Welcome to 4-12

[azbearsfan]

Checked the stats at ESPN.com. In 2007:

 

Kyle Orton: 3 starts, was sacked twice

Rex Grossman: 8 starts, was sacked 25 times. That's TWENTY-FIVE FREAKING TIMES!!! That means Rex gets sacked more then 3 times a game. Orton didn't get sacked 3 times in 3 games.

 

I never acted like Orton was god. I only implied that he wasn't as bad as Rex.

 

Orton does get sacked . . . just not multiple times every game.

 

So "You get real man."

 

I posted this in another post. 11 of those sacks were in two games the Giants and Seahawks. Both with top end pass rushes. But if you really looked at the stats, Rex actually had pretty good games in both. Over 250 yrd.

[bradjock]

I posted this in another post. 11 of those sacks were in two games the Giants and Seahawks. Both with top end pass rushes. But if you really looked at the stats, Rex actually had pretty good games in both. Over 250 yrd.

 

Rex had good yards versus the Giants & Seahawks because we were playing from behind. A ton of his yards came in the 4th quarter. The thing is, those were both two big games against top NFC teams, and he gets sacked 11 times?

 

Even so, if you take those games out, Rex was sacked 14 times in 6 games. Sheesh. That still doesn't give me confidence. In 2006 he was sacked 21 times. That's still high compared to Orton. Rex just doesn't have the sight now the mobility to avoid getting sacked.

 

Which brings me back to my original point: All things being equal, Kyle is not worse then Rex. Therefore he gets the job.

[nfoligno]

Jeez, pat yourself on the back much? I was talking about how our line was getting old before the start of the season LAST YEAR. Several agreed then.

 

Your right. Too much damn back patting going on. Just recall being in the minority w/ Jason, fighting w/ an on-slaught of posters who simply didn't think going heavy on the OL was necessary.

[Diehardfan]

The problems here are many...most anywhere you look. From the GM to the coaching to the players, its bad, real bad. You have a GM who cant pick a player in the 1st round that can play, who cant recognize a QB that can play in this league and is not the least bit progressive or inovative in replacing aging veterans or the basic job of building a franchise. You have a coaching staff who refuses to adapt their philosophy to the players at hand and year after year pay the price for it...a defensive coordinator who dutifully calls a passive defensive game demanded by his head coach...an offensive coordinator who refuses to alter his blocking assignments regardless of the pathetic condition of the offensive line and the laughable lack of ability of his QBs and WRs. The players are what they are....good enough to compete on defense but no where near good enough to compete when they're paired with an offense thats mid-level college quality, at best. You may be saying....What's he talking about? We were just in the Super Bowl a couple of years ago. Thats very true, but it was also a fluke...courtesy of a VERY weak NFC and an extremely weak last place schedule. Did any of you honestly think the Bears would beat the Manning and the Colts that year?

 

This is only the beginning, boys. There is very little young talent here and what they have is on defense and aging more quickly than normal because of having to take 3/4 of the snaps every game.

[jason]

An Oline heavy draft wouldn't have done much for the present, as most rookie linemen rarely ever make much of an impact. However, it would have helped for the future.

 

Gotta start somewhere!! It's not a new philosophy for me, and if it's not addressed in next year's draft, we'll be having this same discussion.

[jason]

That being said, I'd love to see some continuity with our WR's. It seemed like we were constantly shuffling in Booker/Lloyd/Bradley/Hester and "Stone Hands" Bennett. With the exception of Lloy & Orton on the two minute drive, I didn't feel like any of these guys were in long enough to really show what they can do.

 

Don't you DARE steal Dez White's hard earned nickname and try to give it to Bennett. Come up with something new if you want, but nobody will ever be Stonehands except for Dez White. Next thing you know you'll be calling someone Sweetness.

[Mongo3451]

Your right. Too much damn back patting going on. Just recall being in the minority w/ Jason, fighting w/ an on-slaught of posters who simply didn't think going heavy on the OL was necessary.

Again, you and Jason need to get off each others nutsacks. Many people wanted OL.(Me, Pix, Chile, Conner, BrianBear, BearSox, etc...) You just happened to be blasted for it.

[nfoligno]

Again, you and Jason need to get off each others nutsacks. Many people wanted OL.(Me, Pix, Chile, Conner, BrianBear, BearSox, etc...) You just happened to be blasted for it.

