This is a must read

[Wesson44]

LAKE FOREST, Ill. – Today marks the beginning of a regular feature on ChicagoBears.com. Senior writer Larry Mayer will sit down with general manager Jerry Angelo to discuss the most pressing issues involving the Bears on the first and third Wednesdays of each month during the offseason and every Wednesday throughout the season.

 

This unique feature will provide you with inside information directly from Jerry that you can’t get anywhere else. Jerry will candidly discuss relevant issues affecting the Bears that avid fans are most interested in.

 

We hope you enjoy the first installment.

 

LM: After the 2008 season ended, you said that you believed in Kyle Orton and liked some of the things he did, but you needed to see more before anointing him the long-term solution at the position. You also indicated that the Bears were fixated on getting the quarterback position stabilized. With all that in mind, why are the Bears seemingly not interested in pursuing a veteran in free agency or via a trade?

 

 

Quarterback Kyle Orton has compiled a 21-12 career record as a starter, including 15-2 at Soldier Field.

JA: When you talk about bringing in a quarterback, that requires a few things that we have to keep in mind. If you bring him in now, you’re bringing in a veteran to compete to start. We’ve done that. Really we did that last year with Kyle [Orton] and Rex [Grossman], so we had co-starters. That creates a competition, which was the right thing to do last year given our situation. But it takes away reps from the starting quarterback because you’re dividing those and certainly it does for the backup quarterbacks as well.

 

Given the players that potentially could be out there, we thought that Kyle was as good or better given our situation. To bring in somebody to compete to start to me was running up and down the starting line and really was hurting Kyle’s progress. We had our meetings and we felt very good about the players we have presently—obviously Kyle, talking about Caleb Hanie’s continued development, and we like what we saw in Brett Basanez from college and when he was with Carolina in the preseason.

 

Now is that to say that we couldn’t look for a veteran after the draft? That’s a possibility. We haven’t ruled that out. To do it then, that veteran would have had a chance to see what his value is, and it might be a little bit more palatable for him to come in and compete for a backup job versus if you sign him now.

 

In terms of a trade, trades are very difficult to do. I know there was a lot of talk about Matt Cassel. The real problem with the Matt Cassel trade from my perspective was the contract. He had signed his franchise tag, which was approximately $15 million, so that means that in the ’09 season he has a $15 million guaranteed contract in hand. To do something now in terms of a new contract, that’s going to be an exorbitant amount of money, which is fine if you know for sure he’s the guy. It’s a little bit easier for Kansas City and Denver to feel good about him because they were with him (new Chiefs general manager Scott Pioli and new Broncos head coach Josh McDaniels worked with Cassel in New England). But to bring somebody in and say he is the guy and pay him an exorbitant amount of money given that he’s guaranteed $15 million in ’09, that’s why most teams were cautious about going forward. It wasn’t the draft compensation. It was the contract that people were focusing on.

 

He did a nice job [in 2008]. But let’s not forget who he was with. He was with the New England Patriots; a pretty good football team with a good supporting cast and a great system. Is that guy going to be the same guy in another system with different personnel around him? It’s hard to say. He did a fine job, so there were rewards with him. But there was great risk as well.

 

LM: Why haven’t the Bears tried to sign any of this year’s big-name free agents such as wide receiver T.J. Houshmandzadeh or safety Brian Dawkins, both of whom are productive veterans who seemingly would provide major upgrades?

 

JA: Houshmandzadeh is a fine receiver. Would we have entertained him? Yes, but we wanted to see what his marketplace was. In this case, we felt like [what he received from the Seahawks] was an exorbitant amount of money. Remember, he was a No. 2 in Cincinnati. That’s not to say that what Seattle did wasn’t right for them; their situation is different in my mind than ours. They had an inordinate amount of injuries with receivers and they felt like they needed to get somebody that was established and healthy.

 

A lot of teams would have liked to have had Houshmandzadeh. But he’s going to be 32 in ’09 and the price that you’re paying for that receiver we felt was very high. You have to look at economics when you look at players. Who doesn’t want Houshmandzadeh? But you have to look at the economics: What are the implications to the cap going forward and what does that prevent us from doing in other areas within our team and/or in free agency?

 

With Brian Dawkins, he’s 35 years old. He’s a great player, but Philadelphia put a limit on what they were going to pay him and they know him the best. You have to understand that it’s not just, “Do you want the player?” Certainly there are players out there, but at what cost? And what does that cost do to your salary cap and to other things you may want to do internally and/or in free agency. You have to be patient as you go through this process. It’s not a matter of not wanting to spend the money. The cap is how you want to allocate the money. When we look at a player, we have to put a value on that player, and then we have to stay disciplined to stay within those parameters. With 14 players being franchised, it makes free agency less attractive, and the players that do get out in free agency are making an exorbitant amount of money because it’s a supply and demand business.

