the D+ draft

[Lucky Luciano]

i gave not only this draft a D+ but angelo's history of drafting in chicago as a GM a D as a whole.

 

here is the one of the biggest problems our franchise faces... short sightedness. if the qb's you have a chance to draft project as being starters you make the pick even if you have a franchise qb on the team (which we don't). you don't want perrenial backups drafted EVER! you groom them to be #1's. this gives you leverage in actually having valuable players you can trade in the future if it warrants or at the least a future starter/star if your qb goes down.

 

it doesn't mean jack if he is going to push the guys ahead of him. that is what you WANT. this now leaves us in the same boat we have been bailing for SIX YEARS! TWO unknown qb's with no option if either or both fail. if we picked brohm in the 2nd (or some other) and missed out on a rb, so what. which do we need more? which is more valuable in todays nfl due to rule changes? it's the qb and a passing game. where is the potential starter in the following rounds we could have drafted?

 

our stated needs: qb and OL. yet again watched this boat sail. what of williams filling 2 needs by moving tait over to RT? what if williams can't cut it at LOT? what if tait or williams gets injured during the season?

 

we now have our RT backup filling in our starting LG position. who fills in his spot if he has to move? we have not a single guard that this team considers better than a one armed dinosaur. if we do then we have the most inept coaching staff even in our pathetic history of offense. i would also like to ask, how good is st. clair compared to a real guard prospect?

 

this is one reason we should have drafted guard at a high priority after the 1st round. to groom him to be our future starter. yet we could have 'possibly' gotten chilo rachel if we would have moved up in the 2nd with seattle or atlanta and sat on our hands. if not then why not john greco in the 2nd and move him inside as a guard? in the 3rd we pick at positions with no serious need and bypass zuttah, rinehart and cousins. in the 4th we again get someone we don't need and bypass mcglynn, murphy and hale. and finally the 5th we pass on schuening.

 

angelo fails year after year to find a guard which is the easiest position to fill in the draft. i have to ask what do we need more than qb or guards at this point? we even have a need for a backup RT so why not draft that prospect?

 

again, we have picked RB's in the first 3 rounds for 3 of the past 4 years!!! this only amplifies angies huge mistake by taking wolf last season. i say our other problems at OL and QB are far more important to fill-in than any rb in this round. we could have gotten one later in the draft or in realites sake this IS the place for a free agent at this point in bensons career. it's not an immediate critical need.

 

some say we need a receiver.... hmmmm, angie drafts yet ANOTHER #2 receiver. it's NOT a need at all. we have, not counting our draft picks, SEVEN receivers on our roster. booker, bradley, davis and hass are projected as #2 or #3 receivers. in other words we drafted again into our only strength at that position!!! where is our #1 guy? hester? are you kidding me?

 

what about our 3rd round DT pick? we drafted another DT when we already have five and if you consider idoniji (which i do) we have SIX. is that our priority over OL?

 

in the 4th round we drafted another strong safety. we have THREE on the roster not even counting arch (free safety might be a need angie).

 

in the 5th we drafted a CB while we have at least four on our roster. we don't need more depth at this position we need starters at other key positions.

 

and finally we draft a TE in the 5th round. this is the most insane pick of the entire draft. we drafted round 1 last year a TE and we just signed our starting TE for this season. What in gods name do we need a 5th round TE for??? bulky blocking TE's are a dime a dozen!!!

 

other than our first pick it is a disaster for the future of this franchise. we keep drafting the SAME positions over and over every year and still leave the weak points the same.

 

this year we drafted rounds 1-5 a RB, WR, DL, SS, CB and TE

 

last year we draft rounds 1-5 a TE, DL, RB, SS, LB and CB (and another one in the 7th)

 

2006 we draft rounds 1-5 CB/WR?, two DL, and LB

 

2005 we draft rounds 1-5 RB, and two WR's

 

2004 we draft rounds 1-5 three DL, WR, CB and LB

 

2003 we draft rounds 1-5 three DL, CB, LB, SS, and two WR's

 

2002 we draft rounds 1-5 CB, SS, DL, and LB

 

so far angie has drafted TEN defensive linemen, three running backs, four SS, six WR's, six CB's, two TE's (in two years), two QB's, and five LB's all in the first 5 rounds.

 

compare that to four OL in rounds 1-5 over the last 6 years... 2008 - #1 OT williams; 2007 - #4 G/C beekman; 2002 - #1 OT columbo, #4 G metcalf.

 

other than the first pick, it doesn't matter as much how these draft picks turn out quality wise. what matters is we drafted the wrong type of players yet again with nothing on the horizon for filling our real needs. we are always 2 years behind the learning curve for the players we need most.

 

what a mess this clown has put our franchise in.

[Zod]

Maybe you should restart the Fire Jerry Angelo website.

[Da Bears 88]

Maybe you should restart the Fire Jerry Angelo website.

I'm in, then.

[azbearsfan]

I hear ya.

