Make this happen

[AZ54]

St Clair wants to remain with the Bears

 

http://www.chicagobears.com/news/NewsStory.asp?story_id=5511

 

excerpt:

 

Knowing that Williams likely will be given every chance to earn the starting position in 2009, St. Clair wouldn’t be opposed to moving back inside to guard. In 2007, the 6-5, 315-pounder started one game at left tackle, one at right tackle and the final three at left guard.

 

“I’ve played everywhere,” St. Clair said. “If it fits, I’m all for it. I’ve always been a team player. I can play all the positions. I pride myself on playing everything.”

 

Coach Lovie Smith said last week that it was premature to discuss St. Clair’s role next season.

 

“We’re just excited about getting Chris Williams back in the mix and having as many good offensive linemen as we can keep here,” Smith said. “John is an unrestricted free agent. We would just like to keep as many of the guys as we possibly can, let them compete and there they’ll tell us where they need to play.”

 

St. Clair joined the Bears in 2005 after spending his first five NFL seasons with the St. Louis Rams (2000-03) and Miami Dolphins (2004).

 

“Since I’ve been here, it’s been a first-class organization,” he said. “I just like the team, my teammates, my brothers on the o-line and my o-line coach [Harry Hiestand]. There are first-class people here.”

[BearSox]

I'm predicting an 09-10 OLine of Williams - St. Clair - Kreutz - Buenning - Tait (possibly Gross if we decide to go crazy!!*$@#*)

[bradjock]

Hell yes! I couldn't agree more. IMO he makes a better LG then Beekman. Not to mention, what if Chris Williams sucks? Or gets hurt again? It's a nice luxury to have a quality tackle as a back-up. Considering he can play the guard position, I'd think signing him would be a necessity.

 

Christ almighty, we're still back Terrance Metcalf for nothing. I hope we find the money for this guy. He can't be that expensive.

[bradjock]

I'm predicting an 09-10 OLine of Williams - St. Clair - Kreutz - Buenning - Tait (possibly Gross if we decide to go crazy!!*$@#*)

 

Have you heard anything about Buenning??? Is he still recovering? Can he return to his pro-bowl form? I haven't heard a damn thing about him other then I think he got some mop-up duty the game Green Bay beat the hell out of us.

 

Isn't he a free agent? If he can return to form, that would be huge for the Bears.

[Ed Hochuli 3:16]

BearSox

 

I agree except I think we'll bring in a 1-3 round RG to play there instead of Buenning, especially with his injuries.

[bradjock]

BearSox

 

I agree except I think we'll bring in a 1-3 round RG to play there instead of Buenning, especially with his injuries.

 

Why do you think we'd replace Beekman or Garza with a rookie? Considering we have major needs at FS, QB, DE, WR, and tackle, I can't imagine we'd spent a 1-3 round pick on a guard. While that would be nice, it's far from a priority.

[Ed Hochuli 3:16]

Why do you think we'd replace Beekman or Garza with a rookie? Considering we have major needs at FS, QB, DE, WR, and tackle, I can't imagine we'd spent a 1-3 round pick on a guard. While that would be nice, it's far from a priority.

Because Beekman is undersized and he's not a LG and Garza was terrible this year. We have a stud RB- we better get a f***ing RG, whether it's through FA or the draft. Do we get off the bus running? If Lovie really thinks that, we must improve our interior OL.

 

QB is something we could get through FA, like Collins or Garcia.

[jason]

Why do you think we'd replace Beekman or Garza with a rookie? Considering we have major needs at FS, QB, DE, WR, and tackle, I can't imagine we'd spent a 1-3 round pick on a guard. While that would be nice, it's far from a priority.

 

Obviously, I COMPLETELY disagree.

 

A stud RG, and probably a RT as well, would make this team immensely better. I'd say each is just as important of a priorty as the positions you listed. A solid RG/RT combo would make Forte even more of a stud, and would finally allow the offense to see what the QBs and WRs actually have. It would allow for the development of a full offense, instead of a "hold onto the lead" offense.