 

I can take getting blasted, but, while I do not recall what every poster said/wanted, I think it is a question of extremes. Many, if not most, posters wanted to improve the OL. Many wanted Faneca, or draft and OT, or this or that. Where I think the minority came into play was in how many OL some of us wanted to add. I was not just wanting one or two players. I wanted a huge turnover. I wanted to add (through FA and the draft) starters and an largue influx of depth. I was looking for 3 or 4 OL in the draft, and not a 1st and a group of 7ths.

 

Look, seriously, I didn't want to even begin an "I told you so" direction. There were plenty of fans that could jump into that discussion. Call it a moment of weakness. It was a subject Jason and I were often ridiculed for, and I guess I let out some frustration.

 

My only hope is that (a) some players on the OL play/develop better than expected. Barton, Beekman and Oakley for example. Or ( Angelo has FINALLY learned to value the OL a LOT more than he has in the past.

[Mongo3451]

My only hope is that (a) some players on the OL play/develop better than expected. Barton, Beekman and Oakley for example. Or ( Angelo has FINALLY learned to value the OL a LOT more than he has in the past.

Whole heartedly agree...

[jason]

I can take getting blasted, but, while I do not recall what every poster said/wanted, I think it is a question of extremes. Many, if not most, posters wanted to improve the OL. Many wanted Faneca, or draft and OT, or this or that. Where I think the minority came into play was in how many OL some of us wanted to add. I was not just wanting one or two players. I wanted a huge turnover. I wanted to add (through FA and the draft) starters and an largue influx of depth. I was looking for 3 or 4 OL in the draft, and not a 1st and a group of 7ths.

 

Look, seriously, I didn't want to even begin an "I told you so" direction. There were plenty of fans that could jump into that discussion. Call it a moment of weakness. It was a subject Jason and I were often ridiculed for, and I guess I let out some frustration.

 

My only hope is that (a) some players on the OL play/develop better than expected. Barton, Beekman and Oakley for example. Or ( Angelo has FINALLY learned to value the OL a LOT more than he has in the past.

 

Bingo. That's it. And for me, to be quite honest, it has a little bit of "I told you so" in it. Sue me. It's just irritating to be right more often than the actual people running the team is all.

[CrackerDog]

Bingo. That's it. And for me, to be quite honest, it has a little bit of "I told you so" in it. Sue me. It's just irritating to be right more often than the actual people running the team is all.

 

And that's what irritates me. You clearly aren't right more often than the people running the team. I see this type of thing all the time, here and elsewhere. It's real easy to call up a radio show and talk about how the Bears should've drafted O Line with every pick in the draft. But then you'd be a complete moron. The team needs to address all sorts of issues, for now and into the future, with each pick they make. They can't say "Well damn, our O Line is going to suck so we should dedicate our entire draft to it." They have to say:

 

1.) We need help on the O Line. Our biggest need is LT. Let's get the best one available with the first pick we have. They did. Turns out he's hurt. If they had a crystal ball they may have gone a different direction. Or you can choose to believe PFT.com and the rumormill. In this case, it suits your needs so I'm sure you will. Per the Bears, this injury isn't related to the rumors floating around on draft day. The kid didn't miss a game his entire college career. Maybe they screwed up and maybe they didn't. But since your intent is the bash JA for the pick, assume away...

2.) They need to evaluate guys they have. In this case they expected Beekman and a few guys we've had shelved would come around. This doesn't happen over night fellas. You don't know shit about what they've seen in workouts, drills, minicamp, etc. You get a 30 second blurb on the news during sports. That's your entire knowledge base on this issue. But you and NFO are friggen geniuses and our coaches and GM are morons. Puh...lease....

3.) You have to address other needs. I'm not certain but I believe I told you I didn't think Benson was coming back this season, regardless of his issues in Texas. I told you I heard from an insider that the training staff was concerned over Benson's injury. I was told that they said that lots of guys come back from this type of injury but that they hadn't seen the dedication or desire in Benson to do so. So, what does that mean? Do you wing it and select a guard in the second round anyway or... HEY WAIT! There's a guy we have highly rated at RB sitting there and we'll probably need one of those!

4.) They have to consider what they believe will become available in free agency when cuts occur. You have NO INSIGHT into that. None. A professional has all sorts of data in front of him. He may know that 5 or 6 teams out there are overstocked at certain line positions and there'll be a number of good candidates available shortly. That knowledge, if it exists, might change your opinion. Maybe even NFO would pause for a second...

 

Sure, I think and you think that the Bears should've built up the line better than it appears they have. But that doesn't mean I'm right for starting to scream about this before last season started. And it damn well doesn't mean I'm smarter than JA and his team or Lovie and his. The only difference in this case is, you claim to be. And that's bullshit.

