team..Barton i know from watching OSU and hopefully he will help with depth

 

The final guy I will comment on is Davis. I didn't understand this when we picked him, but I think I am beginning to see the logic in it. Alot of people expected Clark to be gone by now with Olsen on the team, and i know he is signed, but likely he will be gone after this year. I think they could have drafted his replacement this year, or next year and they felt that Davis (especially in the 5th round) was worth the gamble this year. I am guessing he was at the top of the bears draft board and they felt that he would be the guy to replace clark and his value was too good to pass on.

[nfoligno]

after the top 3, this is where I actually love our draft. Harrison and Bowman are 1st round talents we got in late rounds...which is exactly the type of players you want to target late...if they never pan out, oh well, they were low picks...but both guys could end up being solid starters...

 

One, I would first argue that the 4th round is not exactly some late round pick to throw away, not to mention Harrison being a 3rd rounder. 6th and 7th rounders, fine. Few players drafted in those rounds make 53 man rosters anyway, so those are great rounds to reach out to big time developmental projects. The 3rd and 4th though, I disagree, and the 5th depends on the circumstances.

 

Two, I would agree w/ your logic more if we were talking about taking projects or gambles at positions of need. Harrison may be closer to that, but in Harrison, I just do not understand the individual. Everything I read talks about a run stuffer. An inconsistent player on the field, who does NOT have a high motor. He sounds a lot like the sort of DTs we run off, and not much like the sort we look to add.

 

As for Bowman, you see him as a starter? Who is he going to knock off? Vasher or Tillman? We just locked up Vasher and Tillman, each of which are still young, to long term deals. Further, we just drafted McBride who looked pretty dang solid last year, and have Graham too.

 

To me, Bowman especially, is a pure luxury pick a team like us can not afford. We have much bigger needs than at CB. You can talk about best player available and all that, but the reality is, we took a long term project at a non-need when we still have starting positions unsettled, and other positions totally lacking any sort of depth.

 

Steltz fills a position of need and he is a perfect safety for our system, his scouting report says he rarely bites on play action and gets good reads, which for a deep cover 2 safety makes up for a lack of speed, especially if we apply pressure as we should up front....

 

I too read he reads the QB well, but where he struggles is reading the receivers and anticipating/angeling routes. Thus he sounds to me like the same sort of S we already have, and the sort we have been trying to upgrade. He is a pure in-the-box safety, and I simply question whether he is an upgrade over what we already have. I do not hate this pick, so far as the individual player goes, but again, simply feel this was more of a luxury pick when we have other needs. If he were projected as a FS, I would be far more on board w/ this.

 

The final guy I will comment on is Davis. I didn't understand this when we picked him, but I think I am beginning to see the logic in it. Alot of people expected Clark to be gone by now with Olsen on the team, and i know he is signed, but likely he will be gone after this year. I think they could have drafted his replacement this year, or next year and they felt that Davis (especially in the 5th round) was worth the gamble this year. I am guessing he was at the top of the bears draft board and they felt that he would be the guy to replace clark and his value was too good to pass on.

 

If we were looking to cut Clark loose next year, why did we sign him to an extension, rather than simply let him play out his contract? Clark was not a FA. He had another year on his deal. If Davis steps up and we cut Clark next year, that sounds like poor management to me, as we would have signed Clark to an extension for no reason.

[jason]

Overall, I thought it was a pretty good draft, looking at the individual players we got. At the same time, I can not help but feel this draft will go down as the draft that could have been. I feel we missed the bus on some players, and while there are later picks I like individually, I question the selections due to who we passed on.

 

1st - I like Williams. I like him a lot. At the same time, I can not help but feel Albert will be a far better player. Williams may indeed be the better, immediate, prospect, but down the road, I think we look back and wonder why we didn't take Albert

 

2nd - Forte - I like Forte. I think most do as well. This fills a need, and w/ a player most like. At the same time, I feel it was a massive mistake passing on Brohm. For years and years, we have suffered as the media continually posted the stat showing how many QBs we have started in the time Farve has started for GB. W/ a group of QBs on the roster that make us a league wide joke, we pass on what I believe will be a franchise QB. Worse, GB ends up getting him. So while I give Forte a solid grade, I just can not escape the feeling we missed out on Brohm.

