Angelo Continues to Impress Me....

[Pixote]

It seems to me Angelo is on a mission. He has been extremely active this offseason, picking up 3 OLmen, A Pro Bowl caliber QB, tries to go after Boldin during the draft, now picks up Gaines, picked up a few other backups for DBs, and seems to have the cap space and motivation to add a few more players before the season starts. This is about as good as it gets for Bears fans. I can't wait for the next acquisition. I would not be surprised to see a few more signings before camp opens up in July.

[madlithuanian]

I basically agree. It seems to me, he "got the memo". That is knowing we have to do more. He certainly has this off-season. Maybe he's turned the corner as a GM. We cannot hold pat and "hope". We need to continue to make strides. I hope the memo gets passed along to the coaching staff! i still have my concerns in that department. But, It's truly been a while since I've been this excited to have the season start! It'll be a long 3 months! In the menatime, maybe the Blackhawks can bring the cup back to Chicago...what the heck.

 

It seems to me Angelo is on a mission. He has been extremely active this offseason, picking up 3 OLmen, A Pro Bowl caliber QB, tries to go after Boldin during the draft, now picks up Gaines, picked up a few other backups for DBs, and seems to have the cap space and motivation to add a few more players before the season starts. This is about as good as it gets for Bears fans. I can't wait for the next acquisition. I would not be surprised to see a few more signings before camp opens up in July.

[Mongo3451]

It seems to me Angelo is on a mission. He has been extremely active this offseason, picking up 3 OLmen, A Pro Bowl caliber QB, tries to go after Boldin during the draft, now picks up Gaines, picked up a few other backups for DBs, and seems to have the cap space and motivation to add a few more players before the season starts. This is about as good as it gets for Bears fans. I can't wait for the next acquisition. I would not be surprised to see a few more signings before camp opens up in July.

I hope LT is lurking with some cap analysis. I would love to re-calibrate this wet dream off-season. The only season I have been more excited was the season after the SB, in which we were supposed to be bulletproof. I'm still praying for a decent FS.

[Stinger226]

I hope LT is lurking with some cap analysis. I would love to re-calibrate this wet dream off-season. The only season I have been more excited was the season after the SB, in which we were supposed to be bulletproof. I'm still praying for a decent FS.

He keeps looking for additions to make this team better and will continue to till he gets it right, we will be a very good team next year, no matter who says Cutler doesnt have the weapons, its about winning and we are set up to do that.

[Lucky Luciano]

It seems to me Angelo is on a mission. He has been extremely active this offseason, picking up 3 OLmen, A Pro Bowl caliber QB, tries to go after Boldin during the draft, now picks up Gaines, picked up a few other backups for DBs, and seems to have the cap space and motivation to add a few more players before the season starts. This is about as good as it gets for Bears fans. I can't wait for the next acquisition. I would not be surprised to see a few more signings before camp opens up in July.

 

here is the problem i have at this juncture with angelo...

 

although his free agent pick-ups have been been reasonably good to excellent this does not make or break a GM. what does is the ability to draft well and with consistency, especially with your first 3 picks. you HAVE to be able to draft good + quality players to improve your team over the long haul or you end up like the george allen skins of the 70's and so far angelo has done poorly up to this point.

[balta1701-A]

here is the problem i have at this juncture with angelo...

 

although his free agent pick-ups have been been reasonably good to excellent this does not make or break a GM. what does is the ability to draft well and with consistency, especially with your first 3 picks. you HAVE to be able to draft good + quality players to improve your team over the long haul or you end up like the george allen skins of the 70's and so far angelo has done poorly up to this point.

The response to that is pretty simple...do you think the Bears are currently an old team? When I say an Old team, I'm thinking about a team who's window is closing, like the Bucs a year or two after they'd won their super bowl, where that defense was getting old and guys were moving on or wearing down. Or Tennessee in McNair's last year...they went in to major cap saving mode and cut a ton of people, and were pretty bad for a year or two. The Bears have a couple guys on the back side of their careers; Urlacher and Kreutz come to mind, but I think they're probably in better position for the long-term than they were after their super bowl appearance, esp. after this offseason.

 

The Bears have some positions they need to rotate younger people in...O-Line, DE, ILB...but there's also other positions where they have a number of people who can step in, and they may still have a couple years with some of those guys too. They don't strike me as a team that is about to break down due to age or cap constraints.

