Pace Visits Bears

[nfoligno]

To start with, while Pace may be a future HOF, that has no bearing on him today. I am sorry to say this, but I think some fans may need to sit back and take a more broad look at this. Pace is no longer the player he once was. If he were close to that player, he would have been signed w/ in days of hitting the market. Not only has he found little interest for his services, but it would appear his game has dropped off so much that he will be moving to RT, a position he has never played. That isn't to say he can't play it, but does put into perspective how far his game has dropped.

 

IMHO, when a players game declines that much, you are talking about a real short period of time before it falls of the cliff. Look at Tait, and no, I am not saying the two players are the same. But Tait was a solid LT, but his game faded. It was believed he could move over to RT to prolong his career, but the reality was, he was done. Fred Miller was also a RT, but once his game began to fade, it went fast. Pace was far superior to both, but at the same time, it isn't like Tait and Miller were career scrubs.

 

So I just question this belief that Pace would be such an automatic great RT for us for 2-3 years. If we sign him, I would just hope to get one great season out of him.

 

Moving on, lets say we did sign him. Sure, I would agree OT is no longer our #1 need, but would still maintain it to be a top tier need. Per Angelo himself, OL take time to develop, thus if we wait until Pace is done, we will have waited to long, and once again be in the same situation as we are.

 

That is the point I think some miss in my argument. My issue is not adding veteran OL. Never has been. It is w/ adding veteran OL and then ignoring OL in the draft, which has been Angelo's practice since joining the bears. We have had a revolving door on the OL at all positions except center, which Angelo inherited when he joined the team. IMHO, if we continue to add the sort of veterans we have and are, we will never stop the revolving door, and never have the consistent OL I think we need. We may see an immediate upgrade (though even that is relative) but the long term success will never be there.

 

But doesn't signing Pace mean and drafting Williams last year mean that OL isn't such a major need for us now? Not saying that we don't need young, new talent. I'm just saying it wouldn't be as urgent as, say WR or safety. I also wouldn't view Orlando Pace, a future HOF'r, as a bandaid. He would probably play at a higher level than anyone else we could bring in through draft or free agency, even if it's just for 2-3 seasons.

 

We could draft a WR, see how it goes on the OL and maybe draft one next year if necessary.

[akshaz]

That is the point I think some miss in my argument. My issue is not adding veteran OL. Never has been. It is w/ adding veteran OL and then ignoring OL in the draft, which has been Angelo's practice since joining the bears. We have had a revolving door on the OL at all positions except center, which Angelo inherited when he joined the team. IMHO, if we continue to add the sort of veterans we have and are, we will never stop the revolving door, and never have the consistent OL I think we need. We may see an immediate upgrade (though even that is relative) but the long term success will never be there.

 

Okay. I didn't fully understand your earlier point. I also disagree with our "revolving door" philosophy on our OL. I firmly believe that we need to plug a guy in there and let him play for 5-7 years like most o-linemen.

 

However, I also believe that these guys, more often than not, cannot be found in the later rounds. Good O-linemen go early and almost never hit free agency in their prime. Similar to Williams, we have to draft a guy in the first 1-2 rounds and let him develop. If we grap Pace, I don't believe that we need to use picks in the later rounds just to "address the position". More than likely, the guys won't pan out to much. We can use those picks for other needs.

 

If we sign Pace, it would give us a "buffer" for this year. It will be more a need next year. But given our activity, I don't see a problem with not drafting more O-linemen this year if we pick up Pace.

[nfoligno]

If we sign Pace, it would give us a "buffer" for this year. It will be more a need next year. But given our activity, I don't see a problem with not drafting more O-linemen this year if we pick up Pace.

 

But have we not said the same every year, or does it just seem that way? Last year, we drafted Williams to play LT and moved Tait to RT. I would say there was no question Tait to RT was a short term solution, yet we said we would deal w/ that later. Later comes sooner, and we go the same short term route to deal w/ the problem. Same thing inside. Brown was fading fast, and everyone saw it. Yet what did we do in the draft to prepare?