 

What a jerk!!! Got us back to the super bowl for the first time in 20 years.

 

I hope he gets fired so we can go back to top four picks. I miss those days.

 

 

Seriously though, you should check out Ashkum's post. It will make you feel better.

[Lucky Luciano]

Maybe you should restart the Fire Jerry Angelo website.

 

nothing like a well thought out intelligent reply.

 

good job.

[nfoligno]

Let me start by saying there may be fewer vocal Angelo bashers than I. At the same time, I am not sure you are being 100% fair.

 

By and large, I agree w/ your comments on QB. Indy, NE, GB, Phily were all teams w/ top tier QBs, and that didn't prevent them from drafting another QB. How about SF getting Young when they still had Montanna. Denver getting Plummer when Elways was still around. Other teams drafted QBs when they had starters already set, and yet we avoided that w/ Rex, basically saying we didn't want to scare him w/ competition.

 

our stated needs: qb and OL. yet again watched this boat sail. what of williams filling 2 needs by moving tait over to RT? what if williams can't cut it at LOT? what if tait or williams gets injured during the season? we now have our RT backup filling in our starting LG position. who fills in his spot if he has to move? we have not a single guard that this team considers better than a one armed dinosaur. if we do then we have the most inept coaching staff even in our pathetic history of offense. i would also like to ask, how good is st. clair compared to a real guard prospect?

 

this is one reason we should have drafted guard at a high priority after the 1st round. to groom him to be our future starter. yet we could have 'possibly' gotten chilo rachel if we would have moved up in the 2nd with seattle or atlanta and sat on our hands. if not then why not john greco in the 2nd and move him inside as a guard? in the 3rd we pick at positions with no serious need and bypass zuttah, rinehart and cousins. in the 4th we again get someone we don't need and bypass mcglynn, murphy and hale. and finally the 5th we pass on schuening.

 

First, I think in Williams, it is a 2-1. Sure, he may not make it at LT. But you can not draft players w/ that attitude. He was the best pure LT on the board who was believed capable of starting as a rookie. If you believe OL was a top need, then there is no reason to bash this pick.

 

Second, I think it 100% pure hindsight 20/20 to say we should have moved up in the 2nd to get Rachel. Few others on this board touted Rachel, or back-to-back OL more than I (and Jason), but no one expected Rachel to go at the top of the 2nd. That was a reach, and as much as I would have loved to get him, there is simply no way you can blame Angelo for not getting him when another team reached.

 

And Greco in the 2nd? Come on. Greco was a big reach at the top of the 3rd. I wanted and OG, and agree we could have/should have gotten one, but these are simply not good example IMHO.

 

Third, while I absolutely agree OG was a need, I would like to point out that (a) it was not our only need and ( more than some other needs, the OG position tends to fall in the draft. I have an issue w/ QB, but that aside, RB and WR in the 2nd and 3rd were both needs and solid picks. Where I will agree w/ you is our later 3rd round pick. At that pick, I felt our best choice would have been McGlynn, Cousins, Rinehart (in that order, even though they went in the opposite order). By doing this, we would have added two OL, RB and WR in the first three rounds of the draft, and given the offense a huge boost.

 

angelo fails year after year to find a guard which is the easiest position to fill in the draft. i have to ask what do we need more than qb or guards at this point? we even have a need for a backup RT so why not draft that prospect?

Agree this is an issue, and a big one. A few months back Angelo said he prefers to add veteran OL because he believes OL is a position that takes time to develop, and likes to get the developed product. But OGs have become so expensive, it basically has forced teams to look to the draft, and I simply do not think Angelo is good here.

 

again, we have picked RB's in the first 3 rounds for 3 of the past 4 years!!! this only amplifies angies huge mistake by taking wolf last season. i say our other problems at OL and QB are far more important to fill-in than any rb in this round. we could have gotten one later in the draft or in realites sake this IS the place for a free agent at this point in bensons career. it's not an immediate critical need.

 

I disagree RB is not a need. I agree Wolfe was a mistake, but also believe accepting your mistakes is better than not, and he seemed this year to accept mistakes made at RB. When you combine Benson's injury w/ Wolfe's inability to be a starter, it did create a need at RB. Not a 1st round need, IMHO, but a high enough need that I see nothing wrong w/ Forte. IMHO, you would have likely been fine w/ taking Forte in the 2nd if we added Cousins or McGlynn in the 3rd, would you not.

 

some say we need a receiver.... hmmmm, angie drafts yet ANOTHER #2 receiver. it's NOT a need at all. we have, not counting our draft picks, SEVEN receivers on our roster. booker, bradley, davis and hass are projected as #2 or #3 receivers. in other words we drafted again into our only strength at that position!!! where is our #1 guy? hester? are you kidding me?

 

Who are you kidding. We have a bunch of bodies at OG. That doesn't mean we have anyone good at the position. I like Booker, but he is not a long term solution, but a temporary fix. Bradley has shown nothing but his ability to get injured. Davis is nice depth, but that is all. Hass? Come on. Fan favorite, but whether due to Hass or the coaches, I think it is obvious he is not in the plans. WR was w/o question a need. And like Forte in the 2nd, I have a feeling you would not be screaming about this pick if we took Cousins or McGlynn later in the 3rd.