[Connorbear]

Sure, I think and you think that the Bears should've built up the line better than it appears they have. But that doesn't mean I'm right for starting to scream about this before last season started. And it damn well doesn't mean I'm smarter than JA and his team or Lovie and his. The only difference in this case is, you claim to be. And that's bullshit.

Jason and I have had this arguement before. I have never responded quite that way. Wow!

 

Peace

[CrackerDog]

Jason and I have had this arguement before. I have never responded quite that way. Wow!

 

Well, I have my way and you have yours. I missed all that discussion around draft time as I was having "fun" with some other aspects of my life.

 

I just get pissed off when I see Bears management called out unfairly. If you want to say something negative about them, go ahead! You have that absolute right. But don't make a claim that you'd be better at doing it than they are. You wouldn't be nearly as good as the worst teams management in the entire league. You have no freakin' clue what goes into it. Every decision impacts 30 other elements of the team that no internet fan could possibly comprehend. Not even great brains like Nfo or Jason.

 

There are lots of people who are "smarter" than JA and Lovie on the internet or on talk radio. They all claim the Bears are cheap or stupid or whatever. Well, the Bears haven't been "cheap" in a decade, maybe longer. Join us in the present! And those stupid bastages running the team are one of four groups who can claim to have put their team in the Superbowl in the last 18 months. Case closed.

[azbearsfan]

Well, I have my way and you have yours. I missed all that discussion around draft time as I was having "fun" with some other aspects of my life.

 

I just get pissed off when I see Bears management called out unfairly. If you want to say something negative about them, go ahead! You have that absolute right. But don't make a claim that you'd be better at doing it than they are. You wouldn't be nearly as good as the worst teams management in the entire league. You have no freakin' clue what goes into it. Every decision impacts 30 other elements of the team that no internet fan could possibly comprehend. Not even great brains like Nfo or Jason.

 

There are lots of people who are "smarter" than JA and Lovie on the internet or on talk radio. They all claim the Bears are cheap or stupid or whatever. Well, the Bears haven't been "cheap" in a decade, maybe longer. Join us in the present! And those stupid bastages running the team are one of four groups who can claim to have put their team in the Superbowl in the last 18 months. Case closed.

 

 

God, amen to that brother. Well said.

[CrackerDog]

God, amen to that brother. Well said.

 

LOL! I get off about 3 good rants a season. I think we've just seen #1.

[jason]

And that's what irritates me. You clearly aren't right more often than the people running the team. I see this type of thing all the time, here and elsewhere. It's real easy to call up a radio show and talk about how the Bears should've drafted O Line with every pick in the draft. But then you'd be a complete moron. The team needs to address all sorts of issues, for now and into the future, with each pick they make. They can't say "Well damn, our O Line is going to suck so we should dedicate our entire draft to it." They have to say:

 

1.) We need help on the O Line. Our biggest need is LT. Let's get the best one available with the first pick we have. They did. Turns out he's hurt. If they had a crystal ball they may have gone a different direction. Or you can choose to believe PFT.com and the rumormill. In this case, it suits your needs so I'm sure you will. Per the Bears, this injury isn't related to the rumors floating around on draft day. The kid didn't miss a game his entire college career. Maybe they screwed up and maybe they didn't. But since your intent is the bash JA for the pick, assume away...

2.) They need to evaluate guys they have. In this case they expected Beekman and a few guys we've had shelved would come around. This doesn't happen over night fellas. You don't know shit about what they've seen in workouts, drills, minicamp, etc. You get a 30 second blurb on the news during sports. That's your entire knowledge base on this issue. But you and NFO are friggen geniuses and our coaches and GM are morons. Puh...lease....

3.) You have to address other needs. I'm not certain but I believe I told you I didn't think Benson was coming back this season, regardless of his issues in Texas. I told you I heard from an insider that the training staff was concerned over Benson's injury. I was told that they said that lots of guys come back from this type of injury but that they hadn't seen the dedication or desire in Benson to do so. So, what does that mean? Do you wing it and select a guard in the second round anyway or... HEY WAIT! There's a guy we have highly rated at RB sitting there and we'll probably need one of those!

4.) They have to consider what they believe will become available in free agency when cuts occur. You have NO INSIGHT into that. None. A professional has all sorts of data in front of him. He may know that 5 or 6 teams out there are overstocked at certain line positions and there'll be a number of good candidates available shortly. That knowledge, if it exists, might change your opinion. Maybe even NFO would pause for a second...