[Wesson44]

IMHO they are not going to let ST.Clair get away. Miller won't be back

[nfoligno]

I would love to keep St. Clair, but in partially due to his ability to play just about anywhere. Signing St. Clair would allow us more flexibility in how we address the OL in the offseason.

 

Ideally, I would like to sign St. Clair, as well as another solid OT, than draft an OG early in the draft. By doing this:

 

LT - Williams. The job is his to lose.

 

LG - St. Clair would have the inside track for the job.

 

C - Kreutz for another year, and hopefully Beekman soon after.

 

RG - Wide open competion between Garza, rookie, Beunning, etc.

 

RT - Veteran addition.

 

Having a veteran like St. Clair could benefit Williams, while having a solid veteran RT would benefit whoever wins the starting job at RG.

 

Tait is cut in my plan. His downward spiral has been drastic. I think he is little better than Fred Miller at this point. I would cut him lose, which I believe would save money, though I am not 100% sure about that.

[Wesson44]

I would love to keep St. Clair, but in partially due to his ability to play just about anywhere. Signing St. Clair would allow us more flexibility in how we address the OL in the offseason.

 

Ideally, I would like to sign St. Clair, as well as another solid OT, than draft an OG early in the draft. By doing this:

 

LT - Williams. The job is his to lose.

 

LG - St. Clair would have the inside track for the job.

 

C - Kreutz for another year, and hopefully Beekman soon after.

 

RG - Wide open competion between Garza, rookie, Beunning, etc.

 

RT - Veteran addition.

 

Having a veteran like St. Clair could benefit Williams, while having a solid veteran RT would benefit whoever wins the starting job at RG.

 

Tait is cut in my plan. His downward spiral has been drastic. I think he is little better than Fred Miller at this point. I would cut him lose, which I believe would save money, though I am not 100% sure about that.

 

IMHO looking at past Tampa Bay games Beunning should be starting at RG over Garza.

[nfoligno]

IMHO looking at past Tampa Bay games Beunning should be starting at RG over Garza.

 

Hey, I have him in the mix, but until he shows he can play again, I am not going to pencil him in. Frankly, I am very low on Garza, and was prior to this season. That is a key reason I still feel OG should be a top 2-3 pick, if not #1, in the draft. I know you are high on Beunning, but until he shows he can play, I just can not count on him. Beekman is not a guy I think the staff even wants at OG, but were w/o options. Garza I think stinks. I like the idea of retaining St. Clair, but lets be honest there. When was he ever a pro bowl (or close) OG.

 

If we add an upper tier rookie OG (Duke?) as well as signing a solid veteran RT, I think that would go a LONG way. Throw in last years #1 pick Williams. Throw in Beunning's potential and Beekman's development and future potential at C, and I think we could build a very solid OL, not just short term (the normal Angelo way) but long term.

[clnr]

I have a question for you guys! How much of Tait's poor play was due to him cover up for Garza? IIRC the most times Tait got burned he was focused more to the interior part of the line than covering the outside. I can't properly evaluate the finer aspects of line play since I've not grown up with the game and has really just covered the game closely for the last 3 years (before that it was an occasional game besides the Super Bowl).

[nfoligno]

I would love to say Tait's poor play was simply due to Garza, but if anything, I would be far more ready to say Garza was hurt by Tait, though I think Garza sucks on his own well enough regardless.

 

One big reason Tait was moved to RT (it was planned prior to our adding Williams) was he had shown such a decrease in quickness and speed. The belief was that on the right side, where you have fewer speedy edge rushers, he would be better suited. IMHO, even DEs w/ lesser speed made Tait look slow. He was getting killed off the edges, and that had nothing to do w/ Garza.

 

But it got even worse. Okay, like Fred Miller the first year he showed signs of degraded play, the hope was Tait may need help on the outside w/ speedy rushers, but would be solid against the power rush. Not even close. I watched Tait getting pushed straight back all year.