 

Go back a bit, and to me, we see the same thing. We add Miller, and yet fail to draft OT, and thus when Miller is done, we are left w/ a sad hole. It just seems like, since Angelo joined the team, we have had that same view on the OL. We continue to plug in veterans who are either very mediocre or over the hill and say we will deal w/ the problem again when we absolutely have to, at which point we deal w/ it the same way. Continually adding veterans who you hope can just give you a couple seasons, while not addressing the issue in the draft, does little to deal w/ the problem.

 

What happens next year when Pace suffers another injury (hasn't he been hit w/ injury the last 4 seasons in a row?). Oh yea, we will sign another veteran and hope he can give us a good year or two.

 

However, I also believe that these guys, more often than not, cannot be found in the later rounds. Good O-linemen go early and almost never hit free agency in their prime. Similar to Williams, we have to draft a guy in the first 1-2 rounds and let him develop. If we grap Pace, I don't believe that we need to use picks in the later rounds just to "address the position". More than likely, the guys won't pan out to much. We can use those picks for other needs.

 

Understand, I am not saying we "should" draft OL in the late rounds. I am saying we should draft OL early, but expect Angelo to wait until late.

[akshaz]

Understand, I am not saying we "should" draft OL in the late rounds. I am saying we should draft OL early, but expect Angelo to wait until late.

 

Are you saying that we should still draft an OL at 18 even if we have Pace signed? What if Maclin, Sanchez or somebody like that is on the board? Do we still draft an OL who will clearly sit for at least a season or two while also neglecting the QB and WR position?

[DrunkBomber]

This tells me we may be preparing to trade if we sign Pace and Lucas. Maybe we trade our 1st and Tillman/Graham/Vasher to Denver for Cutler. Signing Pace would bolster the Oline, adding a leader who may step up his game if he knows his team has a chance. Lucas has been one of the better CB's in the NFC lately and would give the Bears even more flexiblity at the CB which hasn't been stellar or even solid which the Bears thought when they handed cash over to Tillman/Vasher. The news is now flowing and the sky is no longer falling, now just find a way to get Cutler.

Can people just not give up on this? Were not going to trade for Cutler.

[Stinger226]

First, I would point out that Williams was the only OL drafted in the 1st last year that didn't start, so I am not sure we should simply expect that moving forward.

 

Second, you say drafting hasn't been their strong suit lately, and I assume you mean OL. My response would be that when you draft so few, misses become more obvious. Every team has their misses, but when you just draft just a couple OL (3 in the first 3 rounds in 7 years), the misses become more apparant. Instead of drafting an OT once every could years, maybe try to draft multiple and we will see more success stories. Just imagine if we had the same philosophy on the OL as we do on the DL or secondary. We have had plenty of DL and DB misses, but we have drafted so freaking many, that we have also found hits which allow us to better forget and forgive the misses.

 

When you draft 10 DL, and only 3 are hits, at the end of the day, that means you still have 3 solid or starting players, if not even potentially studs. However, if you only draft 2 or 3 OL, and they don't breakout, it looks like you just can draft OL, but maybe you are just as good drafting OL and DL, but you don't match numbers. Know what I am trying, poorly, to say.

 

Damn I need more coffee.

 

Final point. I get that adding Omiyale, Shaffer and potentially Pace upgrades our OL from last year. My issue is, when you say, "as long as we draft one by the 3rd) that is where I have an issue. Right now, I think there is a low chance we draft OL prior to the 4th, which our conditional 3rd as the top spot I can see happening. If we add Pace? I think OL becomes a 5th, 6th or 7th round pick, and no higher.

 

That is where I have a problem. I don't mind adding bandaids, so long as you are also adding the young prospects to develop to replace those bandaids. Think of it like this. Your kids gets a bad cut which needs stiches. Before you get stiches, you have to cover the wound on the way to the hospital. The OL Angelo continually signs are those temporary wraps. No problem w/ that. The problem is he doesn't follow up by drafting prospects (the stiches) so you can have long term solutions.

I see your point and agree with the numbers for hits, makes alot of sense.

[ChileBear]

How are these moves different from signing Reuben Brown, Garza, Miller? They play good/ decent for a year or so, and then fall off a cliff. And then we are back in the same place we began because we didn't draft shit, and thus had no one developed and ready to take over. But no worries. In a few more years Walter Jones may be slowing down, and I am sure we will then be interested.