 

Sure, I think and you think that the Bears should've built up the line better than it appears they have. But that doesn't mean I'm right for starting to scream about this before last season started. And it damn well doesn't mean I'm smarter than JA and his team or Lovie and his. The only difference in this case is, you claim to be. And that's bullshit.

 

1. I've never claimed anything about the injury. I never bashed the pick. Please pay attention before throwing ignorant claims around. I liked the pick. I would have liked Otah maybe a thismuchmore, but I was happy with Williams.

2. None of us are involved in the inside stuff, but what we see on the field is supposed to be the best the Bears have. And as far as the OL goes, that was total shit last year. If you couldn't see this, then you dont' know football.

3. The Forte pick happened to just work out perfectly for the Bears. At the time, I felt it was too high of a pick for a RB, but since Benson screwed up again and then got cut, the Forte pick was seemingly prophetic. At the time, however, the Bears didn't really know what they had in Benson or Wolfe, and to a lesser extent AP, and it was because the OL sucked last year. A RB who isn't superhuman (see Payton, Sanders) can't properly be evaluated with a garbage OL. Highly rated or not, need has to be factored in significantly when considering major holes on a team. That's just common sense.

4. The FA stuff is a wash and you know it. VERY RARELY is there a surprise FA. We know nearly the same time as the teams do because of the proliferation of inside sources and breaking updates on the ESPN ticker. Furthermore, the salary cap is easily known, and often times (see LT2 on this board), it's more comprehensive than the news outlets.

 

Say what you want dude, but it's not bullshit. And it's anything from clear as to whether or not I've been right or wrong more often than those running the franchise. With access to the former boards, it's really easy to see that I - and many other members - have been right on just as consistent a basis as JA and the Bears, if not moreso. Neither you nor I can prove it one way or the other, so we don't know for sure, but I'm absolutely positive that over the years I would have put together a more consistent, more solid team than those in charge of the Bears. Sure, we wouldn't have had some of the guys we now love, but I think overall we would have had a better team consistently. That has nothing to do with being smarter than another person. It has something to do with the saying, "Too far into the forest to see the trees." A lot of times, these guys overthink things instead of just making smart decisions.

 

Anyone with half a brain knew that Shaq going to the Suns was a bad idea, but the people running the franchise did it anyway. Horrible decisions like this take place every year, in every sport.

 

I don't see why it's so hard to believe. I think that a team is mismanaged if they aren't pretty consistently good, but maybe you, along with most Bears fans, have become apathetic towards expectations. The collective of Bears' fans is slowly turning towards the same mindset that has created the loveable losers that are Cubs' fans.

[CrackerDog]

1. I've never claimed anything about the injury. I never bashed the pick. Please pay attention before throwing ignorant claims around. I liked the pick. I would have liked Otah maybe a thismuchmore, but I was happy with Williams.

 

One reason the O Line is in bad shape is because of the injury. You don't need to bash the pick. If he was healthy, we may not be having a conversation about the line. At least not to this extent.

 

2. None of us are involved in the inside stuff, but what we see on the field is supposed to be the best the Bears have. And as far as the OL goes, that was total shit last year. If you couldn't see this, then you dont' know football.

 

The line improved toward the end of the season. Further, it could be said that the biggest disappointment in the line thus far is Tait. Hell, who would've seen that coming? He wanted to be moved back to his more natural position on the right side and thus far it's been a more difficult adjustment than anyone could've predicted.

 

3. The Forte pick happened to just work out perfectly for the Bears. At the time, I felt it was too high of a pick for a RB, but since Benson screwed up again and then got cut, the Forte pick was seemingly prophetic. At the time, however, the Bears didn't really know what they had in Benson or Wolfe, and to a lesser extent AP, and it was because the OL sucked last year. A RB who isn't superhuman (see Payton, Sanders) can't properly be evaluated with a garbage OL. Highly rated or not, need has to be factored in significantly when considering major holes on a team. That's just common sense.

 

You missed my comment about the Bears knowing Benson was an issue before his problems in Texas. I have this from a good source and stated this in the past. I'm not making it up to support my argument here.

 

4. The FA stuff is a wash and you know it. VERY RARELY is there a surprise FA. We know nearly the same time as the teams do because of the proliferation of inside sources and breaking updates on the ESPN ticker. Furthermore, the salary cap is easily known, and often times (see LT2 on this board), it's more comprehensive than the news outlets.