 

LM: How much of a priority is upgrading the wide receiver position either in free agency or the draft?

 

JA: Naturally, we’re going to look at that real hard, in all likelihood in the draft. We’re not looking for backup wide receivers. What we want are potentially starting wide receivers. We have a nucleus of receivers that we feel good about in terms of twos, threes, fours and fives, and if we carried six, a sixth receiver. Part of that ties into special teams. What we’re looking at is the top of the wide receiver position. Where does that come from? It comes with a premium receiver in free agency if there’s one out there and/or in the draft. Yes, it’s a position that we are looking at.

[dawhizz]

In summary:

 

1) Jerry won't even entertain signing a FA QB before the draft, but doesn't love Orton, Hanie, and Basanaz to start the year and is hoping someone is miraculously released after the draft.

 

2) Trades are hard, so why try?

 

3) Your first round pick is Maclin, Nicks, or Britt (or maybe Heyward-Bey). But if Crabtree starts falling, JA might trade up.

 

I'm also curious how Jerry can feel comfortable with his "nucleus" of 2-6 WRs when there are only two WRs currently on the roster who caught a pass last year. Apparently we can expect big things this year from Rudy Carpenter, John Broussard, and Devin Aromashodu. So that's somethin to look forward to...

[Wesson44]

In summary:

 

1) Jerry won't even entertain signing a FA QB before the draft, but doesn't love Orton, Hanie, and Basanaz to start the year and is hoping someone is miraculously released after the draft.

 

2) Trades are hard, so why try?

 

3) Your first round pick is Maclin, Nicks, or Britt (or maybe Heyward-Bey). But if Crabtree starts falling, JA might trade up.

 

I'm also curious how Jerry can feel comfortable with his "nucleus" of 2-6 WRs when there are only two WRs currently on the roster who caught a pass last year. Apparently we can expect big things this year from Rudy Carpenter, John Broussard, and Devin Aromashodu. So that's somethin to look forward to...

 

IMHO i think we are talking 2-6 WR with the Draft pick #18/or FA, Hester, Bennett, Devin Aromashodu Davis,Rideau. Bookers gone, Llyod has not be signed and is a FA, Rudy Carpenter, John Broussard PS players won't make the team. Now if you look at these players it goes like this Both Devins (Hester &Aromashodu) are speed guys like 4.3 to 4.4 fourty types. Bennett & Davis are slot guys, Rideau and whoever will be the pocession WR, But just think about how Macklin, Nicks, DHB, or Britt will fit in with this group Or if we could get Harrison(to old for me),Holt, Walker from the Raiders we could do a few things in the passing game.

[Ed Hochuli 3:16]

Sorry but there's no way we trade up for Crabtree. I'd love for it to happen- don't get me wrong- but he won't do it.

[BearSox]

Hopefully us not signing a QB before the draft means we will make a play for Mark Sanchez.

[Connorbear]

If he drafts a WR in the first round I will be pissed (unless somehow Crabtree falls to us which he won't). Draft a friggin o-lineman or free safety (if he's not getting one in FA).

 

Peace

[dawhizz]

If he drafts a WR in the first round I will be pissed (unless somehow Crabtree falls to us which he won't). Draft a friggin o-lineman or free safety (if he's not getting one in FA).

 

Peace

 

Which FS do you think is worth the #18 pick? Because I don't see one. Plus, if Oher is gone before 18, what OL do you want to draft? Duke Robinson? Eben Britton? Would you really take both those guys over Maclin or DHB?

[Connorbear]

Which FS do you think is worth the #18 pick? Because I don't see one. Plus, if Oher is gone before 18, what OL do you want to draft? Duke Robinson? Eben Britton? Would you really take both those guys over Maclin or DHB?

Not sure on the FS as I haven't really scouted yet. My priorities would be:

 

1 - Best available o-lineman

2 - Best available safety

3 - trade down

 

Peace

[bradjock]

In summary, we're going to draft a WR early, draft a QB early . . . he didn't address that we REALLY need to draft a safety early . . . and we still need to draft 0-line and DE early. If we had 5 first round picks, we'd be good to go.

 

In summary:

 

1) Jerry won't even entertain signing a FA QB before the draft, but doesn't love Orton, Hanie, and Basanaz to start the year and is hoping someone is miraculously released after the draft.

 

2) Trades are hard, so why try?