 

So many here like to talk about the well known definition of insanity, but to me, that is exactly what this offseason has been thus far w/ regard to our OL. More bandaids to try and cover up a massive wound.

IF we do sign Pace, then mark OL off the draft list. And yeah, it would mean that JA is living in the past with OL and not even dealing correctly with the future. Pace doesn't fill me with much confidence at this point in his career.

[Lucky Luciano]

I'm going to be sick. When is Angelo going to learn, and when are the rest of us? Why are we in the freaking position we are today? Because Angelo has ignored OL in the draft so damn often. He drafts OL only when his back is against the wall, and otherwise stocks up on 6th and 7th rounders to take flyers on OL prospects. But we are in our current situation (talking just about the OL) because every year, Angelo looks to add bandaids when the problem calls for a body cast.

 

How are these moves different from signing Reuben Brown, Garza, Miller? They play good/ decent for a year or so, and then fall off a cliff. And then we are back in the same place we began because we didn't draft shit, and thus had no one developed and ready to take over. But no worries. In a few more years Walter Jones may be slowing down, and I am sure we will then be interested.

 

So many here like to talk about the well known definition of insanity, but to me, that is exactly what this offseason has been thus far w/ regard to our OL. More bandaids to try and cover up a massive wound.

 

i absolutely agree. i have been talking the same story for years on here. you HAVE to be able to build your offensive line through the draft and for whatever reason our GM is too stupid to "get it".

 

by picking up these retreads or tweeners you have an offensive line that has absolutely no continuity. you keep plugging in these guys and by the time they mesh with the other players their career is over and we do it again!! we also keep moving some of these aging players to other positions than what made them even reasonably good in their careers, not to mention we always play them a year beyond their ability to even play.

 

with out any doubt, you need to DRAFT good talent to build a cohesive unit that has the ability to play together over 5 years. if this means you draft high and groom a highly talented player for a year or two before he takes over you do it.

 

also, to say the least, by doing what we are doing it's also much harder for your qb to develop!!!

[nfoligno]

First, I would not sign Pace.

 

Second, if we did sign Pace, would I draft an OL in the 1st? Maybe if Smith or Oher fell, but probably not if it was Britton, who I actually like very much. But while I might not draft an OT in the 1st, I would have OL among my top needs in the next couple picks. For example, I would absolutely still look to draft an OL in the 2nd round, not to mention the 3rd.

 

I wuold allow that rookie a chance to compete inside at OG. If its an OT like Loadholt, he can play OG for a year, and then potentially move outside. If its a player like Duke, we simply lock up our OG spot.

 

The point is, I do not blow off OL this year (late round picks are not different enough) and simply wait to see Pace fall off the cliff before dealing w/ the issue. I draft a player today and then hope to be prepared tomorrow.

 

Just for the record, regarding the specific names you mentioned:

 

Maclin - I am VERY much in the minority, but I am not a fan of his. When I look at our team, I simply believe WRs like Nicks, Robinskie and even Iglesias would offer more than a greater athlete/prospect like Maclin.

 

Sanchez - If he fell to us, I would take him over any other prospect discussed. While I am not 100% sold on him (no one seems to be), I am sold on his potential. While he will need time to develop (a) we have Orton for this season ( if he were more developed, he wouldn't be availabe for the 8th pick, much less the 18th and © the potential reward of a franchise QB is worth the risk.

 

Are you saying that we should still draft an OL at 18 even if we have Pace signed? What if Maclin, Sanchez or somebody like that is on the board? Do we still draft an OL who will clearly sit for at least a season or two while also neglecting the QB and WR position?

[nfoligno]

Glad it made sense. Immediately after that post, I got some more coffee, because I realize that my attempt to put my thoughts into writing was very suspect, or at least more suspect than usual. I needed a serious caffine hit.

 

I see your point and agree with the numbers for hits, makes alot of sense.

[akshaz]

IF we do sign Pace, then mark OL off the draft list. And yeah, it would mean that JA is living in the past with OL and not even dealing correctly with the future. Pace doesn't fill me with much confidence at this point in his career.