[defiantgiant]

here is the problem i have at this juncture with angelo...

 

although his free agent pick-ups have been been reasonably good to excellent this does not make or break a GM. what does is the ability to draft well and with consistency, especially with your first 3 picks. you HAVE to be able to draft good + quality players to improve your team over the long haul or you end up like the george allen skins of the 70's and so far angelo has done poorly up to this point.

 

I don't think you necessarily have to draft well early to build a team. Angelo absolutely needs to improve his early drafting, but he's much better than most other GMs at finding starting-caliber players in the 2nd-5th rounds. Matt Forte, Devin Hester and Peanut Tillman were drafted in the 2nd, Lance Briggs and Bernard Berrian in the 3rd, Alex Brown and Nate Vasher in the 4th, etc. We've gotten good players in the middle rounds very consistently during Angelo's tenure as GM, and he's built a team that way. If he could improve his first-round drafting, he'd be in elite company on draft day. Even as is, though, he's managed to put a talented team together despite some major misses in the first round.

 

Also, I think the Cutler trade goes a long way toward ameliorating Angelo's problem with first-round picks, just because of how young Cutler is. It's one thing to trade draft picks for a 30-year-old vet, but it's another thing altogether to get a Pro Bowl-caliber player who's only been in the league three years. You absolutely can build a team by trading for young players. Cutler could easily play in Chicago for a decade, and that makes him a building block for a long time. Look at what Green Bay did when they acquired Favre from Atlanta. They traded for a young player and they ended up getting a 16-year starter. I'm not a big Favre fan, but you can't say he wasn't a long-term building block for the Packers.

 

I agree that Angelo needs to improve his drafting in the first round, but he's put together a good team in spite of that problem.

 

 

The response to that is pretty simple...do you think the Bears are currently an old team? When I say an Old team, I'm thinking about a team who's window is closing, like the Bucs a year or two after they'd won their super bowl, where that defense was getting old and guys were moving on or wearing down. Or Tennessee in McNair's last year...they went in to major cap saving mode and cut a ton of people, and were pretty bad for a year or two. The Bears have a couple guys on the back side of their careers; Urlacher and Kreutz come to mind, but I think they're probably in better position for the long-term than they were after their super bowl appearance, esp. after this offseason.

 

The Bears have some positions they need to rotate younger people in...O-Line, DE, ILB...but there's also other positions where they have a number of people who can step in, and they may still have a couple years with some of those guys too. They don't strike me as a team that is about to break down due to age or cap constraints.

 

Yeah, Chicago's going to need replacements for Urlacher and Kreutz sooner rather than later, and they're going to need a replacement for Ogunleye before too long, but they're not an old team by any means. I think they've potentially got the replacements for Kreutz and Wale already on the roster, in Beekman and Melton. Both guys will need to step up in a big way, but they both have enough talent. Urlacher worries me more, since we don't have anybody on board who's being groomed as his replacement. I think we'll need to invest a high pick in 2010 or 2011 in a middle linebacker, and that player, whoever he is, will have to step up in a pretty short period of time. I'd really like Mark Herzlich from BC or Brandon Spikes from Florida, but we'd probably need to find a way to move back into the first round next year for either of them.

[LT2_3]

I hope LT is lurking with some cap analysis. I would love to re-calibrate this wet dream off-season. The only season I have been more excited was the season after the SB, in which we were supposed to be bulletproof. I'm still praying for a decent FS.

 

We have Waaaaaayyyyyyy more cap space than we could possibly spend on new players.

[Lucky Luciano]

The response to that is pretty simple...do you think the Bears are currently an old team? When I say an Old team, I'm thinking about a team who's window is closing, like the Bucs a year or two after they'd won their super bowl, where that defense was getting old and guys were moving on or wearing down. The Bears have a couple guys on the back side of their careers; Urlacher and Kreutz come to mind, but I think they're probably in better position for the long-term than they were after their super bowl appearance, esp. after this offseason.

 

The Bears have some positions they need to rotate younger people in...O-Line, DE, ILB...but there's also other positions where they have a number of people who can step in, and they may still have a couple years with some of those guys too.

 

when you break this team down by need at position, importance and most of all it's future young players stepping in to replace the aging quality or even the poor quality players on this squad we are extremely thin in my estimation with the exception of QB, TE, DL and possibly RB.

