Bears don't plan to add a back

[madlithuanian]

Agreed! I think we need to really focus on the offensive (all pun intended) side of hte ball. Something tells me the D will end up being good regardless.

 

I hear you on the draft. We had a billion corners and 2 TE's that are really darn good! Yet a O-line turnstile! It just makes no sense.

 

I too wouldn't mind seeing what Kevin Jones could do. Maybe he re-energizes his career like another Jones we brought in... The way the Bears run the club is just plan foolish too much of the time.

 

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.

[Brian]

I'm on the side that I would like to add Ron Dayne. He is still serviceable and would be a nice compliment with his hard nose running style.

[Mongo3451]

name='AZ54' date='Jun 19 2008, 05:12 AM' post='40752']

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.

Neither does the staff. If they are throwing their eggs in Forte's basket, they are nuts. Ditto if they are counting on AP as a servicable #2. It is imperative they have a contingency in place if Forte can't carry the load. A vet must be signed.

 

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

That reminds me of a less eloquent post I threw out there the other day. "Now we have a mediocre QB(yet to be announced), a new OL(yet to be announced), new RB(yet to be announced) and two new starting wideouts (yet to be announced)" The yet to be announced part is good and bad all rolled into one.

 

name='LT2_3' date='Jun 19 2008, 04:22 PM' post='40787']

 

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.

You have violated man-law with the word "obfuscating". Please use dumbed down language in the future. LOL! I really don't care that Lovie said we won't add a back. If he meant it, then I have a problem.

 

name='MadLithuanian' date='Jun 19 2008, 06:34 PM' post='40790']

...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'm not sure about the regime change as of yet. I still like Angelo, a lot. He has put us in a position to win the last few years and deserves a little slack. Lovie, on the other hand, I don't think so much of. I don't like his choir boy act, all while he's lying to us. I also don't like that he doesn't have a ton of experience on his staff. That's either ignorant, arrogant or the McCaskeys pulling the purse strings on quality assistants.

 

 

All told, this is a make or break year for Lovie. If we don't make the playoffs, I really think he is gone. Then, I'll starting my Cowher chant again...

[LT2_3]

You have violated man-law with the word "obfuscating". Please use dumbed down language in the future. LOL! I really don't care that Lovie said we won't add a back. If he meant it, then I have a problem.

 

Really? In my version of the man-law book, it says to use the right word in context.

 

On an aside though, it's a bit ironic that the whole "man-law" thing was started on a light beer commercial, but in my "man-law" book, real men don't drink light beer unless it's for medical reasons.

[nfoligno]

Have to agree w/ Mongo. Man-law would be against words difficult to pronounce, or words which force others to look up/ask the meaning.

 

W/ that said, great call on the commercial twist. laughed my arce off w/ that one.

[LT2_3]

Have to agree w/ Mongo. Man-law would be against words difficult to pronounce, or words which force others to look up/ask the meaning.

 

W/ that said, great call on the commercial twist. laughed my arce off w/ that one.

 

LOL - I'll try to keep that in mind. I guess I was still in my "writing for work" mode.

 

Quick joke: What do light beer and making love in a canoe have in common?

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

They're both effing close to water.

[nfoligno]

Nice, but I have to say, this is one that is better told w/ the full fledged F bomb, though I understand the need for the alteration. Still, LOL.

[madlithuanian]

I, for one, think everything is better in full fledged F bomb mode! (But, decorum prevents it here...)

 

Long live George Carlin!

 

Nice, but I have to say, this is one that is better told w/ the full fledged F bomb, though I understand the need for the alteration. Still, LOL.

[jason]

A few quick thoughts:

 

Ron Dayne!? Really? He sucks.

Kevin Jones? Best option out there, but not exactly exciting.

 

I think the Bears can be just fine with the RBs they have.

Forte is already better than Benson, who showed more problems, lack of common sense, and injuries during his time here than he did talent. On top of that, AP is a servicable backup in the NFL. And, as far as Wolfe goes, I think he's capable of greatness in many ways. He won't be an every down back, but I think the guy is one of those players who always gets counted out, and always steps up to do well.