 

3rd - Bennett - I love this pick. Not a burner, but runs crisp routes and can use his route running to get open downfield. I see him as a Booker like Wr, maybe more. Some say Hines Ward, and i have seen others compare him to Boldin. Point is, while not a burner, he knows how to get open and use the field, and could become a damn good WR for us.

 

W/ that said, we could have gone Brohm/Jamal Charles w/ these two picks, which I feel would have been far greater than Forte/Bennett.

 

3rd - Harrison - I called it prior to the pick, at least to those I was watching the draft w/. I just knew Angelo would go DT here. He can't help himself. While many love this pick, I do not. The off-field issue isn't the biggest for me. It was a single issue, and he does not seem like a consistent problem player. At the same time, I hate when I read about a player w/ a questionable motor, and who brings inconsistent play to the field. Further, I just do not get the fit. He is considered a run stuffing DT. I thought we liked gap shooters. We sent Ian Scott packing, and I am not sure I see that much difference.

 

While we were looking at a #3 DT, we still had big needs at OG.

 

4th - Steltz. Individually, I like Steltz. At the same time, I question our need for yet another in-the-box safety. Arch is not a factor, but we do have McGowan and Payne, who has yet to really get a shot. S was a need, but IMHO, the need was at FS, not SS. I simply do not believe we needed to be adding another in-the-box SS who struggles covering routes. Again, we ignore the OL, and instead draft a position I do not feel was a need.

 

5th - Bowman - Maybe my most hated pick. Talk about drafting at a non-need position. We have two young, solid, starting CBs who are signed long term. We drafted a CB last year (McBride) who started over a veteran when Vasher went down w/ injury, and looked damn good. Also have Graham in depth. Everyone talks about Bowman's potential and upside, but his injury history is not minor. Blew out his knee one year, and Patella tendon the next. Further, as he was a junior college transfer prior to that, and played little after the transfer due to injury, this is a major project player. So we drafted a big time project, w/ major injury history, at a position we were already solid.

 

This is the sort of pick you do not mind when you are coming off a SB win, w/ few needs, and are in position for luxury pick/gambles. We still had big needs to address, and I just do not feel this was a good pick. People talk about his potential, but w/ Vasher and Tillman locked in, what is his potential. Nickel DB? And that is if he can stay healthy and develop. Huge gamble at a non-need position. Huge mistake, IMHO.

 

5th - Davis - First, is he a TE or DE. He played both as a senior. My 2nd most disliked pick. We just drafted Olsen in the 1st, and re-signed Clark. Could use a 3rd TE, but seriously. St. Clair is still our starting OG, and we have no depth on the OL, and yet we are drafting a #3 TE?

 

7th - Baldwin - Entering this draft, the three positions I would have said we were most stocked would have been CB, TE and DE. Well, we just drafted a CB and TE, so it only makes sense to now draft a DE, right? Brown and Wale starting, w/ a great #3 in Anderson. Bazuin was just drafted, and no clue how we find a way to get him on the field w/ the other three on the team. Baldwin may be a good player, but you can only have so many players at one position. How does Baldwin fit in?

 

7th - Adams - We finally draft an OG, and not a very good one. Big OG, but considered very unathletic. One review said it best. Big boy w/o athleticism, but will likely make the roster due to a lack of depth. Not exactly a glowing endorcement.

 

7th - LaRocque - When listing the need positions, I guess I forget LB, but Angelo didn't. To continue the trend, Angelo looks at what positions are non-needs, and drafts a prospect.

 

7th - Barton - Actually love this pick. Not very athletic, but a blue collar sort of worker who find a way to get the job done.

 

7th - Monk - Another pick I love. Hell, I love the name. Injuries in his senior year killed his stock, but he has plenty of upside at a major need position. PRIME candidate for Angelo's red shirt program. Spend a year on IR to further allow the knees the regain health and strength, while he learns and develops through practice and study.

 

If I simply look pick by pick at the individual players, I actually like most all of them. Davis is a great example. I actually very much like Davis, and think he could develop into a nice TE, and was a good value. At the same time, I just have to question drafting a #3 TE over other need positions. People talk about taking the BPA, but you can only have so many players on the roster, or at various positions. You are not going to start 3 TEs (though that could be interesting) and taking a deep depth chart guy over positions where you still need a starter is highly questionable, IMHO.

