Bears don't plan to add a back

[sprout]

from profootballtalk.com

 

BEARS DON’T PLAN TO ADD A BACK

Posted by Mike Florio on June 18, 2008, 11:06 p.m.

With 2005 first-round draft pick Cedric Benson now having plenty of time to captain a ship under the influence of Captain Morgan, the Chicago Bears have one less running back on the roster.

 

But they don’t plan to fill that void. More specifically, they don’t plan to fill it by signing a veteran like Shaun Alexander or Ron Dayne.

 

“We don’t have any plans to do that,” Smith said. “From Matt [Forte’] to Adrian Peterson to Garrett Wolfe, to P.J. Pope, Matt Lawrence, we like all of our players and those are the ones that we’re going with.”

 

Then again, if one of the guys currently on the roster blows out a tire during training camp, phones will be ringing, everywhere except on the S.S. Cedric.

 

 

 

 

Sounds like normal coach speak to me. He's not going to talk about bringing other guys in even if it was in the plans.

[AZ54]

Alright then, this begs the question: which of these no-name RB on the roster has made that good of an impression that the Bears would feel comfortable with him the final roster? I have no clue. Having seen Pope before in preseason games I don't think it's him, at least I hope it's not him.

[brletich]

Alright then, this begs the question: which of these no-name RB on the roster has made that good of an impression that the Bears would feel comfortable with him the final roster? I have no clue. Having seen Pope before in preseason games I don't think it's him, at least I hope it's not him.

 

How about Forte, Peterson, and Wolfe?

[sprout]

Alright then, this begs the question: which of these no-name RB on the roster has made that good of an impression that the Bears would feel comfortable with him the final roster? I have no clue. Having seen Pope before in preseason games I don't think it's him, at least I hope it's not him.

 

Exactly. That's why I hope it was just something to say. If they are convinced by seeing guys in mini-camps without pads, then we have a problem. The ony RB on our roster that they should really know what he can do is AP. And what he can do, isn't much. I view the rest of them as unknown commodities right now.

[Da Bears 88]

Lovie must be on some drugs if he thinks Forte, AP and Wolfe will cut it.

[nfoligno]

They may cut it, but I just do not like that we are not providing Forte with solid competition for the job. Sorry, but AP is not a NFL starting RB, and thus should not be deemed legit competition for the guy you hope will be.

[GakMan23]

This staff is starting to really worry me. We went 7 and 9 last year, got rid of our best WR, and they are happy with the way the team looks. We haven't added any players to improve this team thru free agency and are expecting all the problems we had to be fixed by unproven players picked up in the draft. Either Jerry has truly lost his mind or he is so arrogant he thinks he can draft stars with every pick he makes in the draft.

[BearsFan]

Once again the Bears are setting themselves up for an offensive disaster. Angelo stated that he was going to bring stability to the QB position. However, he made no effort to do so by keeping Grossman, Orton, cutting Griese, and bringing in a couple long shot UDFAs. The QB position is now weaker than it was last year.

 

Angelo stated that he was going to create competition for Benson, not cut him. Drafting Forte would have accomplished that goal. It's understandable that Jerry was forced to rid the team of the negative publicity Ced suddenly created, but that weakened the half back depth back to exactly what it was 12 months ago. It damn sure leaves the position weaker than what it was in '06. If Forte is injured or doesn't excel in his rookie year, Peterson will have to carry the load again, and that will doom the ground game.

 

JA cut Ruben but failed to replace him with a legitimate LG. Beekman isn't even competing for the spot, the Bears say they want St. Clair to remain at swing tackle, That leaves turnstile Metcalf as the anointed one. Guess what? He's going to get the QB killed, and he's too damn slow to pull on the ground attack. Defenses are going to have a field day attacking the Bears' left side this year!!

 

All in all, Chicago's offense is in as much trouble now as it was last season, when it finished 26th in the league. AND, they go from the 2nd easiest schedule in '07 to 11th toughest in '08. Things look pretty bleak this year.

 

.

[ChileBear]

They may cut it, but I just do not like that we are not providing Forte with solid competition for the job. Sorry, but AP is not a NFL starting RB, and thus should not be deemed legit competition for the guy you hope will be.

 

My Kool Aide is a bit sour at this point. Come on Lovie, we all know we need to get a vet to help Forte out. Address the problems now, not when the season starts! <_>

[nfoligno]

How similar is this to the early years of Angelo in Chicago?