 

1. OL - we have one young drafted 'high quality' prospect, c. williams, for 5 positions over the next 2-5 years. the rest that are not limited by age are serious questionmark veterans from other teams who may or may not prove to be even starter quality let alone good+ quality starters.

 

should we have drafted guard or tackle high this particular year? earlier this offseason i stated that i did not beleive so with the glut of FA linemen we aquired this offseason and include buenning also in this list. i still stand by that. but our lack of previously drafted linemen to fill in these positions, which are getting extremely expensive cap wise to find good + players in free agency, is obvious. if these 2nd tier FA's don't pan out we are in the same boat again next season.

 

next - we certainly could have locked down our future center position this season by keeping our 2nd round pick and drafting unger who has very good size/weight and is projected to be an excellent center and could play as a quality guard if needed. our only depth at all to an aging kreutz is beekman who has shown little as someone who is going to excel in the nfl. although it would not have been a flashy pick it would have anchored one of the most important positions on the offensive line where there exists a player who touches the ball on offense every single play. i'm sure cutler would agree.

 

2. DB's - there is absolutely no depth OR quality in regards to our safeties and especially free safety which is an important position in the type of defense we run. nothing on the table now and nothing being groomed on the roster for our future. poor drafting by angelo at this position has been critical to where our defense now stands in pass protection.

 

our corners are not able to play 'up' coverage and it shows as stated in another post about our poor short pass protection (defiantgiant - http://www.talkbears.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=4540). although we have a lot of reasonably young bodies on our squad the trend is still to play them 5-10 yards off the LOS which is due, >>IMO

 

3. LB's - we not only lack depth at this position but lack quality in our SLB. there is nobody to fill in the middle when url leaves or is injured, nobody to fill briggs slot if needed, and not a single strong side backer on this entire team that is even average. angelo has failed to draft any replacements at this position, with the only exception being in briggs, with how many picks?

 

4. WR - we have 2 questionable #2 WR's drafted by angelo currently on this roster and one was a CB makeover. i don't think i need to extrapolate on angelo's draft results at this position more than it has been discussed on this board.

 

finally... the facts are you can't keep bringing in aging quality vets at high price tags like the boldin type receivers or the cheaper end-of-the-line pace/r. brown type linemen without serious damage to your team in the long run. these are stop-gap or over-the-top get me into the superbowl this season type players only. if you can't fill these positions in the draft for long term solutions you will be in trouble if your goal is to win multiple superbowls.

[nfoligno]

LT,

 

One. Nothing precise, but do you have a general ballpark of where we stand. I know the players we have added were not cap killers, but at the same time, we have added quite a few pieces. I honestly do not know if we have $15m or $25m at this point in cap space. Any idea?

 

Two. We have Waaaaaayyyyyyy more cap space than we could possibly spend on new players

 

Where ever we stand in cap space, trade and sign for Boldin, then sign Culter to an extension, and I bet I could spend every dollar we have in cap space.

 

We have Waaaaaayyyyyyy more cap space than we could possibly spend on new players.

[LT2_3]

LT,

 

One. Nothing precise, but do you have a general ballpark of where we stand. I know the players we have added were not cap killers, but at the same time, we have added quite a few pieces. I honestly do not know if we have $15m or $25m at this point in cap space. Any idea?

 

Two. We have Waaaaaayyyyyyy more cap space than we could possibly spend on new players

 

Where ever we stand in cap space, trade and sign for Boldin, then sign Culter to an extension, and I bet I could spend every dollar we have in cap space.

 

The last numbers I've seen is about $20 mil in cap space. I can't see Cutler or Boldin taking more than $8 mil in cap space this year with new contracts. Sure, they will be big money deals, but I would expect a large portion of both being pushed into the future.

 

On a side note, the new CBA negotiations are key to any new, big deals. There will be a number of deadlines that will determine how teams plan for the future and the first will be the deadline to sign players to contracts that use up this year's cap space. If there is a new CBA in place that keeps a salary cap for future years by the deadline to use this year's cap space, then any new contract will have to abide by whatever new rules they implement and teams will have a better idea of how they can allocate their future cap. If there isn't a new agreement in place by then, teams will likely be a bit more conservative.