 

Here is the draft, IMHO, that could have been. This is not simply using hindsight, as these were the picks I was calling for when they were happening.

 

1st - Albert - I have no problem w/ Williams, and Williams may actually be better for us this year. I simply believe that in years to come, Albert will be a pro bowl starter, and Williams will not. I think we drafted Blake Brockermeyer (who I actually felt was a damn good LT) over a player who has the potential to be a Walter Jones.

 

2nd - Brohm - You want to win, you need a QB. There have been exceptions to the rule, but they are exceptions. If you want to win and be a long term successful team, you need a franchise QB. We do not have one, and passed on one here. Worse, our rival took him.

 

3rd - Jamal Charles - Frankly, I like Forte better, but Brohm/Charles is a great combo IMHO. The difference between Forte and Charles is simply not close to enough to pass on a QB like Brohm.

 

3rd - Caldwell - Solid WR prospect w/ speed to get downfield, and YAC ability to make a short pass into a big gain.

 

4th - Collins - I do not trade down, and instead, draft Collins, who I was very high on. In Collins, you get a guy who can challenge inside for a starting job, but otherwise would be the #3 OT w/ big upside. Everyone agrees he left school a year too soon, and needs to develop him game more, but is a great prospect to grab and do this. Provides solid a solid backup OT, which we do not have, and may potentially replace Tait down the road.

 

5th - Schuening - OGs tend to slip in the draft, and I feel this way about Schuening. He was a top 5, if not top 3, graded OG that was there in the 5th. IMHO, he could have come in and strongly challenged for the starting job at LG. Instead, we took a major project CB.

 

5th - Barrett - Okay, I said this is what I would have actually done. Barrett did not end up getting drafted until the 7th, after at least one of our picks, so this would have been a reach. Soid in-the-box safety, but if knee is an issue, we red shirt him.

 

7th - Hillis - He was the lead blocker for McFadden and Jones. Could challenge McKie as a rookie.

 

7th - Schwartz - Taking projects now. College OT who may need to move inside w/ a lack of lateral mobility.

 

7th - Barton - That's right. Yet another OL. I am stockpiling OL at this point. I am filling our depth chart out, and loading up the practice squad w/ prospects.

 

7th - Monk - I loved this Angelo pick.

 

Hey, I am not trying to pretend I am such an expert that all these players are going to be NFL studs. At the same time, I feel this would have addressed needs far better and found more productive players for us.

 

But NFO...you can't POSSIBLY do better than the experts that have been doing this for years and years and years! Why even try? Why question their excellence? Afterall, they are pros at their job! And if you had any clue about football, you would already be doing this in a front office somewhere. Your draft sucks compared to JA's.

[nfoligno]

Your right. How could I have been so wrong. What was I thinking? Who needs a QB.

 

Baltimore won a SB w/o a good QB. They are the rule, not the exception, and we should continue to try and follow in their footsteps.

[daa84]

One, I would first argue that the 4th round is not exactly some late round pick to throw away, not to mention Harrison being a 3rd rounder. 6th and 7th rounders, fine. Few players drafted in those rounds make 53 man rosters anyway, so those are great rounds to reach out to big time developmental projects. The 3rd and 4th though, I disagree, and the 5th depends on the circumstances.

 

Two, I would agree w/ your logic more if we were talking about taking projects or gambles at positions of need. Harrison may be closer to that, but in Harrison, I just do not understand the individual. Everything I read talks about a run stuffer. An inconsistent player on the field, who does NOT have a high motor. He sounds a lot like the sort of DTs we run off, and not much like the sort we look to add.

 

maybe i put it poorly, especially regarding harrison. DT was a need. Dusty is a ? and that leaves only harris who has his own injury issues and Adams as the only quality depth there. Ive heard quite the opposite on harrison as you have. Ive read that hes quick and is not a run stuffer, and is a bad fit in a 2 gap scheme, much better suited for 1 gap, with showing flashes as a plus pass rusher.

As for Bowman, you see him as a starter? Who is he going to knock off? Vasher or Tillman? We just locked up Vasher and Tillman, each of which are still young, to long term deals. Further, we just drafted McBride who looked pretty dang solid last year, and have Graham too.