 

what about our 3rd round DT pick? we drafted another DT when we already have five and if you consider idoniji (which i do) we have SIX. is that our priority over OL?

 

Short answer. No. I did call it though. I said, at least to those I watched the draft w/, we would take Harrison there and then. I expected us to go DT in the 3rd or 4th, and when I saw Harrison as Kiper's best available, I just felt Angelo couldn't resist. That is his way. I agree OL was a far greater need. I would even say a backup OT would have been a better pick than a DT. I do actually believe DT was a need, as Harris is entering his final year, Dusty has two years of nothing but injury, and none of the rest are proven either. But for me, w/o a DT, our defense is still loaded w/ talent, but on offense, far from it.

 

in the 4th round we drafted another strong safety. we have THREE on the roster not even counting arch (free safety might be a need angie).

 

I do not agree w/ this pick either. If a FS we loved were there, I could better see that, but I simply do not believe another in-the-box safety was a need. I like Steltz, and he may well end up a starter, but I question just how big of an upgrade he is to the in-the-box safeties we already have. I would have rather we gave Payne/McGowan a shot. Again, if this was a FS that fell, I would be more okay w/ this pick, but he isn't. Further, I would add that, as said before, I could better deal w/ this pick, even being Steltz, if we had drafted different in front. If we added an OG instead of a DT, I could better deal w/ grabbing a defensive player you liked here.

 

in the 5th we drafted a CB while we have at least four on our roster. we don't need more depth at this position we need starters at other key positions.

 

Here is my opinion. I believe Angelo basically locked in on OL, RB and WR w/ the first three picks. After that, he went BPA, and for Angelo, the BPA is always going to be a defensive player, thus the DT, SS and CB w/ the next three picks. This is a pick I hate as well. We are very solid and deep at CB, and yet St. Clair is still our starting LG. No way we should have been looking to draft a CB here. But at this area, Angelo is looking at upside and not need, and Bowman has tons of upside, though it comes w/ JUCO experience and major injury concerns.

 

and finally we draft a TE in the 5th round. this is the most insane pick of the entire draft. we drafted round 1 last year a TE and we just signed our starting TE for this season. What in gods name do we need a 5th round TE for??? bulky blocking TE's are a dime a dozen!!!

 

No argument, but see above comments. After the first three picks, I think Angelo was just looking at BPA, and he was tops on our board. If the top player was a K, he would have probably taken him. I disagree w/ this logic, but feel that is what Angelo does.

 

other than our first pick it is a disaster for the future of this franchise. we keep drafting the SAME positions over and over every year and still leave the weak points the same.

 

I disagree w/ the disaster statement. I do believe it is a massive mistake to have passed on Brohm, but the players we did take are likely going to contribute and or start, or at least most of them. Williams will likely start at LT. Forte will start by some point this year, if not out of the gate. Ditto for Bennett. Harrison I think will be playing in the rotation. Steltz could be starting this year too. So while I think we blew it by passing on a QB, if you look at the players we did add, they are likely starters/contributors (minus Bowman and Davis). So while what we did not get hurts, what we did get definitely should help.

 

this year we drafted rounds 1-5 a RB, WR, DL, SS, CB and TE

 

You missed OT.

 

last year we draft rounds 1-5 a TE, DL, RB, SS, LB and CB (and another one in the 7th)

 

You missed OG in the 4th last year.

 

2006 we draft rounds 1-5 CB/WR?, two DL, and LB

 

You forgot DM, a CB/FS/SS?

 

2005 we draft rounds 1-5 RB, and two WR's

 

You missed a 4th round QB (Orton)

 

2004 we draft rounds 1-5 three DL, WR, CB and LB

 

You missed a 5th round QB (Krenzel)

 

2003 we draft rounds 1-5 three DL, CB, LB, SS, and two WR's

 

You missed QB in the 1st.

 

2002 we draft rounds 1-5 CB, SS, DL, and LB

 

You missed OT in the 1st and OG in the 3rd.

 

so far angie has drafted TEN defensive linemen, three running backs, four SS, six WR's, six CB's, two TE's (in two years), two QB's, and five LB's all in the first 5 rounds.

 

He has drafted 3 QBs in the first 5 rounds (Rex, Krenzel, Orton).

 

compare that to four OL in rounds 1-5 over the last 6 years... 2008 - #1 OT williams; 2007 - #4 G/C beekman; 2002 - #1 OT columbo, #4 G metcalf.

 

Agreed that is sad. Like I said earlier, Angelo said he likes to add veteran OL. I have no issue w/ veteran OL, but you should still be adding Ol through the draft, and simply allowing them to develop.