 

Think about it. For his first couple years, what FAs did he sign? As I recall, Clark was about it. He saved money for re-signing players and looked to the draft to add to the team. He didn't believe we were a SB contender, if after our 13 win season, IMHO. I am not saying re-building, but I would say he was in a building mode, and then later, started to add big money FAs as he began to feel we were a contender.

 

I see similar here. While many fans want to beleive we are a SB contender, I just do not see it. I don't think Angelo does either. I believe Angelo is building right now. He is reserving his money to re-sign our own, so we have them locked up when we do make a run. Further, he is going to allow the young players an opportunity to play, and thus develop. If they struggle, so what. We are not a contender, and can afford to give them some time. Players like Hester, Bennett, Forte and Williams all will play, and be allowed an opportunity to develop.

[nfoligno]

Once again the Bears are setting themselves up for an offensive disaster. Angelo stated that he was going to bring stability to the QB position. However, he made no effort to do so by keeping Grossman, Orton, cutting Griese, and bringing in a couple long shot UDFAs. The QB position is now weaker than it was last year.

 

Agreed. I really don't see the logic here. I think we blew it by not drafting a QB, particularly Brohm, who I preferred over Henne. But the point is, few (outside bear fans) see much future hope in Rex or Orton, and to put our future hopes in an undrafted rookie FA QB is really reaching, even for the kool-aid drinkers.

 

Angelo stated that he was going to create competition for Benson, not cut him. Drafting Forte would have accomplished that goal. It's understandable that Jerry was forced to rid the team of the negative publicity Ced suddenly created, but that weakened the half back depth back to exactly what it was 12 months ago. It damn sure leaves the position weaker than what it was in '06. If Forte is injured or doesn't excel in his rookie year, Peterson will have to carry the load again, and that will doom the ground game.

 

I can see the argument we upgraded from last year w/ Forte over Benson. Maybe not, but I see the argument. Forte has an all around game, where as Benson failed to catch passes and struggled in pass protection. I will still argue the running was more due to the OL, but Benson didn't shine there either way. Forte is supposed to be a great receiver, and a solid blocker. If so, he can be seen as an upgrade to Benson, but I agree we have failed at the RB position in not adding competition for the starting role. We are putting all our hopes on a rookie RBs shoulders, and we saw just last year how that failed w/ Benson.

 

JA cut Ruben but failed to replace him with a legitimate LG. Beekman isn't even competing for the spot, the Bears say they want St. Clair to remain at swing tackle, That leaves turnstile Metcalf as the anointed one. Guess what? He's going to get the QB killed, and he's too damn slow to pull on the ground attack. Defenses are going to have a field day attacking the Bears' left side this year!!

 

Still today among my biggest pet peeves. If we did nothing else at RB, QB or WR, I could better deal w/ it if we did more at LG. By adding a veteran LG to work along side our #1 pick LT, and w/ Tait moved to RT, we would have the workings of a great OL. A great OL can make average QBs, RBs and WRs look FAR better, and allow them to develop quicker as well. A weak OL has the opposite effect. By not adding a solid LG, not only would I agrue that we hurt the offense, but I would argue we have done little to protect our investments in the draft, as Williams, Forte and Bennett could all find it difficult to develop behind an OL that still may well struggle.

 

All in all, Chicago's offense is in as much trouble now as it was last season, when it finished 26th in the league. AND, they go from the 2nd easiest schedule in '07 to 11th toughest in '08. Things look pretty bleak this year.

 

I don't put a ton of stock into pre-season strength of schedules, but I would otherwise agree. Our offense was among the worst in the league, and the upgrades, at best, were minimal. It seems like we are putting most of our hopes, once again, in defense and special teams, which I think is a mistake. While we are still loaded w/ talent on defense, I still believe coaching holds this defense back. On special teams, we will likely be good/great again, but you do have to wonder what sort of an effect Hester's playing time on offense will have on his return ability.

[DrunkBomber]

I understand that between the three backs on our roster, one is a rookie, one is a career third stringer and the other one has no business being in the NFL (just my opinion, and its not relevant to my point so no need to debate Wolfe now) but when Benson was here we had one too many backs as it was. Its not common for teams to carry more than three running backs so barring injury it doesnt surprise me that they are saying this. If they do bring in a new back you might as well kiss Wolfe good bye because if they brought in someone good enough to play than they would be ahead of him and there arent enough carries to go around for all these guys.