 

Either way, the Bears are in position to do what ever they want to do. If they trade for Boldin, his deal is likely to average 8-9 mil per year, but will probably be a bit graduated in cap value.

[nfoligno]

Okay, as a new glass half-full guy, I have to come to the support of Angelo here

 

when you break this team down by need at position, importance and most of all it's future young players stepping in to replace the aging quality or even the poor quality players on this squad we are extremely thin in my estimation with the exception of QB, TE, DL and possibly RB.

 

1. OL - we have one young drafted 'high quality' prospect, c. williams, for 5 positions over the next 2-5 years. the rest that are not limited by age are serious questionmark veterans from other teams who may or may not prove to be even starter quality let alone good+ quality starters.

 

should we have drafted guard or tackle high this particular year? earlier this offseason i stated that i did not beleive so with the glut of FA linemen we aquired this offseason and include buenning also in this list. i still stand by that. but our lack of previously drafted linemen to fill in these positions, which are getting extremely expensive cap wise to find good + players in free agency, is obvious. if these 2nd tier FA's don't pan out we are in the same boat again next season.

 

The first point I would make is, with the exception of LT, I think you would find that many teams create their OLs w/o top draft picks. The LT position is an obvious exception, and there we have a 1st round pick. Yes, I know he will move to RT today, but I think the play for tomorrow is still LT.

 

The second point is, while the OL may not be loaded w/ "highly touted" talent (top draft picks or upper tier FAs) that does not mean it is w/o talent. They have questions, but (a) I think there is reason to believe the players do in fact have talent and ( especially on the OL, players drafted later, or even undrafted, can still prove to be very good. Many OL in the NFL are drafted day two and still go on to be very good players. While I think this is more an exception to the rule at many positions, I think it happens often enough on the OL to question the rule itself.

 

Third point is, we have gotten considerably younger at the position. Sure, it still comes down to talent, and whether we added the right talent or not, but we have seriously infused the OL w/ youth. Gone are Miller, Brown, Tait and St.Clair, all of which were on the backend of their careers. Garza just turned 30, but we also have Beekman, Buenning, Omiyale and Shaffer all under 30, and all have starting experience, though Omiyale has the least.

 

next - we certainly could have locked down our future center position this season by keeping our 2nd round pick and drafting unger who has very good size/weight and is projected to be an excellent center and could play as a quality guard if needed. our only depth at all to an aging kreutz is beekman who has shown little as someone who is going to excel in the nfl. although it would not have been a flashy pick it would have anchored one of the most important positions on the offensive line where there exists a player who touches the ball on offense every single play. i'm sure cutler would agree.

 

I would not have been against that draft pick. At the same time, I do think you are a tad quite to dismiss Beekman. Beek was a 4th round draft pick, and while not a top tier pick, the 4th round is where many interior OL are found, including centers. He was considered our backup center, but won the starting OG last year, and while he wasn't great, he was not bad either. And it has to be factored that he was out of position. I think there is solid reason to believe he can be a solid replacement for Kreutz.

 

Few have screamed to add to the OL like Jason and I for years now. At the same time, while I would have taken a different path, I also have to admit we have added talent and youth to the OL. Draft picks would have been nice, but are far from a guarantee. I think we have a nice mix of starting talent and youth right now on the OL. Short term, veterans like Kreutz and Pace aid the development of the youth, while we have the youth to step in when those players step down.

 

2. DB's - there is absolutely no depth OR quality in regards to our safeties and especially free safety which is an important position in the type of defense we run. nothing on the table now and nothing being groomed on the roster for our future. poor drafting by angelo at this position has been critical to where our defense now stands in pass protection.

 

I would argue we have some young DBs who could be developed. Both Graham (who looked good last year at CB) and Bowman, and young, versatile and athleitc DBs who are moving to FS. Bullocks didn't live up to expectations in NO, but in a new system, could be a solid veteran. No question this is still among our weaker positions, but I disagree w/ the idea there is no hope for the future, as Graham may well provide stability. If he doesn't, this will be a position to be addressed, but there is not a team in the league w/o a single position in need of work.

 

our corners are not able to play 'up' coverage and it shows as stated in another post about our poor short pass protection (defiantgiant - http://www.talkbears.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=4540). although we have a lot of reasonably young bodies on our squad the trend is still to play them 5-10 yards off the LOS which is due, >>IMO

 

I agree we have a group of #2s, yet at the same time, continue to disagree adding a top tier, #1 CB is a prerequisite in our scheme. Further, I would add that we do have talent and youth here, mixed w/ experience. And we also drafted a CB who, while small for the position, was considered an upper tier talent.