 

3) Your first round pick is Maclin, Nicks, or Britt (or maybe Heyward-Bey). But if Crabtree starts falling, JA might trade up.

 

I'm also curious how Jerry can feel comfortable with his "nucleus" of 2-6 WRs when there are only two WRs currently on the roster who caught a pass last year. Apparently we can expect big things this year from Rudy Carpenter, John Broussard, and Devin Aromashodu. So that's somethin to look forward to...

[AZ54]

I prefer to take an OT with our first pick but if it ends up being Maclin I'll be happy, as long as we get our RT in Rd 2.

[Wesson44]

I prefer to take an OT with our first pick but if it ends up being Macklin I'll be happy, as long as we get our RT in Rd 2.

Macklin or DNB in the first

Briton or OT from Oregon in rd2

Burton FS in the 3rd

[Bears4Ever_34]

Guys I think we could be closer to Crabtree than you think. Teams are going to "Willis McGahee" him and he may fall into the draft. I still think we'd have to trade up to get him but I don't think he's a top 10 pick anymore.

[ChileBear]

In summary, we're going to draft a WR early, draft a QB early . . . he didn't address that we REALLY need to draft a safety early . . . and we still need to draft 0-line and DE early. If we had 5 first round picks, we'd be good to go.

In summarry, I'd say JA was well prepared for the interview. He ran all around every question and gave away nothing other than the fact that the team is hoarding its $. QB? Orton is the man, kind of, and after him we don't have a clue. Trade, don't call us unless you're giving the player away. WR, we like collecting non-no. 1s. Draft? It's a crap shoot that JA wishes he didn't have to face.

So JA said nothing that made me feel any better about the team I love. Damn!

[Stinger226]

Not sure on the FS as I haven't really scouted yet. My priorities would be:

 

1 - Best available o-lineman

2 - Best available safety

3 - trade down

 

Peace

I think we need to take the best player available, where teams get into trouble is taking people too early. There are maybe 10 to 15 players that will be very good in the draft, they are usually drafted in the upper part of round one. If one of the two best CBs drop, we need to take them. I would rule out RBs and QBs, because the rb we dont consider a need, and the QBs only have one close to a sure bet Stafford, he wont be there. So whether a OT, LB, WR, DE, CB or the one DT rated high, we need to just take him. I want someone who could be a pro bowler, none of these safties are.

[nfoligno]

McGahee was expected to miss his entire rookie season w/ injury. Crabtree is expected to be ready to go by camp, and definitely ready to play game one his rookie year. He "may" drop some, but I do not see him being a McGahee.

 

Actually, the player I think (draft wise) to better compare him to might be, gulp, David Terrell. Terrell was considered one of the best prospects in the draft. Not just at the WR position, but overall. Then it was reported he had a stress fracture, and his value slipped some, and we took him at #8, which at the time was considered a steal.

 

I am not comparing the two WRs in terms of NFL production, but simply in terms of the draft. Both were considered elite prospects, not just at their position, but overall. Both were found to have stress fracture injuries, and thus their draft stock took a bit of a hit. Still, even w/ the stress fracture, Terrell didn't make it out of the top 10, and I doubt Crabtree does either.

 

Guys I think we could be closer to Crabtree than you think. Teams are going to "Willis McGahee" him and he may fall into the draft. I still think we'd have to trade up to get him but I don't think he's a top 10 pick anymore.

[nfoligno]

I personally want no part of DHB. I love the raw skills he shows, but he is simply very raw and a player I think will need a few years to develop. Worse, w/ our staff's history of developing WRs, I just question taking raw receivers, as I am not sure they would ever develop.

 

I personally do not want Mac. I just believe he is too similar to Hester, and would not offer us a solid compliment to Hester. Remember, our staff really pigeon holes WRs into a position. I think our staff would view Mac as being similar to Hester, and essentially stick him behid Hester on the depth chart. He would be a slot receiver and not even a starter on our offense.

 

Mac is a higher graded prospect/value in the draft, but for us, I think Nicks or Britt would offer a MUCH greater fit.

 

No way, as much as I like him, would I take Duke over those mentioned WRs, as Duke could be there for us in the 2nd round. In terms of value, it is simply too great of a reach. Britton is looking like more of a value by the day. More and more mocks have Britton going closer and closer to our pick, w/ some actually having us taking him. I know Mac is the higher graded prospect, but I think Britton would be the better pick for us.

 

Which FS do you think is worth the #18 pick? Because I don't see one. Plus, if Oher is gone before 18, what OL do you want to draft? Duke Robinson? Eben Britton? Would you really take both those guys over Maclin or DHB?