 

other than the first pick, it doesn't matter as much how these draft picks turn out quality wise. what matters is we drafted the wrong type of players yet again with nothing on the horizon for filling our real needs. we are always 2 years behind the learning curve for the players we need most.

 

Look, I hate we passed on QB and OG, but it is simply wrong to say it doesn't matter how the picks turn out. If we added a bunch of starters, then the draft is not a D. Far from it. I would also add that if the RB, WR, DT, SS start, then maybe it means the positions were not the strength you think, and were in fact greater needs than you want to believe.

 

I started a thread which was titled something like, "what might have been". I believe that down the road, as good as our draft picks may turn out, we will look back on this draft as the year that might have been. I point to Brohm as the key in that, as well as Albert, who I still feel will be the best OL in the entire group, including Long. But even w/ that said, if the players we did draft turn into solid starters, then while it hurts to have missed on this player or that, it would still be considered a good draft.

[Connorbear]

Not going to give a detailed reply. I grade out the draft at a B- (I think this is the same score NFO gave). I am disappointed we did not address QB or OG but very happy with everything else we did.

 

After spending several posts the other night trying to convince you that Forte is not being brought in to play FB, I don't feel like having another argument.

 

Peace

[Lucky Luciano]

I hear ya.

 

What a jerk!!! Got us back to the super bowl for the first time in 20 years.

 

I hope he gets fired so we can go back to top four picks. I miss those days.

 

 

Seriously though, you should check out Ashkum's post. It will make you feel better.

 

getting to a SB is meaningless without winning it. are you really ready to say that this coming season looks like we are superbowl bound? or last?

 

in seven years during angelo's tenure in chicago our offense has set records for BAD and i don't see much relief in the near future. do you?

 

i gave him more than a chance to rebuild this team into a contender but building half a team won't get you any props from me from now on.

 

it's time to look for a better solution and move on.

[Da Bears 88]

I hear ya.

 

What a jerk!!! Got us back to the super bowl for the first time in 20 years.

 

I hope he gets fired so we can go back to top four picks. I miss those days.

 

 

Seriously though, you should check out Ashkum's post. It will make you feel better.

Hmm, did we win it? NO! So, STFU.

[Da Bears 88]

getting to a SB is meaningless without winning it. are you really ready to say that this coming season looks like we are superbowl bound? or last?

 

in seven years during angelo's tenure in chicago our offense has set records for BAD and i don't see much relief in the near future. do you?

 

i gave him more than a chance to rebuild this team into a contender but building half a team won't get you any props from me from now on.

 

it's time to look for a better solution and move on.

Don't mind azbearsfan, he drinks the "JA can't do no wrong kool aid".

 

The dude is a tool.

[Lucky Luciano]

By and large, I agree w/ your comments on QB. Indy, NE, GB, Phily were all teams w/ top tier QBs, and that didn't prevent them from drafting another QB. How about SF getting Young when they still had Montanna. Denver getting Plummer when Elways was still around. Other teams drafted QBs when they had starters already set, and yet we avoided that w/ Rex, basically saying we didn't want to scare him w/ competition.

 

one comment: SF did not get young as a replacement for montana. he was brought in as a trade from tampa to back up montana. he just excelled there in that system along with having someone able to coach and teach him. young had a horrendous career in tampa until going to the 9ers.

 

First, I think in Williams, it is a 2-1. Sure, he may not make it at LT. But you can not draft players w/ that attitude. He was the best pure LT on the board who was believed capable of starting as a rookie. If you believe OL was a top need, then there is no reason to bash this pick.

 

i don't know what you read but i certainly did not bash our first pick. in fact it brought our draft up from F to D+. my comment on williams not making it was in regards to having NO depth at RT with miller gone and st. clair at G. that's not a bash but reality.

 

Second, I think it 100% pure hindsight 20/20 to say we should have moved up in the 2nd to get Rachel. Few others on this board touted Rachel, or back-to-back OL more than I (and Jason), but no one expected Rachel to go at the top of the 2nd. That was a reach, and as much as I would have loved to get him, there is simply no way you can blame Angelo for not getting him when another team reached.

 

And Greco in the 2nd? Come on. Greco was a big reach at the top of the 3rd. I wanted and OG, and agree we could have/should have gotten one, but these are simply not good example IMHO.

 

sorry but 100% pure hindsight? lets look at the board:

 

st. louis - need OT but went WR

skins - this was our trade deal - skins needed picks as they traded them all away. this was their first of the draft.

kc - got their guard - no problem from them to speak of unless they planned on albert going OLT.

packers - probably wouldn't trade with us

falcons - NEED a guard

seattle - NEED a guard

49ers - NEED a guard

 

there is NO way the 2nd best guard makes it to us in a sane draft room.

 

greco: a trade up to the bottom of the 2nd or top of 3rd if considered a worthy pick. i don't know enough about him other than he WAS picked at the top of the 3rd and he plays out to be a LG according to draft reports and a pretty good one with the possibility to play RT which is another depth position we NEED.