 

Odd that everyone on this board seems to love Tom Waddle, Bobby Engram, and Mike Hass (all three perceived to have been given the short straw on talent, but the long straws on heart and effort), but seem so down on Wolfe.

[Da Bears 88]

Kevin Jones? Best option out there, but not exactly exciting.

Here's a thought, Kevin Jones would be a better backup than the two clowns we have.

[nfoligno]

odd that everyone on this board seems to love Tom Waddle, Bobby Engram, and Mike Hass (all three perceived to have been given the short straw on talent, but the long straws on heart and effort), but seem so down on Wolfe.

 

Not sure I agree w/ the analogy. I am not sure I would agree the WRs you mentioned were short on talent. They simply lacked speed. Great route running, great hands and knowledge are as much a talent as speed.

 

Questions of Wolfe have more to do w/ his size rather than talent. He is a talented player, but does he have the size?

 

IMHO, the problem is more AP than Wolfe. I think most fans have no issue w/ Wolfe as a 3rd down back style player. The problem is more about numbers and AP.

 

Fans want a greater level of competition for Forte. AP does not offer that. Nor does Wolfe. If we bring in a RB to provide competition, and maybe an upgrade in case Forte is injured, or simply doesn't live up to the hype, then we have 4 RBs on the roster. Few expect the staff to dump AP, do as much as anything to his special teams play, which means Wolfe would be on the chopping block.

 

IMHO, if we had a #2 RB that was simply put, a better option at RB, then I think there would be more love for Wolfe.

 

The real issue/thing is, you view Wolfe as a potential Dunn like every down back, and many others simply view him as a nice 3rd down, change of pace back.

[jason]

odd that everyone on this board seems to love Tom Waddle, Bobby Engram, and Mike Hass (all three perceived to have been given the short straw on talent, but the long straws on heart and effort), but seem so down on Wolfe.

 

Not sure I agree w/ the analogy. I am not sure I would agree the WRs you mentioned were short on talent. They simply lacked speed. Great route running, great hands and knowledge are as much a talent as speed.

 

Questions of Wolfe have more to do w/ his size rather than talent. He is a talented player, but does he have the size?

 

IMHO, the problem is more AP than Wolfe. I think most fans have no issue w/ Wolfe as a 3rd down back style player. The problem is more about numbers and AP.

 

Fans want a greater level of competition for Forte. AP does not offer that. Nor does Wolfe. If we bring in a RB to provide competition, and maybe an upgrade in case Forte is injured, or simply doesn't live up to the hype, then we have 4 RBs on the roster. Few expect the staff to dump AP, do as much as anything to his special teams play, which means Wolfe would be on the chopping block.

 

IMHO, if we had a #2 RB that was simply put, a better option at RB, then I think there would be more love for Wolfe.

 

The real issue/thing is, you view Wolfe as a potential Dunn like every down back, and many others simply view him as a nice 3rd down, change of pace back.

 

Actually, my problem with the entire idea that is being pushed in this thread is that we suddenly have a good back in Forte. We simply don't know that. He could be the next Salaam, Enis, or Benson. It's always nice to bring guys in, but until the guys we have are given a chance to excel, we will never know what we have...and we'll always be searching.

 

If Forte doesn't have it, then AP and Wolfe should get the ball more. If they don't have it, THEN the Bears should search out other options. If the Bears go get veteran leadership (i.e. Alexander or Jones), then that is basically saying that AP and Wolfe are nearly pointless...and given some of the things we've seen each do - AP more than Wolfe, obviously - it's just impossible to say.

 

And, yes, I think Wolfe has the potential to be more than just about anyone on this board is saying. I hear the words that call him a clown, a midget, a pure third down back, a waste, garbage...and the guy hasn't been given the shot. I don't see how anyone can relegate him or downplay him when he hasn't been given a chance. I'm sure Barry Sanders would have received the same scorn from this board until he started killing the opponent...and even then I'm sure some of it would have continued. What's to lose with letting Wolfe get carries and seeing, maybe, just maybe, if JA picked up the next Dunn? The chance seems to have worked out for every other team that's taken a chance on the guy. Ask Ohio State if he's a third down back.