[nfoligno]

But, teams often do carry more than 4 RBs into camp, and I don't want to hear about the no-names.

 

I don't see anyone chomping at the bit for the RBs who are available, which tells me they could be looking at vet minimum, one year deals. Where exactly is the harm. If they look good, we have competition and insurance. Wolfe or AP could be on the outside looking in. If they do not look good, they are gone.

 

To me, adding a 4th RB is not much different from adding Brandon Lloyd. Many posters have talked about how his contract is nothing, and while some (including myself) feel he may start, others question whether he even makes the team. That is because his deal is such that can be be gone, and we take no cap hit. His contract guarantees him one thing and one thing only. A shot. Why would it be a bad idea to take the same approach at RB?

[Lucky Luciano]

How similar is this to the early years of Angelo in Chicago?

 

I see similar here. While many fans want to beleive we are a SB contender, I just do not see it. I don't think Angelo does either. I believe Angelo is building right now. He is reserving his money to re-sign our own, so we have them locked up when we do make a run. Further, he is going to allow the young players an opportunity to play, and thus develop. If they struggle, so what. We are not a contender, and can afford to give them some time. Players like Hester, Bennett, Forte and Williams all will play, and be allowed an opportunity to develop.

 

here is the problem with that scenario:

 

besides the possible age and/or injury to existing key players over this rebuilding period, we still did not draft enough players to fill the positions on offense that have held us back and CAUSED this rebuilding process. when you rebuild you need to develop prospective starting players to replace the existing problems. each of our problem positions takes time to develop and most would agree that a 2-3 year LAG may not even be enough time to develop them EVEN if we had them!!

 

1. we still have absolutely no depth at guard and in fact we don't even have a real starting guard on this roster with the 'possible' exception of garza. metcalf is a wasted roster spot, beekman can't even replace a one armed guard and is not even considered in the mix to replace that drone metcalf. the rumors have it he is to replace kruetz in the future at center but if he can't even sub as guard how good is he really at replacing a pro bowl player at the center position?

 

that leaves who, that wasn't passed over for st. clair last season at that position?

 

2. all of our tackles, with the exception of the rookie, are aging. by the time this rebuilding process is over they will have a short shelf life themselves and will need to be replaced. are we again going to rebuild after this rebuilding process? again, a 2-3 year lag for a replacement tackle to get up to speed in the nfl even IF he has talent. which also brings into question the lack continuity of your offensive line playing together.

 

if we fail to draft these type players, that means that we have to spend BIG dollars for free agents at a position that should be easy to fill in the draft and ignore or go cheap on other skill position players we may need in free agency like receivers and running backs (not to mention players on the defensive side of the ball).

 

this is the reality of angies failure to draft offensive linemen over the last SIX YEARS!!

 

3. at qb we are existing on a wing and a prayer. both qb's will be free agents or gone when this rebuilding process is over. if both fail to become even reasonably effective average qb's then what? we passed on the possibility to draft a replacement this season yet AGAIN. so add another 2-3 year LAG period to this process even if we can find a quality player to draft NEXT year. the only other option is we can acquire a free agent ham and egger to do the same thing we have done for 40 years.

 

again this position is just an afterthought for angelo who still roams the plains with dinosaurs and believes defense wins championships.

[LT2_3]

How similar is this to the early years of Angelo in Chicago?

 

Think about it. For his first couple years, what FAs did he sign? As I recall, Clark was about it. He saved money for re-signing players and looked to the draft to add to the team. He didn't believe we were a SB contender, if after our 13 win season, IMHO. I am not saying re-building, but I would say he was in a building mode, and then later, started to add big money FAs as he began to feel we were a contender.

 

I see similar here. While many fans want to beleive we are a SB contender, I just do not see it. I don't think Angelo does either. I believe Angelo is building right now. He is reserving his money to re-sign our own, so we have them locked up when we do make a run. Further, he is going to allow the young players an opportunity to play, and thus develop. If they struggle, so what. We are not a contender, and can afford to give them some time. Players like Hester, Bennett, Forte and Williams all will play, and be allowed an opportunity to develop.

 

This has been Angelo's MO all along - being a draft driven team.