 

3. LB's - we not only lack depth at this position but lack quality in our SLB. there is nobody to fill in the middle when url leaves or is injured, nobody to fill briggs slot if needed, and not a single strong side backer on this entire team that is even average. angelo has failed to draft any replacements at this position, with the only exception being in briggs, with how many picks?

 

One, I think many teams who have such elite talent at a position tend to have lesser depth. I think you are a tad quick to dismiss the starter talent we do have. I agree we do not have a great looking SLB, yet at the same time, question if we need one in our scheme. The SLB in our scheme is no more than a 2 down player (part time), and few teams have 3 elite LBs.

 

Further, I would argue we do in fact have depth. Williams, for example, is a player the staff we ready to insert in place of Briggs before Briggs returned at our price. You can say he isn't proven, but that is simply going to be true of most any team w/ a stud starter. When you have elite starters, your backups are going to get few chances to prove themselves. We have also just drafted another LB too.

 

I just question the idea that a team w/ talent like ours (at LB) also has these great, proven depth chart players. When you have elite starters, you simply are not going to spend the high picks or FA dollars on backups who are most likely to see action only on special teams.

 

4. WR - we have 2 questionable #2 WR's drafted by angelo currently on this roster and one was a CB makeover. i don't think i need to extrapolate on angelo's draft results at this position more than it has been discussed on this board.

 

But i would offer two counter-points.

 

One, while I am not going to say the WR talent has been there, I would argue it has not been a good situation to develop WRs until now. We the garbage we have had at QB, you simply are not likely to develop great WRs. Now we have a QB in Cutler who simply makes WRs better.

 

Two, while we do not have much by way or proven commodites, I would argue we have talent on youth on the roster, including 3 rookie Wrs we just added this past draft, combined w/ a 1st day (I still consider round 3 a 1st day pick) WR from last year and an explosive player in Hester. Our WRs may have a lot to prove, but I would argue we have youth, talent and potential like few times in the past, and finally a QB capable of helping move that development along.

 

finally... the facts are you can't keep bringing in aging quality vets at high price tags like the boldin type receivers or the cheaper end-of-the-line pace/r. brown type linemen without serious damage to your team in the long run. these are stop-gap or over-the-top get me into the superbowl this season type players only. if you can't fill these positions in the draft for long term solutions you will be in trouble if your goal is to win multiple superbowls.

 

I agree, but also think you are too quick to overlook what Angelo has done of late. He has been adding more FAs on the right side of 30. Also, I see a lot of potential in the draft picks, particularly this year.

 

I agree w/ the general idea that a team is going to be in trouble if they don't hit on their earlier draft picks. At the same time, i would add that

 

(a) that is somewhat offset when you hit on players drafted later - you still hurt by way of cap hit when a player like Benson busts, but then again, is that not offset when you find a cheap playmaker like Forte?

 

( if you look at the total history of Angelo, you can easily attack his drafts, but I also think his last two drafts offer a lot of increased hope. In 2008, Williams, Forte, Bennett and Harrison could all be starters, or see big roles. In 2009, Gilbert, Iglesias, Moore and Knox could all see a lot of playing time, and even see a starter or two in there.

 

So while I agree Angelo has not draft well through the years, and further, I would question many of his moves (and road taken) throughout his time, I at the same time do think he has changed course somewhat, and think there is far greater reason for hope today.

 

Today, I think we set up better overall, in terms of starters and depth, than at maybe anytime in the past.

 

Oh yea, and did I mention we finally have a franchise QB?

[nfoligno]

I realize the new CBA has a big time effect on all discussions. At the same time, Angelo has in the past front loaded deals, and that is something I think would be beneficial today.

 

Both Boldin (if we were to trade for him) and Cutler are going to get, as you said, very large contracts. As we have cap space, to me, it would be very smart to sign them now to a deal w/ a big time front loaded piece. For example, say Cutler gets $30m bonus, but you set $10m as roster bonus to eat it today, and spread out the rest. His year one cap hit could be $12, 13 or more, but after that, his cap hit will be far more reasonable, allowing you far more cap flexibility down the road.