 

The guy gave up two sacks in 14 games at LT!! That's not too shabby by any standards. If he could simulate that performance at an easier position to play (RT), it would be a great addition for us.

[akshaz]

First, I would not sign Pace.

 

Second, if we did sign Pace, would I draft an OL in the 1st? Maybe if Smith or Oher fell, but probably not if it was Britton, who I actually like very much. But while I might not draft an OT in the 1st, I would have OL among my top needs in the next couple picks. For example, I would absolutely still look to draft an OL in the 2nd round, not to mention the 3rd.

 

I wuold allow that rookie a chance to compete inside at OG. If its an OT like Loadholt, he can play OG for a year, and then potentially move outside. If its a player like Duke, we simply lock up our OG spot.

 

The point is, I do not blow off OL this year (late round picks are not different enough) and simply wait to see Pace fall off the cliff before dealing w/ the issue. I draft a player today and then hope to be prepared tomorrow.

 

Agree and disagree. First, I like your point about drafting a guy in the mid rounds (3rd of 4th) and letting him compete/play inside. However, I think that it's very unlikely that we'll find a difference maker at tackle so late in the draft.

 

But, if you do draft a lineman with one of those picks, we are doing it at the expense of the other positions where we need help, ie QB, WR, Safety, LB.

 

If we sign Pace, we will have starters at LT, C and RT with competition at the other inside positions. Clearly our OL will be far superior than years past. That being the case, I don't think we have the luxury of drafting another O-lineman in the 2nd or 3rd rounds where we really need to bring in a guy that can help us at other positions.

[azbearsfan]

First, I would not sign Pace.

 

Second, if we did sign Pace, would I draft an OL in the 1st? Maybe if Smith or Oher fell, but probably not if it was Britton, who I actually like very much. But while I might not draft an OT in the 1st, I would have OL among my top needs in the next couple picks. For example, I would absolutely still look to draft an OL in the 2nd round, not to mention the 3rd.

 

I wuold allow that rookie a chance to compete inside at OG. If its an OT like Loadholt, he can play OG for a year, and then potentially move outside. If its a player like Duke, we simply lock up our OG spot.

 

The point is, I do not blow off OL this year (late round picks are not different enough) and simply wait to see Pace fall off the cliff before dealing w/ the issue. I draft a player today and then hope to be prepared tomorrow.

 

Just for the record, regarding the specific names you mentioned:

 

Maclin - I am VERY much in the minority, but I am not a fan of his. When I look at our team, I simply believe WRs like Nicks, Robinskie and even Iglesias would offer more than a greater athlete/prospect like Maclin.

 

Sanchez - If he fell to us, I would take him over any other prospect discussed. While I am not 100% sold on him (no one seems to be), I am sold on his potential. While he will need time to develop (a) we have Orton for this season ( if he were more developed, he wouldn't be availabe for the 8th pick, much less the 18th and © the potential reward of a franchise QB is worth the risk.

 

 

I disagree on some and agree on some.

 

I would like the signing of Pace, as I liked the signings of Omi and Shaff. The reasons I like these signings is that it makes our oline better for next year as we would be upgrading 3 and possible 4 positions along it. I think Omi is young enough to be a starter for awhile. Shaff I think could upgrade us for 3-4 years or until someone else develops. Pace I would like for a couple years to bring some, IMO, much needed leadership to the Oline. I dont believe Kruetz gives us much from that standpoint. And in speaking of Kruetz we need to start looking for a C. Maybe the idea is to move Beekman inside in a couple of years. Anyway, it makes us better immediately for next year, which is going to be a key one for Lovie. A draft pick or picks would take longer to make a positive impact IMO. Plus Omi and Shaff can be plugged in at different positions to solidify things.

 

I also agree that we need to spend a high pick on an OL. We need to get that guy learning and ready to take over for someone. The good thing about the deals for Omi and Shaff is that they are easy to get out of if a draft pick develops.

 

 

I also agree with you on the type of receiver. I would love to see Robiskie here. If that means we trade down so the value is better, then so be it.