 

Now as for not signing another RB, that was Lovie's quote - not Angelo's. It's also smart for the HC not to undermine bargaining position. I would also add that in the article from the mothership, Mayer says this:

 

That’s true at running back, where second-round draft pick Matt Forte joins veteran Adrian Peterson, 2007 third-round pick Garrett Wolfe, P.J. Pope and Matt Lawrence. Even though the Bears recently waived Cedric Benson, they do not intend to sign a veteran free agent such as Shaun Alexander or Kevin Jones at this time.

 

So while Lovie's quote indicates that they intend to not sign one at all, I think that's reading into it a bit just for something to talk about in the offseason.

 

Also, if anyone hasn't noticed, teams aren't signing players other than draft picks right now. This is the wait and see portion of the offseason. Front offices are on vacation and agents are trying to gauge the market.

 

The basic fact is that we aren't going to sign anyone over the next few weeks unless Kevin Jones rocks his workout when he finally has it. It also wouldn't surprise me if Rueben Brown signs with us right before TC. He's been very supportive of the franchise in the media when he didn't have to say anything at all.

[nfoligno]

here is the problem with that scenario:

 

Before getting to the "problem(s)", but me be clear. This is not my preferred scenario, but simply what I see.

 

besides the possible age and/or injury to existing key players over this rebuilding period, we still did not draft enough players to fill the positions on offense that have held us back and CAUSED this rebuilding process. when you rebuild you need to develop prospective starting players to replace the existing problems. each of our problem positions takes time to develop and most would agree that a 2-3 year LAG may not even be enough time to develop them EVEN if we had them!!

 

Agree and disagree.

 

I would make the point that we had too many holes to expect filling at in one draft.

 

I agree players take time to develop. I disagree we should expect a 2-3 year LAG for each player drafted though. At least one player IMHO stands a chance to develop far more year one, at least based on his position. While numerous positions in the NFL take time to develop, some have more immediate dividends, and RB is one of them. Many rookie RBs excel.

 

Also, I think some other players can be developed to the point of being considered solid, if not good, after one year. That would mean we could be competitive next year, and w/ further additions, could contend, though QB (see below) is still our glaring issue.

 

1. we still have absolutely no depth at guard and in fact we don't even have a real starting guard on this roster with the 'possible' exception of garza. metcalf is a wasted roster spot, beekman can't even replace a one armed guard and is not even considered in the mix to replace that drone metcalf. the rumors have it he is to replace kruetz in the future at center but if he can't even sub as guard how good is he really at replacing a pro bowl player at the center position?

 

I hope you are not looking for an argument from me. I screamed for a veteran OG. They are not as cheap as they used to be, but there were plenty available, and not all were super expensive.

 

I would add that for many teams, this is not a huge issue. OG is not the hardest position to find talent in the draft. We simply make it seem so.

 

that leaves who, that wasn't passed over for st. clair last season at that position?

 

Personally, I am hoping St. Clair start for us at LG. I know he "should" be a swing tackle, but he is also likely the best LG option we have. Further, while he is not a seasoned LG, he is a veteran who would help (IMHO) Williams far more than Metcalf, Beekman or any of the others on the depth chart.

 

2. all of our tackles, with the exception of the rookie, are aging. by the time this rebuilding process is over they will have a short shelf life themselves and will need to be replaced. are we again going to rebuild after this rebuilding process? again, a 2-3 year lag for a replacement tackle to get up to speed in the nfl even IF he has talent. which also brings into question the lack continuity of your offensive line playing together.

 

Not too much argument here. Tait is 33, and while he "may" have a couple seasons left, I think it obvious he is on the downside of his career. W/ that said, RT is not the most difficult position, or should not be, to fill. I would really like to see Barton develop, but if not, like OG, this simply "should not" be that difficult to fill. LT and C are supposed to be the difficult positions to address on the OL, and we have that in Williams and Kreutz. Problem is, what should be is not reality in Chicago.

 

if we fail to draft these type players, that means that we have to spend BIG dollars for free agents at a position that should be easy to fill in the draft and ignore or go cheap on other skill position players we may need in free agency like receivers and running backs (not to mention players on the defensive side of the ball).

 

Agreed. Look at the money we have spent on the OL w/ Angelo in charge. Tait, Kreutz, Brown and Miller were all higher priced FAs. Our inability to draft OL has forced us to spend a ton of cash in FA, and now we are old and w/o depth.