 

Bowman I should have been more specific about as well. Like had been said before, I think he will probably have the quasi-redshirt year and take some time to develop. I think down the line he can be a starter, at nickelback perhaps by the end of next season. As solid as McBride was last year, he isn't a starter IMO. Hes a very servicable player, especially for a 7th rounder, but likely will be a back up. Will Bowman start over our 2 CBs? Almost certainly no. I guess I meant that he could be solid starter quality, which I still do think is true. BTW it seems Graham is destined to be our next ST ace, as he registered the highest ever special teams point total last year against oakland according to Toub

 

I too read he reads the QB well, but where he struggles is reading the receivers and anticipating/angeling routes. Thus he sounds to me like the same sort of S we already have, and the sort we have been trying to upgrade. He is a pure in-the-box safety, and I simply question whether he is an upgrade over what we already have. I do not hate this pick, so far as the individual player goes, but again, simply feel this was more of a luxury pick when we have other needs. If he were projected as a FS, I would be far more on board w/ this.

I disagree that Steltz is a pure in the box safety. I watched alot of LSU over the last handful of years (having gone to an SEC college) and think he can play back in converage in the cover 2. (He led LSU with 6 picks last year) I also disagree in saying S is not a need. We absolutely need safety help...archuleta is on his way out, if not now then next year, and manning or brown will play free. McGowan stinks also imo, and i have never really understood why people like him. Payne i have no idea about since we didnt see him cuz of the arm injury, but i know the bears like him.

 

If we were looking to cut Clark loose next year, why did we sign him to an extension, rather than simply let him play out his contract? Clark was not a FA. He had another year on his deal. If Davis steps up and we cut Clark next year, that sounds like poor management to me, as we would have signed Clark to an extension for no reason.

My mistake here, I thought Clark was a FA this year. Still wouldnt be shocked if we pulled a Darwin Walker with him, and gave him a longer deal so he was happy, and then cut him the next year.

 

 

just my two cents...either way i didnt disagree with your analysis that much. I just like taking risks in the later rounds, as the downside (a guy being a bust) is less than the potential reward. Oh and BTW I certainly agree with you that I would have loved Brohm, especially if we could have traded up to get him in the late second round.

[adam]

If I simply look pick by pick at the individual players, I actually like most all of them. Davis is a great example. I actually very much like Davis, and think he could develop into a nice TE, and was a good value. At the same time, I just have to question drafting a #3 TE over other need positions. People talk about taking the BPA, but you can only have so many players on the roster, or at various positions. You are not going to start 3 TEs (though that could be interesting) and taking a deep depth chart guy over positions where you still need a starter is highly questionable, IMHO.

 

Here is the draft, IMHO, that could have been. This is not simply using hindsight, as these were the picks I was calling for when they were happening.

 

1st - Albert - I have no problem w/ Williams, and Williams may actually be better for us this year. I simply believe that in years to come, Albert will be a pro bowl starter, and Williams will not. I think we drafted Blake Brockermeyer (who I actually felt was a damn good LT) over a player who has the potential to be a Walter Jones.

 

2nd - Brohm - You want to win, you need a QB. There have been exceptions to the rule, but they are exceptions. If you want to win and be a long term successful team, you need a franchise QB. We do not have one, and passed on one here. Worse, our rival took him.

 

3rd - Jamal Charles - Frankly, I like Forte better, but Brohm/Charles is a great combo IMHO. The difference between Forte and Charles is simply not close to enough to pass on a QB like Brohm.

 

3rd - Caldwell - Solid WR prospect w/ speed to get downfield, and YAC ability to make a short pass into a big gain.

 

4th - Collins - I do not trade down, and instead, draft Collins, who I was very high on. In Collins, you get a guy who can challenge inside for a starting job, but otherwise would be the #3 OT w/ big upside. Everyone agrees he left school a year too soon, and needs to develop him game more, but is a great prospect to grab and do this. Provides solid a solid backup OT, which we do not have, and may potentially replace Tait down the road.

 

5th - Schuening - OGs tend to slip in the draft, and I feel this way about Schuening. He was a top 5, if not top 3, graded OG that was there in the 5th. IMHO, he could have come in and strongly challenged for the starting job at LG. Instead, we took a major project CB.