[nfoligno]

FS is near out of the picture, IMHO. Unless Jenkins somehow falls to us, and we view him as a FS (and he is willing to play FS) I just do not see any FS near value at 18.

 

I am with you on drafting OL over WR in the 1st. At the same time, there is a limited number of OL who may be availale when we pick. For me, Oher and Jason Smith, if either fall to us, are no brainers. After that, you have Britton, who is looking more and more like a decent value at 18, but who else? You have Unger and Mack, who are both centers but may also be viewed as OGs. Each are considered late 1st/ early 2nd round picks though, and I would seem a reach at 18. No true OGs are even considered 1st round values.

 

So that's the thing. Do you take Britton over WRs who may be considered a much higher grade? Maybe. But after Britton, I just do not see any OL being close in value at 18. We could trade down, if we have a partner, but I am not a big fan of talking trade down as there are just so many factors in that.

 

At 18, I would love OL, but our options are simply limited. If no OL is available, I think WR has to be our next choice. I would rather get a FS, but there are just none worth the pick. So if we stay at 18, and the OTs are gone, it may have to be WR. Problem at WR, for me, is the higher graded prospects I think would be very questionable fits for us. Nicks and Britt are far and away my top choices at WR, but are either of them worth the 18th?

 

As of now, I am just really hoping Oher or Smith fall to us.

 

If he drafts a WR in the first round I will be pissed (unless somehow Crabtree falls to us which he won't). Draft a friggin o-lineman or free safety (if he's not getting one in FA).

 

Peace

[balta1701-A]

McGahee was expected to miss his entire rookie season w/ injury. Crabtree is expected to be ready to go by camp, and definitely ready to play game one his rookie year. He "may" drop some, but I do not see him being a McGahee.

I doubt he'll push it to 18, but especially if a team like the Raiders winds up with T.O., the team picking #4 no longer needs a #1 wideout (Seattle), it's entirely possible he'll slip to somewhere in the neighborhood of 10.

[nfoligno]

Looking at the draft a bit, teams that need WR.

 

1. Det - Hey, they love to draft WRs, right? Okay, not serious here.

 

4. Sea - Would have been a good spot for Crabtree, but now that they have TJ, he falls beyond.

 

5/6. Both Cle and Cincy could use a WR, but the defense for each is so bad that it has to be their pick. Cincy, after losing TJ and w/ the status of CJ up in the air, is a possibility, but I still think they draft defense.

 

7. Oakland. If they were to sign TO, which I have heard nothing about, unlikely they take Crab, but if no TO, then I would say Crab would be a very possible pick.

 

8. Jax - They have somewhere between little and nothing at WR. They have tried to find one, but have thus far failed. They have many needs, and could go D, OL or even QB, but WR is a need also.

 

10. SF - No question they need weapons.

 

11/12 - I think each could use a WR, but both will draft defense.

 

17. NYJ - Especially after jumping Coles, WR is a high need.

 

Anything can happen, but I doubt he gets out of the top 10. IMHO, Oakland and SF are the lowest he will go.

 

I doubt he'll push it to 18, but especially if a team like the Raiders winds up with T.O., the team picking #4 no longer needs a #1 wideout (Seattle), it's entirely possible he'll slip to somewhere in the neighborhood of 10.

[DrunkBomber]

That interview is really disheartening. All it is telling us that JA has an excuse for every situation. Saying stuff like: Well, the Eagles were around Dawkins and they didnt think he was worth the money so we have to consider that.

[DABEARSDABOMB]

Honestly I feel a lot better, sounds like he realizes we don't have a #1 WR and he's going to try and address it. I hope that means he plans on adding a FA like Holt as well as a draft pick.

[nfoligno]

Agreed, that was just a dumbass comment. By that logic, why would we ever sign a FA. If their former teams didn't think enough of them to sign them for similar money... Or how about Wale. If Miami likely him so little they were not willing to pay him and wanted to trade him.....

 

I'll go one further. Do you look at every prospect in the draft that falls to you and say, "Well, all 17 teams in front of us passed on him, so maybe they aren't that good".

 

I know GMs have to play games w/ the media, but to utter such a stupid comment is incredible, especially when the interview is w/ the teams own web site, and Angelo may have even had a copy of the questions before sitting down. Regardless, questions about our lack of interest in FAs should have been pretty obvious going in.

 

That interview is really disheartening. All it is telling us that JA has an excuse for every situation. Saying stuff like: Well, the Eagles were around Dawkins and they didnt think he was worth the money so we have to consider that.

[nfoligno]

Some things that stood out to me.