 

No, you don't. Tell me right now how many O Lineman are on the Jets and who they project to keep. How about the Steelers? I know you can look it up and I know you can guess at who they'll keep. Not the point. Jerry knows this information right now, without looking it up, and can project, based on a knowledge of the entire landscape, who will be available, at what price and who best to chase when it happens. You don't.

 

Say what you want dude, but it's not bullshit. And it's anything from clear as to whether or not I've been right or wrong more often than those running the franchise. With access to the former boards, it's really easy to see that I - and many other members - have been right on just as consistent a basis as JA and the Bears, if not moreso. Neither you nor I can prove it one way or the other, so we don't know for sure, but I'm absolutely positive that over the years I would have put together a more consistent, more solid team than those in charge of the Bears. Sure, we wouldn't have had some of the guys we now love, but I think overall we would have had a better team consistently. That has nothing to do with being smarter than another person. It has something to do with the saying, "Too far into the forest to see the trees." A lot of times, these guys overthink things instead of just making smart decisions.

 

I'm not saying there aren't questionable moves by anyone, least of all JA. His mistakes are clear. But you couldn't carry his jock. And neither could I. Fans love to believe they'd make all the right decisions. You say we'd be missing a few guys we all now love. Damn dude... That's pretty arrogant. Look at this roster. For better or worse, one hell of a lot of our players come from deep in the draft. If you're that knowledgeable, you belong in a GM role somewhere for a team. Otherwise, you're just a guy with an opinion, like the rest of us.

 

Anyone with half a brain knew that Shaq going to the Suns was a bad idea, but the people running the franchise did it anyway. Horrible decisions like this take place every year, in every sport.

 

I don't see why it's so hard to believe. I think that a team is mismanaged if they aren't pretty consistently good, but maybe you, along with most Bears fans, have become apathetic towards expectations. The collective of Bears' fans is slowly turning towards the same mindset that has created the loveable losers that are Cubs' fans.

 

You might want to look at the MLB standings. Cubs fans are dedicated, not losers. And they have a lot more fun, as do I, than a lot of internet football experts seem to have.

 

PS. You skipped by the part about how this team is one of 4 where the front office can make the claim that their decisions put us in the Superbowl in the last 18 months.

[nfoligno]

One reason the O Line is in bad shape is because of the injury. You don't need to bash the pick. If he was healthy, we may not be having a conversation about the line. At least not to this extent.

 

Sorry, but I would argue the problem is more than one injury. The problem is we didn't prepare for injuries. We drafted a LT, and expected him to be our starter. Who was his backup? The guy we intended to start at LG, and who himself I think was questionable in that position. His backup? Metcalf. That's ugly. IMHO, when you have a unit that has suffered injuries year in and year out, that should tell you how important depth is. Not us though.

 

The line improved toward the end of the season. Further, it could be said that the biggest disappointment in the line thus far is Tait. Hell, who would've seen that coming? He wanted to be moved back to his more natural position on the right side and thus far it's been a more difficult adjustment than anyone could've predicted.

 

One, the line improved, but isn't that relative? What, we went from being the worst to 5th from worst. Its not like the line was playing well at the end of the season. More a matter of just how bad they played prior.

 

As for Tait, I think more than you think wondered if he wasn't simply slipping. A move to RT was hoped to help, but many still felt there was a very real need to add depth. Especially after watching how fast Miller went downhill, more should have been done to prepare for the possibility of Tait going downhill.

 

No, you don't. Tell me right now how many O Lineman are on the Jets and who they project to keep. How about the Steelers? I know you can look it up and I know you can guess at who they'll keep. Not the point. Jerry knows this information right now, without looking it up, and can project, based on a knowledge of the entire landscape, who will be available, at what price and who best to chase when it happens. You don't.

 

Sorry, but this is bogus. What, you think Angelo is the wizard of Oz? He knows about these things because people feed him the info. You think he himself scouts every team? Hell no. If you, I or Jason were the GM, we would have a flood of people providing us this info. While I am not saying I could be the bears GM, at the same time, I think this is a false argument. If any of us were, we would have the same tools at our disposal Angelo has now. You assume that either we would have to know all this stuff on our own, or you assume Angelo knows this info on his own. Both are inaccurate believes.

 

I'm not saying there aren't questionable moves by anyone, least of all JA. His mistakes are clear. But you couldn't carry his jock. And neither could I. Fans love to believe they'd make all the right decisions. You say we'd be missing a few guys we all now love. Damn dude... That's pretty arrogant. Look at this roster. For better or worse, one hell of a lot of our players come from deep in the draft. If you're that knowledgeable, you belong in a GM role somewhere for a team. Otherwise, you're just a guy with an opinion, like the rest of us.