[Butkus]

I think it is a mistake not to get a veteran backup running back. We have a rookie who we are counting on to be a starter in Forte, a seemingly solid backup in Peterson who has never had significant playing time, and a relatively complete unknown in Wolfe who everyone seems to agree is not an every down back. So, if Forte and/or Peterson do not perform well or get hurt, we are in a dire situation.

 

This decision reminds me of the decision by the staff to keep giving Grossman the starting QB job, or to give Benson the starting job by releasing TJ despite the fact that he never earned it. It is a mistake that could really wruin a season, I hope it doesn't. I just cannot believe that picking up a vet RB would be that expensive or anything but a solid insurance policy. I generally like the Bears management decisions, but not this one.

[Connorbear]

This decision reminds me of the decision by the staff to keep giving Grossman the starting QB job, or to give Benson the starting job by releasing TJ despite the fact that he never earned it. It is a mistake that could really wruin a season, I hope it doesn't. I just cannot believe that picking up a vet RB would be that expensive or anything but a solid insurance policy. I generally like the Bears management decisions, but not this one.

Correction - TJ was not released; he was traded. But I do get your point.

 

Peace

[nfoligno]

Actually, my problem with the entire idea that is being pushed in this thread is that we suddenly have a good back in Forte. We simply don't know that. He could be the next Salaam, Enis, or Benson. It's always nice to bring guys in, but until the guys we have are given a chance to excel, we will never know what we have...and we'll always be searching.

 

If Forte doesn't have it, then AP and Wolfe should get the ball more. If they don't have it, THEN the Bears should search out other options. If the Bears go get veteran leadership (i.e. Alexander or Jones), then that is basically saying that AP and Wolfe are nearly pointless...and given some of the things we've seen each do - AP more than Wolfe, obviously - it's just impossible to say.

 

I am a bit confused in your argument. On one hand, you seem to say you have an issue w/ the "statement" forte is a good back, as we just do not know. I agree w/ you on this. On the other hand, it seems like you just want to live and die w/ what we have, rather than bring in competition. Is this accurate.

 

For me, if you took AP out of the equation, I think I might agree. Forte has not had his chance, and I would agree Wolfe has not either. AP though? He has been on the team what, 6 years. In that time, he did little to make coaches think he was a starter. He has had some good runs, and even some good games, but is simply not a starter. Go through the history of the NFL and try to find a RB that broke out his 7th season. It just doesn't happen.

 

To me, AP is a solid #3/special teams. But there lies the rub. Few believe Wolfe should be our #2. IMHO, that is the issue for most. While everyone likes AP, most still feel he is more a #2 than a #3, but we have Wolfe, who is viewed as a #3. That is the whole issue IMHO. Fans simply want an upgrade at #2. A RB that can compete w/ Forte, make him earn the job, and be a solid replacement if needed.

 

And, yes, I think Wolfe has the potential to be more than just about anyone on this board is saying. I hear the words that call him a clown, a midget, a pure third down back, a waste, garbage...and the guy hasn't been given the shot. I don't see how anyone can relegate him or downplay him when he hasn't been given a chance. I'm sure Barry Sanders would have received the same scorn from this board until he started killing the opponent...and even then I'm sure some of it would have continued. What's to lose with letting Wolfe get carries and seeing, maybe, just maybe, if JA picked up the next Dunn? The chance seems to have worked out for every other team that's taken a chance on the guy. Ask Ohio State if he's a third down back.

 

First, your better off sticking w/ Dunn as your example. I have never liked when people try to use some of the greatest players in history as an example. Those players are often an exception, rather than the rule. Surely, you are not going to say Wolfe has Payton or Sanders skills. Because unless you think he has that level of skill, to use the geatest ever as exapmles doesn't work.