 

Last year, we started a journeymen, jack of all OL positions guy at LT. We had a red shirt freshmen none of our staff felt could play OG start at OG. We had a degrading former pro bowler at center. We had an average on his best days OG in Garza. Tait was expected to be our one true anchor. IMHO, he was the worst player on the entire OL. Seriously. I felt his play was worse than every one of the rest. Tait was worthless, both in pass protection and run blocking.

 

He was a very solid OT for us for quite a few years, but I think is now on par w/ Fred Miller. There was a time when I felt we could add a young RT to develop until Tait was done, but I now believe Tait is done, and we need an immediate replacement.

 

I have a question for you guys! How much of Tait's poor play was due to him cover up for Garza? IIRC the most times Tait got burned he was focused more to the interior part of the line than covering the outside. I can't properly evaluate the finer aspects of line play since I've not grown up with the game and has really just covered the game closely for the last 3 years (before that it was an occasional game besides the Super Bowl).

[nfoligno]

Ignore - Computer issues.

[nfoligno]

Ignore - Computer issues.

[nfoligno]

Ignore - Computer issues.

[clnr]

Thanks for the answer, although once would be enough

I think it's safe to say that Tait will be gone for the next year, since he's due such large salary next year and we'd increase the cap space by cutting him.

[Mongo3451]

I would love to keep St. Clair, but in partially due to his ability to play just about anywhere. Signing St. Clair would allow us more flexibility in how we address the OL in the offseason.

 

Ideally, I would like to sign St. Clair, as well as another solid OT, than draft an OG early in the draft. By doing this:

 

LT - Williams. The job is his to lose.

 

LG - St. Clair would have the inside track for the job.

 

C - Kreutz for another year, and hopefully Beekman soon after.

 

RG - Wide open competion between Garza, rookie, Beunning, etc.

 

RT - Veteran addition.

 

Having a veteran like St. Clair could benefit Williams, while having a solid veteran RT would benefit whoever wins the starting job at RG.

 

Tait is cut in my plan. His downward spiral has been drastic. I think he is little better than Fred Miller at this point. I would cut him lose, which I believe would save money, though I am not 100% sure about that.

I agree with all that are wishing for St. Clair to stay. I believe it to be critical. On the other hand, I'm not seeing a lot of love for Beekman. IMO - he and Olin were our best linemen this year. He has shown quick feet, an ability to engage his man quickly, is very adept at pulling and didn't make a bunch of stupid mistakes (not bad for a developing young player) He IMO would make a better starting guard than St. Clair and definately better than Garza. Move St. Clair to RT, while his heir is drafted. Move Tait to backup, as the wear and tear of a backup make make him servicable for small stretches. If the staff doesn't see that in him, he should be cut. I would prefer to see a stud OG be drafted in the 1st couple of rounds. Maybe another day one tackle as well.

[jason]

I would love to say Tait's poor play was simply due to Garza, but if anything, I would be far more ready to say Garza was hurt by Tait, though I think Garza sucks on his own well enough regardless.

 

One big reason Tait was moved to RT (it was planned prior to our adding Williams) was he had shown such a decrease in quickness and speed. The belief was that on the right side, where you have fewer speedy edge rushers, he would be better suited. IMHO, even DEs w/ lesser speed made Tait look slow. He was getting killed off the edges, and that had nothing to do w/ Garza.

 

But it got even worse. Okay, like Fred Miller the first year he showed signs of degraded play, the hope was Tait may need help on the outside w/ speedy rushers, but would be solid against the power rush. Not even close. I watched Tait getting pushed straight back all year.

 

Last year, we started a journeymen, jack of all OL positions guy at LT. We had a red shirt freshmen none of our staff felt could play OG start at OG. We had a degrading former pro bowler at center. We had an average on his best days OG in Garza. Tait was expected to be our one true anchor. IMHO, he was the worst player on the entire OL. Seriously. I felt his play was worse than every one of the rest. Tait was worthless, both in pass protection and run blocking.

 

He was a very solid OT for us for quite a few years, but I think is now on par w/ Fred Miller. There was a time when I felt we could add a young RT to develop until Tait was done, but I now believe Tait is done, and we need an immediate replacement.