 

this is the reality of angies failure to draft offensive linemen over the last SIX YEARS!!

 

No question. I scream every year for OL, only to see us pass. Even this year, while we did draft a LT in the 1st, I feel it was a mistake to pass on OL after that until the 7th. While we still had an open spot on the starting OL, we were drafting depth and deep depth at DT, S, CB, TE and even DE.

 

3. at qb we are existing on a wing and a prayer. both qb's will be free agents or gone when this rebuilding process is over. if both fail to become even reasonably effective average qb's then what? we passed on the possibility to draft a replacement this season yet AGAIN. so add another 2-3 year LAG period to this process even if we can find a quality player to draft NEXT year. the only other option is we can acquire a free agent ham and egger to do the same thing we have done for 40 years.

 

Agreed. I wanted Brohm, and it kills me he went to our division rival. We simply do not seem to put a great enough value on the QB position, which is a large part of why we are in the position we are in. Now moving forward, we are likely going to be looking for yet another new QB next year. That will either be a veteran (either VERY expensive or a QB failed w/ another team) or a rookie. If we took a QB this year, we could at least get a jump start on the development process, and have a better chance next year or the year after.

 

I was talking about what I think Angelo is thinking, not what I would have done. By the time our offense is built, if ever, how will Urlacher and Mike Brown look. Despite other talent we have, I think our defense still is based off those two players. Heck, we do not know for sure Harris will even be around. And what about Hester? Will he be a bear.

 

This will be an iteresting draft class, w/ the top 3 picks being offense. Angelo's history drafting offense is flat out awful, which, despite all the hype, worries me how our golden boys will fair.

[nfoligno]

While there is not a ton of signings, there have been some. That OG from SD was signed not long ago, and I think many expect Bently to be signed before long.

 

I am not sure I see the point is coming out and saying we are not looking to add a RB, if that is not the case. What reason is there for spy games? You can just skip the question, and leave it alone. you can leave it open by saying you want to see what we have. While I can understand not coming out and saying you feel it is a dire need to sign a RB, I am not sure what the point is going the opposite direction either.

 

I agree that I can see us signing Brown. He likely will not be expensive. We have a solid relationship with him. If healthy, he is a solid addition. I can see us waiting a bit to see if a young player steps up, but as that is unlikely, can see him being offered a contract.

[madlithuanian]

You're preaching' to the converted! (At least me...) You and I have been on the same page regarding the coaching, and the idea of this season being a quasi-rebuild.

 

How similar is this to the early years of Angelo in Chicago?

 

Think about it. For his first couple years, what FAs did he sign? As I recall, Clark was about it. He saved money for re-signing players and looked to the draft to add to the team. He didn't believe we were a SB contender, if after our 13 win season, IMHO. I am not saying re-building, but I would say he was in a building mode, and then later, started to add big money FAs as he began to feel we were a contender.

 

I see similar here. While many fans want to beleive we are a SB contender, I just do not see it. I don't think Angelo does either. I believe Angelo is building right now. He is reserving his money to re-sign our own, so we have them locked up when we do make a run. Further, he is going to allow the young players an opportunity to play, and thus develop. If they struggle, so what. We are not a contender, and can afford to give them some time. Players like Hester, Bennett, Forte and Williams all will play, and be allowed an opportunity to develop.

[nfoligno]

I avoid the word "re-build", as it draws more argument. As I see it, we are looking to field a solid defense and special teams, and hoping to build the offense while the other two units carry us. I think the staff does hope to contend w/ D and STs, and hopes those two units can be good enough to get us into the playoffs (ala 2001) while the defense develops. Then, in a couple years, the O will be ready to take on their fair share.

 

At least, that is what I think the staff is thinking. What just bothers me is, while we have added some pieces, I do not think we have done enough to support the development of those we added.

 

LT - Williams has to develop, starting at LT as a rookie which is one of the most difficult assignments, while starting next to a mediocre to awful LG.

 

WR - We hope to develop Hester and Bennett, and some others, but do them no favors w/o an addition at QB.

 

RB - Forte will start, but will he have holes to run through?

 

QB - We want to give Rexy another shot, and/or see if Orton can develop, but what do we surround him with? A bunch of kids who need to develop also.

 

We do not have one solid unit to lean on. We have a bunch of players who we want to develop, but who will be counting on others who are trying to develop. That is a difficult way to develop talent.