 

5th - Barrett - Okay, I said this is what I would have actually done. Barrett did not end up getting drafted until the 7th, after at least one of our picks, so this would have been a reach. Soid in-the-box safety, but if knee is an issue, we red shirt him.

 

7th - Hillis - He was the lead blocker for McFadden and Jones. Could challenge McKie as a rookie.

 

7th - Schwartz - Taking projects now. College OT who may need to move inside w/ a lack of lateral mobility.

 

7th - Barton - That's right. Yet another OL. I am stockpiling OL at this point. I am filling our depth chart out, and loading up the practice squad w/ prospects.

 

7th - Monk - I loved this Angelo pick.

nfo, I am still a bit shocked we passed on Schuening, when he was right there. I think they were scared of Charles because of the whole Texas RB thing (Ricky/Benson). I don't understand how Brohm and Henne both fell so far, but there has to be reasons that most teams passed on them. If they liked him, the Bears could've even traded down in the 2nd to pick Brohm, then used the picks gained to trade back up to pick Forte. They would've had Brohm/Forte instead of Forte/Bennett. Then you pick Caldwell instead of Harrison and Schuening instead of Bowman and we are looking pretty damn good.

 

So Williams or Albert, then Brohm and Forte, then Caldwell, Steltz, and Schuening.

[adam]

Your right. How could I have been so wrong. What was I thinking? Who needs a QB.

 

Baltimore won a SB w/o a good QB. They are the rule, not the exception, and we should continue to try and follow in their footsteps.

Yeah, Baltimore was the last team to win an SB with a QB that had a rating under 85. Now would any of those QB's mentioned be at least that good in the NFL?

 

The last 10 QB's drafted in the 2nd Round: Kolb, Beck, Stanton, Clemens, Jackson, Brees, Carter, Tuiasosopo, King, Batch. That is an ugly group other than Brees, especially for Franchise QBs.

 

The last 10 QB's drafted in the 3rd Round: Walter, Greene, Schaub, Ragone, Simms, McCown, Redman, Huard, Quinn, Griese. Any QB's to build a Franchise around in that group? Schaub?

 

If you look at the past 10 Super Bowl champions, the QB's have came from the 1st Round (5 times), 6th Round (3 times/Brady), 9th Round (1 time/Johnson), and undrafted (1 time/Warner). Going back to 1980, only 2 QBs that were selected in the 2nd-5th rounds won a Super Bowl (Theismann and Montana).

 

So our only hope is Grossman.

[madlithuanian]

...then we are truly doomed.

 

Yeah, Baltimore was the last team to win an SB with a QB that had a rating under 85. Now would any of those QB's mentioned be at least that good in the NFL?

 

The last 10 QB's drafted in the 2nd Round: Kolb, Beck, Stanton, Clemens, Jackson, Brees, Carter, Tuiasosopo, King, Batch. That is an ugly group other than Brees, especially for Franchise QBs.

 

The last 10 QB's drafted in the 3rd Round: Walter, Greene, Schaub, Ragone, Simms, McCown, Redman, Huard, Quinn, Griese. Any QB's to build a Franchise around in that group? Schaub?

 

If you look at the past 10 Super Bowl champions, the QB's have came from the 1st Round (5 times), 6th Round (3 times/Brady), 9th Round (1 time/Johnson), and undrafted (1 time/Warner). Going back to 1980, only 2 QBs that were selected in the 2nd-5th rounds won a Super Bowl (Theismann and Montana).

 

So our only hope is Grossman.

[adam]

...then we are truly doomed.

lol, but actually true.

[selection7]

Interesting original post Nfo. Sometimes it's hard to get through to the bottom line when you read the writeups by the draft pundits and sports columnists.