 

Agreed. The Bears need a RT to replace Tait. The Bears need a RG to replace Garza. The Bears will soon need a C to replace Kreutz. And that's ignoring the fact that the LG isn't exactly great, and the LT is a first round rookie who was injured badly enough that he barely saw the field in his first year.

 

Read that again and shudder.

[Connorbear]

I would definately keep St Clair. He is extremely versatile and was a positive for the team this past yr.

 

Peace

[nfoligno]

I would definately keep St Clair. He is extremely versatile and was a positive for the team this past yr.

 

Peace

 

I think most here would like to re-sign St. Clair, but I think there are two questions/issues.

 

One. What role would we tell him we envision for him. We just drafted Williams, so it is unlikely he would be told he would have a legit opportunity to start at LT. So would we tell him next offseason would be a similar plan as this last offseason? He will be part of a competition for the LG spot, and if anything happens to Williams, he would again move over.

 

Problems I can see here are (a) while it is possible, I do not think we hand him the LG spot w/o competition, but what if we tell him he would have the leg up in a competition, yet at the same time another team simply offers him a starting job ( what if he likes playing OT better than OG, and another team makes him an offer to play OT.

 

Two. Money. While I would not say he has played great this year, I will say he has played the most difficult position on the OL, and done so (at least) w/o looking bad. I don't think anyone would say he was the weakest link on our OL, or even close. Some might even say he was solid. I am not sure any other teams would view him as a long term LT, but he played well enough at LT, plus has experience at RT and OG. So w/ all this, I just wonder if he may not be offered more than we are willing to pay him.

 

There is a fairly decent crop of FA OTs this year, so that may help. I personally don't think money will be the issue, but guaranteed playing time may be.

[nfoligno]

Agreed. The Bears need a RT to replace Tait. The Bears need a RG to replace Garza. The Bears will soon need a C to replace Kreutz. And that's ignoring the fact that the LG isn't exactly great, and the LT is a first round rookie who was injured badly enough that he barely saw the field in his first year.

 

Read that again and shudder.

 

Just to throw a little "glass half full" optimism at this. I agree 100% that Tait needs to be replaced sooner rather than later. I agree Garza is flat out a weak link. But in terms of future, we may not be as bad off, so long as we make moves now.

 

LT - While he is unproven, he is also a 1st round pick who came to us w/ loads of potential and expectations. The injury hurt, but I do not think there is any reason to believe he can't play LT for us.

 

C - I agree Kreutz has been on the decline for years, though I have always said that I believed part of that was due to not having much by way of OGs on either side of him. He is no longer a player who can carry the entire interior, but may still be a solid player if he only has to worry about his own position. W/ that said, there is no question his play has been on the decline. But I think the PT Beekman got this year went a long way toward giving us hope. Beekman was viewed as Kreutz' backup and likely eventual replacement. I think he did better than most expected this year at OG, but I also still believe he is viewed long term as moving back to center. While nothing is certain, I do believe he showed enough this year to give reason for optimism that we have a compatent replacement for Kreutz.

 

OG - Again, this is a glass half full take, but while I am not content w/ our starters, we do have a player in our depth that gives "some" reason for hope. Buenning was a very solid young OG for TB prior to his injury. We signed him on the cheap w/ the plan of letting him heal, and looking (IMHO) at 2009 rather than 2008 when we signed him. In 2009, he should be fully recovered, and could offer a very solid starter for us. I believe he played LG for TB, and thus could fill in nicely for us there.

 

If we add a veteran RT and draft relatively early (if not the 1st round) an OG, I think our OL will have tremendous potential for 2009 and beyond. But it all starts w/ this offseason. If we (Angelo) buy into the OLs better than expected play too much, and do not view OL as a top need, not only do I see us taking a step back in 2009, but we will only lengthen the time needed to improve the OL for the future.

[nfoligno]

Agreed. The Bears need a RT to replace Tait. The Bears need a RG to replace Garza. The Bears will soon need a C to replace Kreutz. And that's ignoring the fact that the LG isn't exactly great, and the LT is a first round rookie who was injured badly enough that he barely saw the field in his first year.