 

IMO we also need a FS and a DE like Anderson was his rookie season. We really need an edge rusher who is going to bring the fear.

[madlithuanian]

Ha! True enough!

 

Endgame is this - if we get Cutler out of it, Angelo runs for Mayor and wins by a landslide.

[ChileBear]

First, I would not sign Pace.

 

 

Sanchez - If he fell to us, I would take him over any other prospect discussed. While I am not 100% sold on him (no one seems to be), I am sold on his potential. While he will need time to develop (a) we have Orton for this season ( if he were more developed, he wouldn't be availabe for the 8th pick, much less the 18th and © the potential reward of a franchise QB is worth the risk.

Agree. If Sanchez is there at 18 I'd grab him. He can be the no.2 behind Orton, after giving him his shot in TC and Pre-Season.

[dawhizz]

If the Bears like Pace and Pace likes the Bears, would it be better to sign him now or later? You sign him now, and it means you have it done and can move forward in the draft accordingly. But if you wait, it allows you to keep Pace in mind while drafting. For instance, say Oher is still there at 18 or Loadholt falls to the 3rd or something. If you sign Pace, you probably aren't taking them. If you wait, you can take advantage of that kind of thing and just tell Pace, "we decided to go in a different direction." Just something to keep in mind.

['TD']

If the Bears like Pace and Pace likes the Bears, would it be better to sign him now or later? You sign him now, and it means you have it done and can move forward in the draft accordingly. But if you wait, it allows you to keep Pace in mind while drafting. For instance, say Oher is still there at 18 or Loadholt falls to the 3rd or something. If you sign Pace, you probably aren't taking them. If you wait, you can take advantage of that kind of thing and just tell Pace, "we decided to go in a different direction." Just something to keep in mind.

 

Personally, I would still draft a couple linemen some what early. Even if you get Pace signed, the most you are going to get out of him is 2-3 years of play.

 

The rook could come in and play a guard spot until he is ready to surpass Pace or Williams fails.

 

The Bears on the other hand, probably wont draft a tackle prospect with a pick earlier then 4th if Pace is signed.

[bradjock]

I agree with your point about the o-line, but couldn't the EXACT same thing be said about WR??? This screams to me that we've already decided to draft a WR in round #! with hopes that he'll start alongside of Hester.

 

I agree that we've not taken an o-lineman in the 2nd or 3rd rounds since Terrance Metcalf, but who says we won't this year? If we're committed to WR at #18, why not draft a guard in round 2 or 3? That'd make more sense from a talent stand-point, we'd still be building the line, and we'd still have a need for Pace.

 

Granted, I'm using my crystal ball and making a lot of predictions. But here's what it comes down for me: Does signing Orlando Pace to play RT make our o-line significantly better for the 2009 season? If it does, then hell yes we sign him.

 

First, I would not sign Pace.

 

Second, if we did sign Pace, would I draft an OL in the 1st? Maybe if Smith or Oher fell, but probably not if it was Britton, who I actually like very much. But while I might not draft an OT in the 1st, I would have OL among my top needs in the next couple picks. For example, I would absolutely still look to draft an OL in the 2nd round, not to mention the 3rd.

 

I wuold allow that rookie a chance to compete inside at OG. If its an OT like Loadholt, he can play OG for a year, and then potentially move outside. If its a player like Duke, we simply lock up our OG spot.

 

The point is, I do not blow off OL this year (late round picks are not different enough) and simply wait to see Pace fall off the cliff before dealing w/ the issue. I draft a player today and then hope to be prepared tomorrow.

 

Just for the record, regarding the specific names you mentioned:

 

Maclin - I am VERY much in the minority, but I am not a fan of his. When I look at our team, I simply believe WRs like Nicks, Robinskie and even Iglesias would offer more than a greater athlete/prospect like Maclin.

 

Sanchez - If he fell to us, I would take him over any other prospect discussed. While I am not 100% sold on him (no one seems to be), I am sold on his potential. While he will need time to develop (a) we have Orton for this season ( if he were more developed, he wouldn't be availabe for the 8th pick, much less the 18th and © the potential reward of a franchise QB is worth the risk.

[nfoligno]

Allow me a moment to understand what you are saying.