[xvflutop]

I will admit, that I was kind of bummed not to see a QB drafted while I sat in front of the TV. But thinking back I am glad we didn't get one. Let me retract that I'm glad we didn't get one after the first round, although I would've liked to see one in the later rounds. However... I didn't want Henne, and I'm not convinced about Brohm. Once Flacco was off the board (which I figured he would be before we had a real shot of taking him) I pretty much resigned to to not grabbing a QB this draft. Well a top QB. I felt that this QB group just wasn't up to par with the last couple of drafts. And I would rather have a high round Third stringer (face it, if we are plugging them in for any extended period of time, the season is already lost) than pay good money for a QB that apparently we didn't feel very high upon in the first place. Like I stated in another thread, I believe the course should be to give Orton/Grossman their chance this year, and in the event that they both don't pan out (at least don't pan out to starter martial) then we should trade our first pick next year for Brady Quinn (assuming Derek Anderson has another good year). That way instead of investing in a first round QB that will take time to develope, we get a guy who has sat a couple of years and should be ready to step out on the field. And furthermore he will have had two years with a QB coach that doesn't work for the bears. i think in the end if that plays out it will be win-win-win.

[killakrzydav]

I was stunned that we didnt go QB.

 

I liked the Monk, Williams, Stultz, and Davis picks in that order. The DT, CB RB and a few others were garbage. As much as I dislike picks that arent sexy, I am very glad we didnt take Mendy but we needed more OL. Brohm would have made this draft.

[BearSox]

I would have preferred Albert over Williams as well, but you can't fault the team in picking him. You could have gone either way.

 

people are severely underrating the role John Gilmore played on this team, and a TE like him was needed.

 

Also, while at first I did not like the Bowman pick, I cannot help but to like it now. That pick has steal written all over it.

 

Plus, complaining about picks made past the 4th round is really goofy. Once you get down to the 5th, 6th, 7th round range, the success rate is not that great. In that range you start looking for steals and add depth. I would have liked Schuening however.

[nfoligno]

people are severely underrating the role John Gilmore played on this team, and a TE like him was needed.

 

Um, Davis is not even that sort of a TE. He is a raw TE who was primarily used as a pass catcher, not a blocker. Behind the curve in that area.

[BearSox]

Um, Davis is not even that sort of a TE. He is a raw TE who was primarily used as a pass catcher, not a blocker. Behind the curve in that area.

He needs to develop his blocking, but from all accounts, he has the potential to be a solid blocker.

[AZ54]

Davis has the big body you need to block but yes he has to improve in that area. I'm surprised at all the love for Brohm and this is the first time I recall anyone on this board calling him a franchise QB. I certainly was interested in him in Rd 2 and definitely Rd 3. There was talk of his loose joints leading to lots of soft tissue injuries but I figure with Harrison drafted right behind him he can show him how to roll a tighter joint.

[DrunkBomber]

Davis has the big body you need to block but yes he has to improve in that area. I'm surprised at all the love for Brohm and this is the first time I recall anyone on this board calling him a franchise QB. I certainly was interested in him in Rd 2 and definitely Rd 3. There was talk of his loose joints leading to lots of soft tissue injuries but I figure with Harrison drafted right behind him he can show him how to roll a tighter joint.

I know the Brohm comment wasnt geared only at me, I dont think we should have gotten him at 14 but in round 2 would have been good. I have stood pretty pat on saying I think he is the best QB in the draft though.

[nfoligno]

Nice on the joint joke.

 

I think plenty were calling Brohm a franchise QB. Would potential franchise QB be better? There was plenty of discussion prior to the draft of trading down in the 1st to take him later, or trading up from our 2nd round pick, as the expectation at the time was that Brohm would not make it to our pick.

 

Brohm has some injury concerns. That is a big reason he was not a 1st round pick. But in the 2nd round? We used every round after this (nearly) to take a flier on a risk player. Why not in the 2nd.

[jason]

If you look at the past 10 Super Bowl champions, the QB's have came from the 1st Round (5 times), 6th Round (3 times/Brady), 9th Round (1 time/Johnson), and undrafted (1 time/Warner). Going back to 1980, only 2 QBs that were selected in the 2nd-5th rounds won a Super Bowl (Theismann and Montana).

 

Which is all the more reason to draft QBs consistently and try to find a winner. If it's a crapshoot, and we never really know when one will turn out, a team has absolutely nothing to lose - and everything to gain - from taking QBs in the middle rounds (3-5).

 

A flyer on Dennis Dixon, Josh Johnson, Colt Brennan, JDBooty, or someone else.

 

I'm sure that the stats on later round guys at all positions are nearly the same. Lots more hits near the first round, lots more misses near the end. So, what's the harm in picking a QB when it's obviously a need position? It's certainly better than picking a third-string, run-blocking TE who may not even be a TE.