 

IMHO, I would argue many of us would be able to hit on numerous picks later in the draft. That is because we would have scouts and personnel directors helping us, the same as Angelo. Again, not saying I could do it, but I am saying you seem to pretend any of us, if we had the job, would not have the tools Angelo does.

 

Let me ask you this? Why is being the GM so different from being a manager of any number of other companies? I bash coaches, but there is no question I am a pure arm chair QB in this regard. I know a few posters have coaching experience, but I don't. I know that if I coached a team, I would be ripped worse than Shoop and last a shorter period than Crowton. But to me, being the GM of a team is more about management. You have scouts feeding you reports on this player and that player. In the end, you make the decision, but do so based on reports provided from others.

 

Angelo would shred me in putting a defense together. No question in my mind on that one. He is a former defensive scout, and simply put, he knows defense. On the other hand, I have not seen anything to make me believe he knows offense to the point he should be given such credit. At no position on offense has he proven himself.

 

In general, I doubt I would be a good GM. I simply am not great w/ numbers. On the other hand, I do feel fans have tools today we lacked in years past. Look at the info out their prior to the draft. In years past, you had Kiper, and even that was a huge upgrade to what was previously out there. Today? Today you have loads of sites who actually employ ex-scouts, GMs and or coaches. You get scouting reports on not just the top players in the draft, but the bottom players as well. I laugh when I read someone so easily dismiss a fans ability to draft. No question a fan would have more than his fair share of misses, just as GMs do, but on the other hand, I think fans today have the tools to have some late round hits too.

[CrackerDog]

One reason the O Line is in bad shape is because of the injury. You don't need to bash the pick. If he was healthy, we may not be having a conversation about the line. At least not to this extent.

 

Sorry, but I would argue the problem is more than one injury. The problem is we didn't prepare for injuries. We drafted a LT, and expected him to be our starter. Who was his backup? The guy we intended to start at LG, and who himself I think was questionable in that position. His backup? Metcalf. That's ugly. IMHO, when you have a unit that has suffered injuries year in and year out, that should tell you how important depth is. Not us though.

 

St. Clair played well the other night. Are you even watching these games? They had a backup and/or someone for the rotation.

 

The line improved toward the end of the season. Further, it could be said that the biggest disappointment in the line thus far is Tait. Hell, who would've seen that coming? He wanted to be moved back to his more natural position on the right side and thus far it's been a more difficult adjustment than anyone could've predicted.

 

One, the line improved, but isn't that relative? What, we went from being the worst to 5th from worst. Its not like the line was playing well at the end of the season. More a matter of just how bad they played prior.

 

As for Tait, I think more than you think wondered if he wasn't simply slipping. A move to RT was hoped to help, but many still felt there was a very real need to add depth. Especially after watching how fast Miller went downhill, more should have been done to prepare for the possibility of Tait going downhill.

 

And drafting a boatload of O Line guys in this draft would've prevented that or better prepared us for this?

 

No, you don't. Tell me right now how many O Lineman are on the Jets and who they project to keep. How about the Steelers? I know you can look it up and I know you can guess at who they'll keep. Not the point. Jerry knows this information right now, without looking it up, and can project, based on a knowledge of the entire landscape, who will be available, at what price and who best to chase when it happens. You don't.

 

Sorry, but this is bogus. What, you think Angelo is the wizard of Oz? He knows about these things because people feed him the info. You think he himself scouts every team? Hell no. If you, I or Jason were the GM, we would have a flood of people providing us this info. While I am not saying I could be the bears GM, at the same time, I think this is a false argument. If any of us were, we would have the same tools at our disposal Angelo has now. You assume that either we would have to know all this stuff on our own, or you assume Angelo knows this info on his own. Both are inaccurate believes.

 

You may not but Jason made that exact claim. That started it. Let him fight his own battles.

 

And regardless of where the info comes from, he has it and you/Jason don't. If you were the GM you'd have it. He is and he does. And he still isn't living up to what Jason thinks he could produce with little or no information.

 

I'm not saying there aren't questionable moves by anyone, least of all JA. His mistakes are clear. But you couldn't carry his jock. And neither could I. Fans love to believe they'd make all the right decisions. You say we'd be missing a few guys we all now love. Damn dude... That's pretty arrogant. Look at this roster. For better or worse, one hell of a lot of our players come from deep in the draft. If you're that knowledgeable, you belong in a GM role somewhere for a team. Otherwise, you're just a guy with an opinion, like the rest of us.