 

You think it "very unlikely" we will find a difference maker OT in the 3rd or 4th, yet you think we will find a difference maker QB? How is that again?

 

Okay, moving on. You think our situation on the OL is just so good (if we sign Pace) that we don't need to draft OL, and yet you talk about drafting a LB instead? Um, I think either Briggs or Urlacher are better at the LB position than ANY of the OL, even including Kreutz or Pace. If you think LB is a high need, you must think OL is an absolute.

 

Agree and disagree. First, I like your point about drafting a guy in the mid rounds (3rd of 4th) and letting him compete/play inside. However, I think that it's very unlikely that we'll find a difference maker at tackle so late in the draft.

 

But, if you do draft a lineman with one of those picks, we are doing it at the expense of the other positions where we need help, ie QB, WR, Safety, LB.

 

If we sign Pace, we will have starters at LT, C and RT with competition at the other inside positions. Clearly our OL will be far superior than years past. That being the case, I don't think we have the luxury of drafting another O-lineman in the 2nd or 3rd rounds where we really need to bring in a guy that can help us at other positions.

[nfoligno]

One. Your "who says" question will only be answered for sure in the future, but I would argue history is not on the side of your crystal ball. It isn't "just" that we haven't drafted OL in the 2nd or 3rd rounds since Metcalf. It's that the ONLY OL we have drafted in Angelo's 7 years is Metcalf. THE ONLY ONE!

 

As for your argument of, does Pace better our OL, then let me ask you this. Would most any hack veteran WR I might name improve our WRs corp in 2009? Our WR corp was/is so bad that I might argue most any WR we might add would upgrade significantly improve the group. Say we brought in Curry, or Furrey, or McDonald. I would argue any would improve our WR corp. Now say we pass on WR in the draft because we have already "significantly upgraded" our Wr corp. Play w/ names and examples, but I think you get the point. Just because you upgrade doesn't mean you have done the right thing. If you have the 30th ranked OL, and "upgrade it" to the 22nd spot, most would say 8 spots is a significant upgrade, and yet I would say it is still a bad OL.

 

I agree with your point about the o-line, but couldn't the EXACT same thing be said about WR??? This screams to me that we've already decided to draft a WR in round #! with hopes that he'll start alongside of Hester.

 

I agree that we've not taken an o-lineman in the 2nd or 3rd rounds since Terrance Metcalf, but who says we won't this year? If we're committed to WR at #18, why not draft a guard in round 2 or 3? That'd make more sense from a talent stand-point, we'd still be building the line, and we'd still have a need for Pace.

 

Granted, I'm using my crystal ball and making a lot of predictions. But here's what it comes down for me: Does signing Orlando Pace to play RT make our o-line significantly better for the 2009 season? If it does, then hell yes we sign him.

[akshaz]

Allow me a moment to understand what you are saying.

 

You think it "very unlikely" we will find a difference maker OT in the 3rd or 4th, yet you think we will find a difference maker QB? How is that again?

 

Okay, moving on. You think our situation on the OL is just so good (if we sign Pace) that we don't need to draft OL, and yet you talk about drafting a LB instead? Um, I think either Briggs or Urlacher are better at the LB position than ANY of the OL, even including Kreutz or Pace. If you think LB is a high need, you must think OL is an absolute.

 

I don't have the data in front of me, but I think that there is a better chance in finding a solid starting QB in the 3rd round than finding a solid starting LT. QBs are much more likely to be misses than OTs, who rarely fall through the cracks.

 

If we sign Pace, I'm not saying our OL would be stellar. I'm just saying it wouldn't be such an urgency to use a high draft pick on a OL because we have far more urgent needs, especially at WR and QB. Obviously, I'm not suggesting replacing Briggs or Url. But, I do believe we need a real playmaker at strong side backer as well.

[azbearsfan]

One. Your "who says" question will only be answered for sure in the future, but I would argue history is not on the side of your crystal ball. It isn't "just" that we haven't drafted OL in the 2nd or 3rd rounds since Metcalf. It's that the ONLY OL we have drafted in Angelo's 7 years is Metcalf. THE ONLY ONE!