 

I admit, I have pre-draft bias. Before the draft, I read quite a lot about him. He was touted by a couple local sports writers I respect. But he was considered a 2nd day pick, 3rd down back, special teams player. Even those who were touting him and among his biggest supporters did not view him as a 1st day pick w/ the potential to be an every down starter. Further, I still do not believe our own personnel people thought that of him. I still believe he was drafted w/ the belief Benson would be our franchise tailback, and Wolfe could be a solid change of pace, 3rd down opion. Further, I think Wolfe was drafted right after the SB, when we watch Indy squib kick to avoid Hester. I think he was drafted to be the "up" returner, but per coaches, he didn't look great in practices in that role, so it didn't happen. I just do not believe our own scouts ever even envisioned Wolfe being a starter.

[Da Bears 88]

I think the Bears can be just fine with the RBs they have.

Then, please pass the drugs you're taking.

[jason]

Actually, my problem with the entire idea that is being pushed in this thread is that we suddenly have a good back in Forte. We simply don't know that. He could be the next Salaam, Enis, or Benson. It's always nice to bring guys in, but until the guys we have are given a chance to excel, we will never know what we have...and we'll always be searching.

 

If Forte doesn't have it, then AP and Wolfe should get the ball more. If they don't have it, THEN the Bears should search out other options. If the Bears go get veteran leadership (i.e. Alexander or Jones), then that is basically saying that AP and Wolfe are nearly pointless...and given some of the things we've seen each do - AP more than Wolfe, obviously - it's just impossible to say.

 

I am a bit confused in your argument. On one hand, you seem to say you have an issue w/ the "statement" forte is a good back, as we just do not know. I agree w/ you on this. On the other hand, it seems like you just want to live and die w/ what we have, rather than bring in competition. Is this accurate.

 

Yes. It's accurate. And the reason why is that I think the RBs all have talent, and the potential to excel, but they need a good OL, a competent offense, a QB who can hold onto the ball, and OC who is not retarded. Until some of that happens, the Bears don't know who they have at RB, and adding a guy is nearly pointless because a good player could easily fail in this system with these players.

 

For me, if you took AP out of the equation, I think I might agree. Forte has not had his chance, and I would agree Wolfe has not either. AP though? He has been on the team what, 6 years. In that time, he did little to make coaches think he was a starter. He has had some good runs, and even some good games, but is simply not a starter. Go through the history of the NFL and try to find a RB that broke out his 7th season. It just doesn't happen.

 

To me, AP is a solid #3/special teams. But there lies the rub. Few believe Wolfe should be our #2. IMHO, that is the issue for most. While everyone likes AP, most still feel he is more a #2 than a #3, but we have Wolfe, who is viewed as a #3. That is the whole issue IMHO. Fans simply want an upgrade at #2. A RB that can compete w/ Forte, make him earn the job, and be a solid replacement if needed.

 

I'm not saying I really know how good AP is, but I don't really think the coaches the Bears have had know either. As we have all learned, there is a difference between a practice player and a game player, and it's pretty painfully obvious that the coaches have just given the position to Rex (and others) based upon practice. When AP has been in with a somewhat competent offense, he's done fairly well. He's not a stud, but he's a solid pro who could easily be a #2 IMHO, if not for the fact that the Bears have had a garbage offense for the better part of the last two decades.

 

And, yes, I think Wolfe has the potential to be more than just about anyone on this board is saying. I hear the words that call him a clown, a midget, a pure third down back, a waste, garbage...and the guy hasn't been given the shot. I don't see how anyone can relegate him or downplay him when he hasn't been given a chance. I'm sure Barry Sanders would have received the same scorn from this board until he started killing the opponent...and even then I'm sure some of it would have continued. What's to lose with letting Wolfe get carries and seeing, maybe, just maybe, if JA picked up the next Dunn? The chance seems to have worked out for every other team that's taken a chance on the guy. Ask Ohio State if he's a third down back.

 

First, your better off sticking w/ Dunn as your example. I have never liked when people try to use some of the greatest players in history as an example. Those players are often an exception, rather than the rule. Surely, you are not going to say Wolfe has Payton or Sanders skills. Because unless you think he has that level of skill, to use the geatest ever as exapmles doesn't work.