 

IMHO, I would argue many of us would be able to hit on numerous picks later in the draft. That is because we would have scouts and personnel directors helping us, the same as Angelo. Again, not saying I could do it, but I am saying you seem to pretend any of us, if we had the job, would not have the tools Angelo does.

 

I talked about this above. The point Jason makes is that he could do it without this information and hence why I called bullshit. You're picking a straw man out to fight about. Frankly, based on your comments here, I probably wouldn't let you serve me an ice cream cone at the DQ, let alone run my favorite football team.

 

Let me ask you this? Why is being the GM so different from being a manager of any number of other companies? I bash coaches, but there is no question I am a pure arm chair QB in this regard. I know a few posters have coaching experience, but I don't. I know that if I coached a team, I would be ripped worse than Shoop and last a shorter period than Crowton. But to me, being the GM of a team is more about management. You have scouts feeding you reports on this player and that player. In the end, you make the decision, but do so based on reports provided from others.

 

There's that straw man again. But to answer your question, the buck stops with JA. Nobody here has ever put their livelihood on the line with making a pick in the draft. Doesn't matter where he gets the info, the point is he has it and makes good decisions, usually, with it.

 

Angelo would shred me in putting a defense together. No question in my mind on that one. He is a former defensive scout, and simply put, he knows defense. On the other hand, I have not seen anything to make me believe he knows offense to the point he should be given such credit. At no position on offense has he proven himself.

 

Bernard Berrian was just signed away from us for #1 receiver money. The Vikings seem to think you're wrong. They're an NFL franchise and you're a dude on the internet arguing with me. Benson was the right decision at the time. Bust. Bringing Tait in was a major coup when it happened. He's served us well for a few years and now seems to be slipping. Olsen is widely thought to be a great TE and we may have found another great one this draft. We haven't had a good TE in Chicago in my adult lifetime.

 

BTW, I agree with you on one point here, I think JA ought to get some kind of "O Consultant" because whoever the Wizard has behind the curtain pulling the strings for him on O, ain't gitten 'er done as consistently as any of us would like.

 

In general, I doubt I would be a good GM. I simply am not great w/ numbers. On the other hand, I do feel fans have tools today we lacked in years past. Look at the info out their prior to the draft. In years past, you had Kiper, and even that was a huge upgrade to what was previously out there. Today? Today you have loads of sites who actually employ ex-scouts, GMs and or coaches. You get scouting reports on not just the top players in the draft, but the bottom players as well. I laugh when I read someone so easily dismiss a fans ability to draft. No question a fan would have more than his fair share of misses, just as GMs do, but on the other hand, I think fans today have the tools to have some late round hits too.

 

All those internet experts... so little time.

[azbearsfan]

It always amazes me that the "messege board All Stars" always say they can do it better and never go and try.

 

Quit your job and present your plan.

[CrackerDog]

It always amazes me that the "messege board All Stars" always say they can do it better and never go and try.

 

Quit your job and present your plan.

 

But who would bag our groceries?

 

(OK, I admit that was a cheap shot. It was meant for humor's sake alone. No internet football experts were harmed during the typing of that joke.)

[nfoligno]

St. Clair played well the other night. Are you even watching these games? They had a backup and/or someone for the rotation.

 

Sorry, but I am watching the games, and didn't think St. Clair played all that well. To be fair to St. Clair, he isn't a LT, but isn't that a knock on a staff which had him as our primary backup?

 

And drafting a boatload of O Line guys in this draft would've prevented that or better prepared us for this?

 

Draft and FA, for the record. And to answer your question. Yes. I am not even sure what your argument against this would be. Either you think Angelo is just that bad drafting OL, and thus drafting OL would not help, or you don't think having quality OL makes a difference.

 

You may not but Jason made that exact claim. That started it. Let him fight his own battles.

 

But I undersand his thinking, and thus can't help but to jump in

 

And regardless of where the info comes from, he has it and you/Jason don't. If you were the GM you'd have it. He is and he does. And he still isn't living up to what Jason thinks he could produce with little or no information.

 

But I would argue we have access to far more info than you pretend to realize. You asked, for example, what the depth chart is for the OL in NY. Then you said we could look it up, but Angelo doesn't have to. I call BS. I bet you that if you asked Angelo point blank the same question, he would have to refer to info provided to him. I question his knowing, off the top of his head, nearly as much as you think. He would refer to info provided to him, much the same way you, I or Jason would have to look up the info to answer that question. In the end, I think we can all come up w/ the answers.