 

As for your argument of, does Pace better our OL, then let me ask you this. Would most any hack veteran WR I might name improve our WRs corp in 2009? Our WR corp was/is so bad that I might argue most any WR we might add would upgrade significantly improve the group. Say we brought in Curry, or Furrey, or McDonald. I would argue any would improve our WR corp. Now say we pass on WR in the draft because we have already "significantly upgraded" our Wr corp. Play w/ names and examples, but I think you get the point. Just because you upgrade doesn't mean you have done the right thing. If you have the 30th ranked OL, and "upgrade it" to the 22nd spot, most would say 8 spots is a significant upgrade, and yet I would say it is still a bad OL.

 

 

Yes but Pace is not some third rate hack like Furrey.

 

The WRs that compare to where Race is are Holt and Harrison. So would you bring in Holt or Harrison to the WR core?

[nfoligno]

Um, are we looking for a LT? I thought we already had one. I "might" agree more starting QBs were drafted after the 1st round than LTs, though I am far from certain on that one, but that is beside the point. We have already drafted our LTs, and I would argue against the idea that you can find a QB easier than a RT in the 3rd round or whatever after the 1st of the draft.

 

I don't have the data in front of me, but I think that there is a better chance in finding a solid starting QB in the 3rd round than finding a solid starting LT. QBs are much more likely to be misses than OTs, who rarely fall through the cracks.

 

If we sign Pace, I'm not saying our OL would be stellar. I'm just saying it wouldn't be such an urgency to use a high draft pick on a OL because we have far more urgent needs, especially at WR and QB. Obviously, I'm not suggesting replacing Briggs or Url. But, I do believe we need a real playmaker at strong side backer as well.

[nfoligno]

I would actually add Holt, but then again, he would be the only FA WR added, and thus would less likely affect our drafting of a WR, while Pace would represent our 3rd OL signed in FA, and more likely push OL way down our draft board, or off it all together.

 

Yes but Pace is not some third rate hack like Furrey.

 

The WRs that compare to where Race is are Holt and Harrison. So would you bring in Holt or Harrison to the WR core?

[lemonej]

I'm going to be sick. When is Angelo going to learn, and when are the rest of us? Why are we in the freaking position we are today? Because Angelo has ignored OL in the draft so damn often. He drafts OL only when his back is against the wall, and otherwise stocks up on 6th and 7th rounders to take flyers on OL prospects. But we are in our current situation (talking just about the OL) because every year, Angelo looks to add bandaids when the problem calls for a body cast.

 

Think about what we have done and are talking about. Just a few weeks ago, many/most on this board agreed our OL sucked and needed a total overhaul. We signed an OT, who has one start in 4 seasons w/ two teams, and who we intend to play at OG. We signed an OT, coming off a bad year, who was called "turnstyle" by his former team, and who many here even say is a young version of St. Clair, who we thought was worth no more than a whopping $1.5m. Now we are talking about Orlando Pace, one of the true great LTs of his time, but who today is what? He is the Marvin Harrison of LTs. Yet fans here want to sign him immediatly and start him over Williams. Huh?

 

How are these moves different from signing Reuben Brown, Garza, Miller? They play good/ decent for a year or so, and then fall off a cliff. And then we are back in the same place we began because we didn't draft shit, and thus had no one developed and ready to take over. But no worries. In a few more years Walter Jones may be slowing down, and I am sure we will then be interested.

 

So many here like to talk about the well known definition of insanity, but to me, that is exactly what this offseason has been thus far w/ regard to our OL. More bandaids to try and cover up a massive wound.

Nfo is this more an indictment of JA or the offensive line coach who has yet to develop any of the Bears OL they have drafted?Lots of teams take late round lineman and turn them into seviceable players but Heastand(sp?) doesn't.Beekman is the first guy drafted by the Bears to actually make the starting lineup.I still get sick seeing Colombo do okay in Dallas and then the very next time JA takes a first round OL he gets injured.Would you be so gungho about going after another guy so soon?At 18 what will be available at OT the 4th rated prospect at the position.Isn' that similar to what we got last season in Williams?With this offensive staff this might be the only way to go because all rookies have trouble seeing the field with Forte being the exception.