 

I admit, I have pre-draft bias. Before the draft, I read quite a lot about him. He was touted by a couple local sports writers I respect. But he was considered a 2nd day pick, 3rd down back, special teams player. Even those who were touting him and among his biggest supporters did not view him as a 1st day pick w/ the potential to be an every down starter. Further, I still do not believe our own personnel people thought that of him. I still believe he was drafted w/ the belief Benson would be our franchise tailback, and Wolfe could be a solid change of pace, 3rd down opion. Further, I think Wolfe was drafted right after the SB, when we watch Indy squib kick to avoid Hester. I think he was drafted to be the "up" returner, but per coaches, he didn't look great in practices in that role, so it didn't happen. I just do not believe our own scouts ever even envisioned Wolfe being a starter.

 

I admit that the Dunn comparison is better, but the Sanders one is virtually the same. It's a guy perceived to be too small, told nearly his entire life that he can't do it, and continually proving people wrong. Is Wolfe the next Barry Sanders? I highly doubt it. However, nobody really knows if he'll blow up if given the chance.

 

If what you say is accurate, then we should consider our scouts incompetent, and those who make draft decisions incompetent. In other words, the scouts, JA, and the coaches basically picked a guy to do a single thing as the up-man, with the possibility of minimal carries, and when it didn't work out, they felt the pick was a waste. Personally, I don't think that is the case. I think that he should be considered a viable option at RB. Furthermore, if he is to be used as an up-man on ST, which I think is a GREAT IDEA, then the coaches need to figure out a way to help him out and prepare him for the role. I have little faith in any of the coaches, and I see no reason why he can't do well if given the chance...I suspect that they saw him do one or two things poorly, and immediately made a rushed decision - something that has happened numerous times over the past decade.

[jason]

Then, please pass the drugs you're taking.

 

Dude, the key word is CAN. I didn't say they WOULD be.

 

I think the RBs can do well, but the OL, QB, and coach will hinder success for yet another year.

[Da Bears 88]

Yay, lets rely on AP and Wolfe behind an unproven rookie RB.

[balta1701-A]

Yay, lets rely on AP and Wolfe behind an unproven rookie RB.

 

How many playoff teams in recent years have come in to seasons with even less than that and still had their running game perform? Denver seemingly every year. The Giants last year despite Barber's retirement. The Packers last year pulling Ryan Grant out of no where. The Steelers pulling Willie Parker out of no where.

 

The lesson I've gotten from watching how these teams do it is that I don't care whether or not you have an unproven RB, it all starts with the O-Line. If the O-Line doesn't perform well, LT can look like crap.

 

If your O-Line performs well, your RB will at least not look bad even if they're bad at what they do. And if they perform well, then that gives the RB a chance to learn or to be really good if he's actually good at what he does.

[nfoligno]

I'm not saying I really know how good AP is, but I don't really think the coaches the Bears have had know either. As we have all learned, there is a difference between a practice player and a game player, and it's pretty painfully obvious that the coaches have just given the position to Rex (and others) based upon practice. When AP has been in with a somewhat competent offense, he's done fairly well. He's not a stud, but he's a solid pro who could easily be a #2 IMHO, if not for the fact that the Bears have had a garbage offense for the better part of the last two decades.

 

Again, when a player has been on the team for as long as AP, I simply find it hard to buy into "we still don't know" comments. I think we know well what we have in AP. That is not a bad thing, but I simply think we have come to expect too much of him.

 

If what you say is accurate, then we should consider our scouts incompetent, and those who make draft decisions incompetent. In other words, the scouts, JA, and the coaches basically picked a guy to do a single thing as the up-man, with the possibility of minimal carries, and when it didn't work out, they felt the pick was a waste. Personally, I don't think that is the case. I think that he should be considered a viable option at RB. Furthermore, if he is to be used as an up-man on ST, which I think is a GREAT IDEA, then the coaches need to figure out a way to help him out and prepare him for the role. I have little faith in any of the coaches, and I see no reason why he can't do well if given the chance...I suspect that they saw him do one or two things poorly, and immediately made a rushed decision - something that has happened numerous times over the past decade.