 

GB seemed to have WRs, RBs and OL develop at rapid pace, but they also had a QB who could help hasten their development. A team like Denver puts together a great OL, which helps develop a young QB, RB and or WRs. What do we have.

 

Bennett and Hester have to rely on Rex or Orton, and visa versa. Forta has to rely on our OL, and visa versa. We just don't have the key, solid unit to stabalize us, and it could hurt all units in the end.

[sprout]

While there is not a ton of signings, there have been some. That OG from SD was signed not long ago, and I think many expect Bently to be signed before long.

 

I am not sure I see the point is coming out and saying we are not looking to add a RB, if that is not the case. What reason is there for spy games? You can just skip the question, and leave it alone. you can leave it open by saying you want to see what we have. While I can understand not coming out and saying you feel it is a dire need to sign a RB, I am not sure what the point is going the opposite direction either.

 

I agree that I can see us signing Brown. He likely will not be expensive. We have a solid relationship with him. If healthy, he is a solid addition. I can see us waiting a bit to see if a young player steps up, but as that is unlikely, can see him being offered a contract.

 

I really just think it's Lovie being Lovie and supporting "his guys". He's just trying to show them support. They may still bring someone in. I think it's way to early to say you're not bringing a rb in, which isn't really what he said. He just said they don't plan to now. Maybe when they get to training camp, Wolfe will some how be even smaller and plans will change.

[LT2_3]

While there is not a ton of signings, there have been some. That OG from SD was signed not long ago, and I think many expect Bently to be signed before long.

 

I am not sure I see the point is coming out and saying we are not looking to add a RB, if that is not the case. What reason is there for spy games? You can just skip the question, and leave it alone. you can leave it open by saying you want to see what we have. While I can understand not coming out and saying you feel it is a dire need to sign a RB, I am not sure what the point is going the opposite direction either.

 

I agree that I can see us signing Brown. He likely will not be expensive. We have a solid relationship with him. If healthy, he is a solid addition. I can see us waiting a bit to see if a young player steps up, but as that is unlikely, can see him being offered a contract.

 

If you are talking about Olivea, it was reported that he agreed to terms with the Jets, but hasn't signed yet. People speculating about Bentley doesn't make it so either. I have to wonder how strong his leg is that had the staph infection. He may be healthy enough to play, but that doesn't mean he's going to play at his previously probowl level.

 

What's the point of obfuscating? Because it undermines negotiations. If Lovie says we aren't signing a RB, that puts us in the best bargaining position. If he ignores the question, the media will read into it that he didn't deny that they will sign someone and it will be out there weakening bargaining position. If he says we want to sign someone, he kills bargaining position.

[madlithuanian]

I think I use the word for that reason! I think you're basically right. I see the Jauron team of like 00-01. Great D, good special teams (now great), and an o that just kind of sputters. I actually feel better using the term "rebuild". At least it feel like something is being done! But in reality, is it really? We do know there's potential upside on the line, maybe with Hester, and maybe with Forte. But I don't feel great at all.

 

I think your last line sums it up beautifully!

 

"We just don't have the key, solid unit to stabalize us, and it could hurt all units in the end."

 

 

I avoid the word "re-build", as it draws more argument. As I see it, we are looking to field a solid defense and special teams, and hoping to build the offense while the other two units carry us. I think the staff does hope to contend w/ D and STs, and hopes those two units can be good enough to get us into the playoffs (ala 2001) while the defense develops. Then, in a couple years, the O will be ready to take on their fair share.

 

At least, that is what I think the staff is thinking. What just bothers me is, while we have added some pieces, I do not think we have done enough to support the development of those we added.

 

LT - Williams has to develop, starting at LT as a rookie which is one of the most difficult assignments, while starting next to a mediocre to awful LG.

 

WR - We hope to develop Hester and Bennett, and some others, but do them no favors w/o an addition at QB.

 

RB - Forte will start, but will he have holes to run through?

 

QB - We want to give Rexy another shot, and/or see if Orton can develop, but what do we surround him with? A bunch of kids who need to develop also.

 

We do not have one solid unit to lean on. We have a bunch of players who we want to develop, but who will be counting on others who are trying to develop. That is a difficult way to develop talent.

 

GB seemed to have WRs, RBs and OL develop at rapid pace, but they also had a QB who could help hasten their development. A team like Denver puts together a great OL, which helps develop a young QB, RB and or WRs. What do we have.