 

In terms of a trade, trades are very difficult to do. I know there was a lot of talk about Matt Cassel. The real problem with the Matt Cassel trade from my perspective was the contract. He had signed his franchise tag, which was approximately $15 million, so that means that in the ’09 season he has a $15 million guaranteed contract in hand. To do something now in terms of a new contract, that’s going to be an exorbitant amount of money, which is fine if you know for sure he’s the guy. It’s a little bit easier for Kansas City and Denver to feel good about him because they were with him (new Chiefs general manager Scott Pioli and new Broncos head coach Josh McDaniels worked with Cassel in New England). But to bring somebody in and say he is the guy and pay him an exorbitant amount of money given that he’s guaranteed $15 million in ’09, that’s why most teams were cautious about going forward. It wasn’t the draft compensation. It was the contract that people were focusing on.

 

One, I think saying the $15m was the key problem is weak. If he said Cassel would expect a new, huge deal, and we were just not sure enough to give him that, then I could understand. But we are a team w/ over $30m in cap space, and should easily be able to afford the $15m one year hit. Just seems like a bit of a cop out.

 

Two. I note a bit of an inconsistency here. He says we don't know enough about Cassel, and that KC and Denver has coaches who know more and thus the greater comfort level. Okay, fine. I can see the logic there. But later in this interview, talking about Dawkins, he indicates that if Phily's staff doesn't want him, then why should everyone else. I personally think that logic is idiotic, but if he is going to use that logic, would that then not be a reason to go after Cassel. By that logic, those who would be most in the know were hot after Cassel.

 

It is less about our not getting Cassel to me so much as the way he talks about it. "Trades are hard". Are you kidding me?

 

He did a nice job [in 2008]. But let’s not forget who he was with. He was with the New England Patriots; a pretty good football team with a good supporting cast and a great system. Is that guy going to be the same guy in another system with different personnel around him? It’s hard to say. He did a fine job, so there were rewards with him. But there was great risk as well.

 

Um, didn't Angelo before tell us it is all about the QB? It isn't about the OL or the WRs, but the QB. Now he is saying it isn't about the QB, but the surrounding talent and system?

 

With Brian Dawkins, he’s 35 years old. He’s a great player, but Philadelphia put a limit on what they were going to pay him and they know him the best. You have to understand that it’s not just, “Do you want the player?” Certainly there are players out there, but at what cost? And what does that cost do to your salary cap and to other things you may want to do internally and/or in free agency. You have to be patient as you go through this process. It’s not a matter of not wanting to spend the money. The cap is how you want to allocate the money. When we look at a player, we have to put a value on that player, and then we have to stay disciplined to stay within those parameters. With 14 players being franchised, it makes free agency less attractive, and the players that do get out in free agency are making an exorbitant amount of money because it’s a supply and demand business.

 

Said this before, but to say we didn't go after a player because his team didn't make a big offer makes no sense. By that logic, you would never sign a single FA.

 

Also, you says its not about money spent but the cap, yet we have $30m in cap space? Again, huh?

 

JA: Naturally, we’re going to look at that real hard, in all likelihood in the draft. We’re not looking for backup wide receivers. What we want are potentially starting wide receivers. We have a nucleus of receivers that we feel good about in terms of twos, threes, fours and fives, and if we carried six, a sixth receiver. Part of that ties into special teams. What we’re looking at is the top of the wide receiver position. Where does that come from? It comes with a premium receiver in free agency if there’s one out there and/or in the draft. Yes, it’s a position that we are looking at.

 

Spin or truth. To me, is sounds like Angelo is all but saying he intends to go after a WR in the 1st, but does anyone truly believe he would be so open about that?

 

One thing that does cause questions is this is, does he not view Hester as a #1? He says he feels good about our twos, threes, etc, but indicates we do not have that #1 WR. Does that mean he views Hester as a #2 and not a #1. If that is the case, does that mean we will be looking more at a WR like Maclin in the draft, rather than a Nicks, who most would consider more of a compliment or #2?

[madlithuanian]

Bewildering...

 

He is an excuse jukebox...

 

Agreed, that was just a dumbass comment. By that logic, why would we ever sign a FA. If their former teams didn't think enough of them to sign them for similar money... Or how about Wale. If Miami likely him so little they were not willing to pay him and wanted to trade him.....

 

I'll go one further. Do you look at every prospect in the draft that falls to you and say, "Well, all 17 teams in front of us passed on him, so maybe they aren't that good".

 

I know GMs have to play games w/ the media, but to utter such a stupid comment is incredible, especially when the interview is w/ the teams own web site, and Angelo may have even had a copy of the questions before sitting down. Regardless, questions about our lack of interest in FAs should have been pretty obvious going in.