 

Third, while I absolutely agree OG was a need, I would like to point out that (a) it was not our only need and (cool.gif more than some other needs, the OG position tends to fall in the draft. I have an issue w/ QB, but that aside, RB and WR in the 2nd and 3rd were both needs and solid picks. Where I will agree w/ you is our later 3rd round pick. At that pick, I felt our best choice would have been McGlynn, Cousins, Rinehart (in that order, even though they went in the opposite order). By doing this, we would have added two OL, RB and WR in the first three rounds of the draft, and given the offense a huge boost.

 

as far as falling like the past, the price they are getting for guards (faneca for instance) means they no longer are an afterthought in the draft if you want to stay out of cap hell.

 

i got no problems with your 3rd round picks either. but for X's sake get one with potential to start.

 

quote: I disagree RB is not a need. I agree Wolfe was a mistake, but also believe accepting your mistakes is better than not, and he seemed this year to accept mistakes made at RB. When you combine Benson's injury w/ Wolfe's inability to be a starter, it did create a need at RB. Not a 1st round need, IMHO, but a high enough need that I see nothing wrong w/ Forte. IMHO, you would have likely been fine w/ taking Forte in the 2nd if we added Cousins or McGlynn in the 3rd, would you not. /quote

i never said it was not a need. i DID say not a need in the freakin 2nd round. we could have picked one up in the later rounds or EVEN in free agency after the cuts. we need to build a line to run behind NOW not in 5 years.

 

quote: some say we need a receiver.... hmmmm, angie drafts yet ANOTHER #2 receiver. it's NOT a need at all. we have, not counting our draft picks, SEVEN receivers on our roster. booker, bradley, davis and hass are projected as #2 or #3 receivers. in other words we drafted again into our only strength at that position!!! where is our #1 guy? hester? are you kidding me?

 

Who are you kidding. We have a bunch of bodies at OG. That doesn't mean we have anyone good at the position. I like Booker, but he is not a long term solution, but a temporary fix. Bradley has shown nothing but his ability to get injured. Davis is nice depth, but that is all. Hass? Come on. Fan favorite, but whether due to Hass or the coaches, I think it is obvious he is not in the plans. WR was w/o question a need. And like Forte in the 2nd, I have a feeling you would not be screaming about this pick if we took Cousins or McGlynn later in the 3rd. /quote

 

puleeaaaase!!! if you don't consider any of our WR's as #2's or 3's then drafting one now is meaningless for this season. i don't know what you are looking at but booker is a solid gold #2 receiver who we will probably use as our #1. now are you saying davis and bradley are not even #2 or #3 receivers??? if thats the case angie should be fired NOW for even considering davis's new contract.

 

the LAST thing we need at this point in time ahead of qb and OL is another #2 receiver which is what bennet is PROJECTED to be!!!!!

 

quote: what about our 3rd round DT pick? we drafted another DT when we already have five and if you consider idoniji (which i do) we have SIX. is that our priority over OL?

 

Short answer. No. I did call it though. I said, at least to those I watched the draft w/, we would take Harrison there and then. I expected us to go DT in the 3rd or 4th, and when I saw Harrison as Kiper's best available, I just felt Angelo couldn't resist. That is his way. I agree OL was a far greater need. I would even say a backup OT would have been a better pick than a DT. I do actually believe DT was a need, as Harris is entering his final year, Dusty has two years of nothing but injury, and none of the rest are proven either. But for me, w/o a DT, our defense is still loaded w/ talent, but on offense, far from it. /quote

 

and that is a recomendation on angelo's prowess at drafting players? cause he can't resist? maybe he should start up a heroin habit instead.

 

quote: I do not agree w/ this pick either. If a FS we loved were there, I could better see that, but I simply do not believe another in-the-box safety was a need. I like Steltz, and he may well end up a starter, but I question just how big of an upgrade he is to the in-the-box safeties we already have. I would have rather we gave Payne/McGowan a shot. Again, if this was a FS that fell, I would be more okay w/ this pick, but he isn't. Further, I would add that, as said before, I could better deal w/ this pick, even being Steltz, if we had drafted different in front. If we added an OG instead of a DT, I could better deal w/ grabbing a defensive player you liked here. /quote

 

absolutely agree. if we got at least one (preferably two) quality guard along with williams i would have been reasonably happy and willing to stretch our needs a bit.

 

quote: Here is my opinion. I believe Angelo basically locked in on OL, RB and WR w/ the first three picks. After that, he went BPA, and for Angelo, the BPA is always going to be a defensive player, thus the DT, SS and CB w/ the next three picks. This is a pick I hate as well. We are very solid and deep at CB, and yet St. Clair is still our starting LG. No way we should have been looking to draft a CB here. But at this area, Angelo is looking at upside and not need, and Bowman has tons of upside, though it comes w/ JUCO experience and major injury concerns. /quote

 

absolutely. this is also where my main bitch with this guy starts. he drafts the same players every year. the only difference is where. we MUST beef up our OL. if our D line looked this bad i could see it but it's not even a close 5th. his drafting players that we will have to cut is ridiculous. who do we release to keep these guys? and another FB? how many we need of these guys? it's like drafting tackling dummies that you pay.