 

Read that again and shudder.

 

Just to throw a little "glass half full" optimism at this. I agree 100% that Tait needs to be replaced sooner rather than later. I agree Garza is flat out a weak link. But in terms of future, we may not be as bad off, so long as we make moves now.

 

LT - While he is unproven, he is also a 1st round pick who came to us w/ loads of potential and expectations. The injury hurt, but I do not think there is any reason to believe he can't play LT for us.

 

C - I agree Kreutz has been on the decline for years, though I have always said that I believed part of that was due to not having much by way of OGs on either side of him. He is no longer a player who can carry the entire interior, but may still be a solid player if he only has to worry about his own position. W/ that said, there is no question his play has been on the decline. But I think the PT Beekman got this year went a long way toward giving us hope. Beekman was viewed as Kreutz' backup and likely eventual replacement. I think he did better than most expected this year at OG, but I also still believe he is viewed long term as moving back to center. While nothing is certain, I do believe he showed enough this year to give reason for optimism that we have a compatent replacement for Kreutz.

 

OG - Again, this is a glass half full take, but while I am not content w/ our starters, we do have a player in our depth that gives "some" reason for hope. Buenning was a very solid young OG for TB prior to his injury. We signed him on the cheap w/ the plan of letting him heal, and looking (IMHO) at 2009 rather than 2008 when we signed him. In 2009, he should be fully recovered, and could offer a very solid starter for us. I believe he played LG for TB, and thus could fill in nicely for us there.

 

If we add a veteran RT and draft relatively early (if not the 1st round) an OG, I think our OL will have tremendous potential for 2009 and beyond. But it all starts w/ this offseason. If we (Angelo) buy into the OLs better than expected play too much, and do not view OL as a top need, not only do I see us taking a step back in 2009, but we will only lengthen the time needed to improve the OL for the future.

[nfoligno]

Agreed. The Bears need a RT to replace Tait. The Bears need a RG to replace Garza. The Bears will soon need a C to replace Kreutz. And that's ignoring the fact that the LG isn't exactly great, and the LT is a first round rookie who was injured badly enough that he barely saw the field in his first year.

 

Read that again and shudder.

 

Just to throw a little "glass half full" optimism at this. I agree 100% that Tait needs to be replaced sooner rather than later. I agree Garza is flat out a weak link. But in terms of future, we may not be as bad off, so long as we make moves now.

 

LT - While he is unproven, he is also a 1st round pick who came to us w/ loads of potential and expectations. The injury hurt, but I do not think there is any reason to believe he can't play LT for us.

 

C - I agree Kreutz has been on the decline for years, though I have always said that I believed part of that was due to not having much by way of OGs on either side of him. He is no longer a player who can carry the entire interior, but may still be a solid player if he only has to worry about his own position. W/ that said, there is no question his play has been on the decline. But I think the PT Beekman got this year went a long way toward giving us hope. Beekman was viewed as Kreutz' backup and likely eventual replacement. I think he did better than most expected this year at OG, but I also still believe he is viewed long term as moving back to center. While nothing is certain, I do believe he showed enough this year to give reason for optimism that we have a compatent replacement for Kreutz.

 

OG - Again, this is a glass half full take, but while I am not content w/ our starters, we do have a player in our depth that gives "some" reason for hope. Buenning was a very solid young OG for TB prior to his injury. We signed him on the cheap w/ the plan of letting him heal, and looking (IMHO) at 2009 rather than 2008 when we signed him. In 2009, he should be fully recovered, and could offer a very solid starter for us. I believe he played LG for TB, and thus could fill in nicely for us there.

 

If we add a veteran RT and draft relatively early (if not the 1st round) an OG, I think our OL will have tremendous potential for 2009 and beyond. But it all starts w/ this offseason. If we (Angelo) buy into the OLs better than expected play too much, and do not view OL as a top need, not only do I see us taking a step back in 2009, but we will only lengthen the time needed to improve the OL for the future.