 

Bennett and Hester have to rely on Rex or Orton, and visa versa. Forta has to rely on our OL, and visa versa. We just don't have the key, solid unit to stabalize us, and it could hurt all units in the end.

[DrunkBomber]

But, teams often do carry more than 4 RBs into camp, and I don't want to hear about the no-names.

I don't see anyone chomping at the bit for the RBs who are available, which tells me they could be looking at vet minimum, one year deals. Where exactly is the harm. If they look good, we have competition and insurance. Wolfe or AP could be on the outside looking in. If they do not look good, they are gone.

 

To me, adding a 4th RB is not much different from adding Brandon Lloyd. Many posters have talked about how his contract is nothing, and while some (including myself) feel he may start, others question whether he even makes the team. That is because his deal is such that can be be gone, and we take no cap hit. His contract guarantees him one thing and one thing only. A shot. Why would it be a bad idea to take the same approach at RB?

This doesnt make any sense. Just because teams have more backs going into camp doesnt mean that they need to run out and sign as many backs as possible. The "no-names" would be the only guys that would be around to compete. Its not realistic to think the Bears are going to sign a back that has the potential to make the roster because of the three guys that are here. They love AP for his durability and contribution to special teams. Theyre obviously keeping Forte and JA isnt going to admit how big of a mistake it was to draft Wolfe after only one season. That said, anybody brought in would have to be a special teams ace or would more than likely not make the final roster.

 

The Lloyd comparison is also poor because WR is a position that can have 4 or 5 on the field at a given time while there is only one tail back on the field at a time. Barring bringing in someone who can come in and immediately start it would be irresponsible to use a roster spot on another mediocre back given our need for youth at OT and depth at OG. How many second tier running backs do we need?

 

So where there isnt any harm in bringing in a vet back things like that dont happen. Teams dont just go and sign all kinds of players in hopes one of them can make the team, at least not players that arent "no-names." How many times have the Bears done anything like this? Just because it makes sense to fans doesnt mean its going to happen or even that its a good idea. It was like everyone being so surprised that the Bears didnt draft a QB when it was very obvious they were happy with the two that had.

[madlithuanian]

...I think all that amounts to needing a regime change! I'm tired of egos and idiocy running this franchise! But, I full well realize that nothing will change... Henceforth why I drink during games!

 

This doesnt make any sense. Just because teams have more backs going into camp doesnt mean that they need to run out and sign as many backs as possible. The "no-names" would be the only guys that would be around to compete. Its not realistic to think the Bears are going to sign a back that has the potential to make the roster because of the three guys that are here. They love AP for his durability and contribution to special teams. Theyre obviously keeping Forte and JA isnt going to admit how big of a mistake it was to draft Wolfe after only one season. That said, anybody brought in would have to be a special teams ace or would more than likely not make the final roster.

 

The Lloyd comparison is also poor because WR is a position that can have 4 or 5 on the field at a given time while there is only one tail back on the field at a time. Barring bringing in someone who can come in and immediately start it would be irresponsible to use a roster spot on another mediocre back given our need for youth at OT and depth at OG. How many second tier running backs do we need?

 

So where there isnt any harm in bringing in a vet back things like that dont happen. Teams dont just go and sign all kinds of players in hopes one of them can make the team, at least not players that arent "no-names." How many times have the Bears done anything like this? Just because it makes sense to fans doesnt mean its going to happen or even that its a good idea. It was like everyone being so surprised that the Bears didnt draft a QB when it was very obvious they were happy with the two that had.

[DrunkBomber]

...I think all that amounts to needing a regime change! I'm tired of egos and idiocy running this franchise! But, I full well realize that nothing will change... Henceforth why I drink during games!

I agree about the regime change. As much as I love the tradition of defense and running the ball first I think they need to stay current with trends in the NFL and work with their personnel better. If you dont have the players to effectively execute the game plan you need to either get different players or a new plan. The fact that we drafted a corner and tight end before an OG absolutely baffles me. id rather bring back Brown before taking a chance on another back.

 

Dont get me wrong, I wouldnt mind bringing in Kevin Jones because of his possible upside. He is the one guy out there that I feel if remained healthy could contribute immediately. I just know how the Bears are and they dont do things like that, which is why Im surprised to see so many people think this news is unexpected.