 

My argument then was better, as I don't recall the quotes today, but based on things said inside the bears org, and outside, I simply came to that conclusion. I am not sure how stupid of a move it would have been. In Wolfe, they saw a player who could help and protect two of our "supposed to be" elite players in Hester and Benson. I disagreed w/ the move, but if you think about it, we were coming off a SB appearance, and they were drafting not w/ rebuilding in mind, but finishing the puzzle. Benson was to be our RB, but we could use a 3rd down back. Hester was unreal as a return man, but we needed to protect him after watching a fumble in the SB on a squib kick. We were drafting for specific roles as much as anything. I disagreed w/ the pick, but understood the logic.

 

I know you think Wolfe can be so much more than what most feel. Hey, I have NO problem giving the kid a shot. At the same time, much the same w/ Forte, I hate counting on that. Rex and Benson are two prime examples IMHO of where we have failed in counting on high pick rookies w/o having a solid veteran backup option.

[balta1701-A]

I know you think Wolfe can be so much more than what most feel. Hey, I have NO problem giving the kid a shot. At the same time, much the same w/ Forte, I hate counting on that. Rex and Benson are two prime examples IMHO of where we have failed in counting on high pick rookies w/o having a solid veteran backup option.

See, this is one spot where I simply disagree with you, because of the nature of a capped league. Ideally, it would be nice for a team to be able to field a roster where there's a veteran mentor to a young guy at every position, where the young guy never has to be relied upon to do anything, but I'd say that the reality in this league is that you live and die by your draft.

 

The only way to really build a genuine champion in a capped league is to win with your youth. You don't have to rely on it at every spot and no championship team does. But the teams that do win don't hesitate to put in young guys as their key people, as a top wideout, or as a top RB, or thrown straight in to their O-Line, etc.

 

Back up the positions where you can and where the added depth or quality of players you have makes sense (i.e. for the Bears, safety). If you can find a bargain veteran, you take him (i.e. the Bears and WR). If the Bears find a RB that they're happy with, who's cheap enough that it's reasonable to grab them, then go ahead. But if you try to enforce veteran depth at every position, you're going to blow out your cap & miss the playoffs every year.

[Pixote]

I would feel better if we added a veteran backup at RB, maybe the likes of Kevin Jones, and a veteran #3 QB, does not have to be anyone spectacular, if he were he would not sign to be a #3, but someone with a season or two of experience to fall back on, like a P Simms, if released.

 

I would also like to see the Bears pick up some depth for our OL when rosters are trimmed.

[jason]

How many playoff teams in recent years have come in to seasons with even less than that and still had their running game perform? Denver seemingly every year. The Giants last year despite Barber's retirement. The Packers last year pulling Ryan Grant out of no where. The Steelers pulling Willie Parker out of no where.

 

The lesson I've gotten from watching how these teams do it is that I don't care whether or not you have an unproven RB, it all starts with the O-Line. If the O-Line doesn't perform well, LT can look like crap.

 

If your O-Line performs well, your RB will at least not look bad even if they're bad at what they do. And if they perform well, then that gives the RB a chance to learn or to be really good if he's actually good at what he does.

 

Thank you. You replied with a much better response than I was thinking of. The NFL has proven over and over and over again that the offense is built in the trenches, and most RBs who get to this level are good enough to do well if the OL is decent. Other teams continuously find guys that are near no-names, and there is success over and over. The Bears, not so much.

 

I'm comfortable with a rookie RB starting; it's been done before and with great success. I'm also comfortable with Wolfe being the 3rd down back, because I, unlike most others, think that he is capable of some great stuff on the field if given the chance.

[Da Bears 88]

Thank you. You replied with a much better response than I was thinking of. The NFL has proven over and over and over again that the offense is built in the trenches, and most RBs who get to this level are good enough to do well if the OL is decent. Other teams continuously find guys that are near no-names, and there is success over and over. The Bears, not so much.

 

I'm comfortable with a rookie RB starting; it's been done before and with great success. I'm also comfortable with Wolfe being the 3rd down back, because I, unlike most others, think that he is capable of some great stuff on the field if given the chance.

Pass the kool aid Jason. Because, it must be a great flavor.