 

seriously it's time to get his mind right or dump him. we can't survive as half a team anymore.

 

quote: other than our first pick it is a disaster for the future of this franchise. we keep drafting the SAME positions over and over every year and still leave the weak points the same.

 

I disagree w/ the disaster statement. I do believe it is a massive mistake to have passed on Brohm, but the players we did take are likely going to contribute and or start, or at least most of them. Williams will likely start at LT. Forte will start by some point this year, if not out of the gate. Ditto for Bennett. Harrison I think will be playing in the rotation. Steltz could be starting this year too. So while I think we blew it by passing on a QB, if you look at the players we did add, they are likely starters/contributors (minus Bowman and Davis). So while what we did not get hurts, what we did get definitely should help. /quote

 

start WHERE? how many cb's can we start at once? how many RB's? how many # FREAKIN 2 wideouts can we get on the field? where is our new DT going to play? do we dump idoniji now after his new contract?

 

quote: this year we drafted rounds 1-5 a RB, WR, DL, SS, CB and TE

 

You missed OT.

 

last year we draft rounds 1-5 a TE, DL, RB, SS, LB and CB (and another one in the 7th)

 

You missed OG in the 4th last year.

 

2006 we draft rounds 1-5 CB/WR?, two DL, and LB

 

You forgot DM, a CB/FS/SS?

 

2005 we draft rounds 1-5 RB, and two WR's

 

You missed a 4th round QB (Orton)

 

2004 we draft rounds 1-5 three DL, WR, CB and LB

 

You missed a 5th round QB (Krenzel)

 

2003 we draft rounds 1-5 three DL, CB, LB, SS, and two WR's

 

You missed QB in the 1st.

 

2002 we draft rounds 1-5 CB, SS, DL, and LB

 

You missed OT in the 1st and OG in the 3rd. /quote

 

the point was of drafting the SAME type players year after year. do you feel we do that on the OL?? or at QB?? you feel we drafted too many krenzel was a knucklehead and should be held against ANYONE stupid enough to draft him. also, in fact lower in my previous post, i pointed out specifically how many and where we drafted OL. so what's the point?

 

quote: Look, I hate we passed on QB and OG, but it is simply wrong to say it doesn't matter how the picks turn out. If we added a bunch of starters, then the draft is not a D. Far from it. I would also add that if the RB, WR, DT, SS start, then maybe it means the positions were not the strength you think, and were in fact greater needs than you want to believe. /quote

 

where do we add these starters? isn't that the crux of this entire MESS?? there are only so many guys can play. do you cut last years safeties? do you cut the previously drafted WR's? which DE's do you cut? anderson?? which DT's? dusty?? the new ones we get who look like the old ones we cut or the old ones that made the cut last year? how deep do you go for depth? one utility offensive lineman and 10 defensive linemen? do we just keep drafting these type of guys so we can replace them when their contracts come up???

 

we need QUARTERBACKS, free safeties, GUARDS, offensive tackles (YES for backup or to replace the ones who are aging or get injured). that's basically it. yet every year we draft the strongest positions we have and leave these to fend for themselves. he is an IDIOT!!!

 

quote: But even w/ that said, if the players we did draft turn into solid starters, then while it hurts to have missed on this player or that, it would still be considered a good draft. /quote

 

and get us no closer to winning a superbowl than we are now!!

[Lucky Luciano]

Not going to give a detailed reply. I grade out the draft at a B- (I think this is the same score NFO gave). I am disappointed we did not address QB or OG but very happy with everything else we did.

 

After spending several posts the other night trying to convince you that Forte is not being brought in to play FB, I don't feel like having another argument.

 

Peace

 

hmmmmmmmmmmmm..... and didn't i explain why i thought that and agreed with the people who said he wasn't?????

 

yea that was a pretty hard sell.

[Connorbear]

hmmmmmmmmmmmm..... and didn't i explain why i thought that and agreed with the people who said he wasn't?????

 

yea that was a pretty hard sell.

Yes but that took a bit of time. For some reason I feel you are dead set on nitpicking everything the front staff does. I have no issues with that but I am not going to play the back and forth game.

 

Peace

[Connorbear]

Don't mind azbearsfan, he drinks the "JA can't do no wrong kool aid".

 

The dude is a tool.

Hey dude, please show some respect. I don't care who you are, I don't appreciate you calling someone else on the site a tool.

 

Peace

[adam]

getting to a SB is meaningless without winning it. are you really ready to say that this coming season looks like we are superbowl bound? or last?

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

[Lucky Luciano]

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

 

if getting to the superbowl was a foundation to build on winning the sb it would then have some meaning. being a fluke or a one shot wonder is just that.

[Lucky Luciano]

Yes but that took a bit of time. For some reason I feel you are dead set on nitpicking everything the front staff does. I have no issues with that but I am not going to play the back and forth game.