 

I talked about this above. The point Jason makes is that he could do it without this information and hence why I called bullshit. You're picking a straw man out to fight about. Frankly, based on your comments here, I probably wouldn't let you serve me an ice cream cone at the DQ, let alone run my favorite football team.

 

One, again, I think you give Angelo too much credit. He would have to look up the info, just as anyone else would.

 

Two, if the ice cream is yellow, I might recommend taking a pass myself.

 

There's that straw man again. But to answer your question, the buck stops with JA. Nobody here has ever put their livelihood on the line with making a pick in the draft. Doesn't matter where he gets the info, the point is he has it and makes good decisions, usually, with it.

 

Below, you state that whoever is pulling the strings for the offense isn't getting it done, but here you say the buck stops w/ Angelo. If that is the case, should he not be held accountable for the failures on offense?

 

Bernard Berrian was just signed away from us for #1 receiver money. The Vikings seem to think you're wrong. They're an NFL franchise and you're a dude on the internet arguing with me. Benson was the right decision at the time. Bust. Bringing Tait in was a major coup when it happened. He's served us well for a few years and now seems to be slipping. Olsen is widely thought to be a great TE and we may have found another great one this draft. We haven't had a good TE in Chicago in my adult lifetime.

 

Ever heard the one about a blind dog finding a bone? Or how about a broken clock being right twice a day? Point is, hitting on one or two offensive players in what, 7 years?, doesn't prove a whole hell of a lot. If it does for you, your standards are pretty damn low.

 

Berrian is not a #1 WR, but is a good WR, and a solid value for the 3rd round pick he cost the team. Good pick. But that is about it, and again, in how many years. You want to use Olsen, but sorry, that is still up in the air. Until production is discussed over potential, I do not believe you can use a player to support your argument. Would you try to use Forte. He has yet to carry once in a real game, but has shown tons of potential, so would you use him?

 

As for Tait, now we are getting away from the draft, which is fine, but again, you also expand the field for failures.

 

BTW, I agree with you on one point here, I think JA ought to get some kind of "O Consultant" because whoever the Wizard has behind the curtain pulling the strings for him on O, ain't gitten 'er done as consistently as any of us would like.

 

But I think you know well Angelo is not going to hire an O consultant. So my question is this. If Anelo is great in building a defense, but fails miserably fielding an offense, is that good enough?

 

 

 

All those internet experts... so little time.

[azbearsfan]

But who would bag our groceries?

 

(OK, I admit that was a cheap shot. It was meant for humor's sake alone. No internet football experts were harmed during the typing of that joke.)

 

 

lol Good one.

 

I am just amazed that jason still remains without a GM job. Hopefully he gets one with Green Bay or Minnisota. (I would say Detriot but they are all set with MM)

[nfoligno]

It always amazes me that the "messege board All Stars" always say they can do it better and never go and try.

 

Quit your job and present your plan.

 

Too old and a family to support to be taking minor risks, must less big gambles.

 

At the same time, I just think some idiolize these guys a bit much. Its one thing when talking about football players. The best of us would look pathetic trying to replace Metcalf, DM or any of our favorite whipping boys. Hell, Benson is better than any of us.

 

But when you talk about GMs, what skills do they have exactly you believe is so beyond any of us. Were they born w/ natural skills that simply make them GMs?

 

Sorry, but in so many ways, a GM is a business man. He is a manager. And believe it or not, many around here are the same.

 

Look at Lt2. Could he be a cap manager for an NFL team? Maybe. Not sure. But is it so outlandish to believe it is possible?

 

In football, just as in many sports, you have positions the average joe could never consider being capable of doing. For example, I could never coach. As much as I blast Turner, I would be a joke on such a level that would make Crowton, Shoop, Shea and such look HOF. I simply do not think GMs are on such a level some of you do. Some are former players, scouts, or whatever. Others were simply business majors who got into the field of sports.

[CrackerDog]

As for Tait, now we are getting away from the draft, which is fine, but again, you also expand the field for failures.

 

That "field of failures" put a team out there better than almost anyone else did in 2007. I know Rex was inconsistent but he wasn't inconsistent because of the rest of the guys around him. If he could produce in 10 games he sure as hell could've produced in 16. And that failed offense played damn well in a couple of playoff games. Not hitting on QB can be held against a lot of guys in the NFL. Most of them don't put together a team around him that can make the Superbowl without one.

 

Did you forget Thomas Jones? Des Clark? I'm not going to make the list out for you man, do a little homework. Or get one of Jerry's minions to do it for you.

 

And I'll have sprinkles on that cone, double dipped.