 

Peace

 

yea like a couple of replys saying what i read in print was incorrect and me agreeing to be open about it and finally agreeing with you? i'm not trying to rag on you but that statement seems awfully unreasonable.

 

as far as nit picking... it's been SEVEN YEARS!!!! my god do you realize how bad an offense we have had during that period? it's record setting bad for a franchise with BAD offenses for decades!!

[Da Bears 88]

Take this with a grain of salt.

 

But, ESPN's John Clayton thought it was a big mistake for us not drafting a QB.

 

I normally don't care for ESPN. But, i agree with him.

[Connorbear]

yea like a couple of replys saying what i read in print was incorrect and me agreeing to be open about it and finally agreeing with you? i'm not trying to rag on you but that statement seems awfully unreasonable.

 

as far as nit picking... it's been SEVEN YEARS!!!! my god do you realize how bad an offense we have had during that period? it's record setting bad for a franchise with BAD offenses for decades!!

Ok so I'll drop the Forte discussion.

 

I agree our offense has been very bad during that time. Would you not agree, however, that our defense has been very good during that time?

 

Peace

[selection7]

I wouldn't be surprised at all if we make it back to the Super Bowl this year (nor would I if we don't). It would take Rex or Kyle finding themselves and Url not being injured (as well as a lack of injuries in gerneral of course). Nagging injuries to the OL hurt us last year so it's not inconceivable that even without our new #1 draft pick our OL could be much improved. These days, unless you are the NE Pats, having a good record the year before is not a prerequisite to getting to the Super Bowl. We've certainly got some talent: Url, Briggs, Vasher, Tillman, Tommie, Dusty, Wale, Mark Anderson, Alex & Mike Brown, Hester, Greg Olson, Gould, Maynard. Look around the league. Other teams are not as well off compared to the Bears as some of you seem to think. Oh, it'll also take a better year from Babich and Turner. We were legitimately better than every NFC team 2 years ago. It wasn't a fluke.

[adam]

if getting to the superbowl was a foundation to build on winning the sb it would then have some meaning. being a fluke or a one shot wonder is just that.

Fluke, one shot wonder? 2001 would be a better year to call a fluke. We were 5-11 in 2000 and 4-12 in 2002.

 

In 2005 we won the Division, then in 2006 we won the NFC. How is that a fluke? That seems like progress to me. Then in 2007 we take a step back like so many other teams have done after losing the Super Bowl. The good thing is most teams rebound the following year, which we should as well.

 

Actually the ultimate goal is to win the SB, but teams are built to make the playoffs. It is a new season at that point. The Giants barely made the playoffs, yet they won the SB.

[adam]

Take this with a grain of salt.

 

But, ESPN's John Clayton thought it was a big mistake for us not drafting a QB.

 

I normally don't care for ESPN. But, i agree with him.

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

[ASHKUM BEAR]

i gave not only this draft a D+ but angelo's history of drafting in chicago as a GM a D as a whole.

 

here is the one of the biggest problems our franchise faces... short sightedness. if the qb's you have a chance to draft project as being starters you make the pick even if you have a franchise qb on the team (which we don't). you don't want perrenial backups drafted EVER! you groom them to be #1's. this gives you leverage in actually having valuable players you can trade in the future if it warrants or at the least a future starter/star if your qb goes down.

 

it doesn't mean jack if he is going to push the guys ahead of him. that is what you WANT. this now leaves us in the same boat we have been bailing for SIX YEARS! TWO unknown qb's with no option if either or both fail. if we picked brohm in the 2nd (or some other) and missed out on a rb, so what. which do we need more? which is more valuable in todays nfl due to rule changes? it's the qb and a passing game. where is the potential starter in the following rounds we could have drafted?

 

our stated needs: qb and OL. yet again watched this boat sail. what of williams filling 2 needs by moving tait over to RT? what if williams can't cut it at LOT? what if tait or williams gets injured during the season?

 

we now have our RT backup filling in our starting LG position. who fills in his spot if he has to move? we have not a single guard that this team considers better than a one armed dinosaur. if we do then we have the most inept coaching staff even in our pathetic history of offense. i would also like to ask, how good is st. clair compared to a real guard prospect?

 

this is one reason we should have drafted guard at a high priority after the 1st round. to groom him to be our future starter. yet we could have 'possibly' gotten chilo rachel if we would have moved up in the 2nd with seattle or atlanta and sat on our hands. if not then why not john greco in the 2nd and move him inside as a guard? in the 3rd we pick at positions with no serious need and bypass zuttah, rinehart and cousins. in the 4th we again get someone we don't need and bypass mcglynn, murphy and hale. and finally the 5th we pass on schuening.

 

angelo fails year after year to find a guard which is the easiest position to fill in the draft. i have to ask what do we need more than qb or guards at this point? we even have a need for a backup RT so why not draft that prospect?

 

again, we have picked RB's in the first 3 rounds for 3 of the past 4 years!!! this only amplifies angies huge mistake by taking wolf last season. i say our other problems at OL and QB are far more important to fill-in than any rb in this round. we could have gotten one later in the draft or in realites sake this IS the place for a free agent at this point in bensons career. it's not an immediate critical need.

 

some say we need a receiver.... hmmmm, angie drafts yet ANOTHER #2 receiver. it's NOT a need at all. we have, not counting our draft picks, SEVEN receivers on our roster. booker, bradley, davis and hass are projected as #2 or #3 receivers. in other words we drafted again into our only strength at that position!!! where is our #1 guy? hester? are you kidding me?

 

what about our 3rd round DT pick? we drafted another DT when we already have five and if you consider idoniji (which i do) we have SIX. is that our priority over OL?

 

in the 4th round we drafted another strong safety. we have THREE on the roster not even counting arch (free safety might be a need angie).

 

in the 5th we drafted a CB while we have at least four on our roster. we don't need more depth at this position we need starters at other key positions.

 

and finally we draft a TE in the 5th round. this is the most insane pick of the entire draft. we drafted round 1 last year a TE and we just signed our starting TE for this season. What in gods name do we need a 5th round TE for??? bulky blocking TE's are a dime a dozen!!!

 

other than our first pick it is a disaster for the future of this franchise. we keep drafting the SAME positions over and over every year and still leave the weak points the same.

 

this year we drafted rounds 1-5 a RB, WR, DL, SS, CB and TE

 

last year we draft rounds 1-5 a TE, DL, RB, SS, LB and CB (and another one in the 7th)

 

2006 we draft rounds 1-5 CB/WR?, two DL, and LB

 

2005 we draft rounds 1-5 RB, and two WR's

 

2004 we draft rounds 1-5 three DL, WR, CB and LB

 

2003 we draft rounds 1-5 three DL, CB, LB, SS, and two WR's

 

2002 we draft rounds 1-5 CB, SS, DL, and LB

 

so far angie has drafted TEN defensive linemen, three running backs, four SS, six WR's, six CB's, two TE's (in two years), two QB's, and five LB's all in the first 5 rounds.

 

compare that to four OL in rounds 1-5 over the last 6 years... 2008 - #1 OT williams; 2007 - #4 G/C beekman; 2002 - #1 OT columbo, #4 G metcalf.

 

other than the first pick, it doesn't matter as much how these draft picks turn out quality wise. what matters is we drafted the wrong type of players yet again with nothing on the horizon for filling our real needs. we are always 2 years behind the learning curve for the players we need most.

 

what a mess this clown has put our franchise in.

 

About the only two guards in this draft that could come in and start would have been Albert and maybe Rachal. St. Clair came in at the end of the season and looked pretty good especially since he had his mind set at being a back up RT or LT. St. Clair is a good player and teammate and if he can be a starting caliber G in the NFL, why not give him his shot at being a starter in the NFL. Last year we drafted Beekman in the 4th. He was considered the 3-5 best guard in last years draft. Rusty/the Bears wanted him to strengthen up a year before putting him in as most teams do with lower drafted offensive linemen. Beekman is still a highly touted G, we still need another prospect I definately agree, but the dire need of the team was still OLT, WR, and RB.

 

As for drafting McGlynn, if you remember he was sitting right there for the Bears, but the Eagles traded up and took him right before the Bears. They were very high on McGlynn and whose to say they wouldn't have taken him. After he was gone, thats when the Bears traded down twice to gain more picks.

 

As for WR's, I love the pick of Bennett and will be the first to buy his jersey when it hits the shelfs. He's not the homerun threat, but we have that in Hester and Bradley who have speed. Bennett is said to be in the mold of Hines Ward and if he becomes that type of receiver, I think every Bear fan will be thrilled with that pick in the third round.

[Da Bears 88]

Lucky Luciano hates JA like me.

[azbearsfan]

Don't mind azbearsfan, he drinks the "JA can't do no wrong kool aid".

 

The dude is a tool.

 

 

lol Thanks for the personal attack, bro. I'm not sure you have any business calling anybody a tool.

 

 

Didn't say Angelo can't do any wrong. I just dont do the whole its all doom and gloom crap.

 

 

And we have had the whole getting to the superbowl and not winning doesn't mean crap argument.

 

 

Buuuuuut it does mean that you were the best team in the NFC. So again I think its really short sighted to absolutely rip everything Angelo has done. Has he made some mistakes??? Absolutely. What GM hasn't? But to give that draft a D+ and say he has taken the franchise to ruin, while within his rights, is pretty ridiculous.

 

 

Again this goes back to my theory that the Bears simply have some fans who just love it when something bad happens so they can be proven right. Their own life sucks so bad that they take pleasure in every injury, negative action and loss, just to say "I told you so....the coach/GM/QB/RB/DC/OC/whoever is worthless". You dont hear a peep when the BEars are winning, but as soon as something bad happens there they are.

It must suck to that pissed off all the time.