 

The last numbers I've seen is about $20 mil in cap space. I can't see Cutler or Boldin taking more than $8 mil in cap space this year with new contracts. Sure, they will be big money deals, but I would expect a large portion of both being pushed into the future.

 

On a side note, the new CBA negotiations are key to any new, big deals. There will be a number of deadlines that will determine how teams plan for the future and the first will be the deadline to sign players to contracts that use up this year's cap space. If there is a new CBA in place that keeps a salary cap for future years by the deadline to use this year's cap space, then any new contract will have to abide by whatever new rules they implement and teams will have a better idea of how they can allocate their future cap. If there isn't a new agreement in place by then, teams will likely be a bit more conservative.

 

Either way, the Bears are in position to do what ever they want to do. If they trade for Boldin, his deal is likely to average 8-9 mil per year, but will probably be a bit graduated in cap value.

[balta1701-A]

I realize the new CBA has a big time effect on all discussions. At the same time, Angelo has in the past front loaded deals, and that is something I think would be beneficial today.

 

Both Boldin (if we were to trade for him) and Cutler are going to get, as you said, very large contracts. As we have cap space, to me, it would be very smart to sign them now to a deal w/ a big time front loaded piece. For example, say Cutler gets $30m bonus, but you set $10m as roster bonus to eat it today, and spread out the rest. His year one cap hit could be $12, 13 or more, but after that, his cap hit will be far more reasonable, allowing you far more cap flexibility down the road.

When is the last opportunity to put a hit on this year's cap?

 

If the Bears are holding that much room, if Cutler wanted to hold out you'd spend it on him now to get him in camp, but it makes sense to keep a little space open early in the year to give you a chance to go after training camp cuts or someone to fill in if you lose a player to injury early in the year. Locking him up as of September/October, while still taking the hit on this year's cap, would be the wisest way to go.

[nfoligno]

I don't know the exact date, but Halloween comes to mind. I think it is prior to the midway point of the season, but it is after the season begins.

 

The player that always stands out to me is Walt Harris. I remember the team trying to re-sign him to allocate money against that years cap, but couldn't get it done, and ended up signing him about a week after the deadline. I railed against our staff for that one.

 

I think the one problem w/ waiting is, you don't want a contract negotation hanging over a players head while he is playing. That is why you often hear players (and staff) talk about how if they can't get a deal done before camp breaks, they are going to put talks on hold until after the season.

 

For me, the thing is, we have the space. There is little question we have tied our future to Cutler. Why not simply go ahead and extend him now. If we had only a tad amount of space, that would be one thing. You want to reserve money for needs which may arrise. But if we have something like $20m, then we have MORE than enough to extend Cutler now, and still have a ton of money ready to take care of any issues which may come up.

 

When is the last opportunity to put a hit on this year's cap?

 

If the Bears are holding that much room, if Cutler wanted to hold out you'd spend it on him now to get him in camp, but it makes sense to keep a little space open early in the year to give you a chance to go after training camp cuts or someone to fill in if you lose a player to injury early in the year. Locking him up as of September/October, while still taking the hit on this year's cap, would be the wisest way to go.

[madlithuanian]

Isn't all the rest just free dessert with the meal?

 

Oh yea, and did I mention we finally have a franchise QB?

[LT2_3]

I don't know the exact date, but Halloween comes to mind. I think it is prior to the midway point of the season, but it is after the season begins.

 

The player that always stands out to me is Walt Harris. I remember the team trying to re-sign him to allocate money against that years cap, but couldn't get it done, and ended up signing him about a week after the deadline. I railed against our staff for that one.

 

I think the one problem w/ waiting is, you don't want a contract negotation hanging over a players head while he is playing. That is why you often hear players (and staff) talk about how if they can't get a deal done before camp breaks, they are going to put talks on hold until after the season.

 

For me, the thing is, we have the space. There is little question we have tied our future to Cutler. Why not simply go ahead and extend him now. If we had only a tad amount of space, that would be one thing. You want to reserve money for needs which may arrise. But if we have something like $20m, then we have MORE than enough to extend Cutler now, and still have a ton of money ready to take care of any issues which may come up.

 

Yes. It's traditionally in between week 8 and week 9 recently. It used to be much later though. I have no idea if they will extend that this year due to the special circumstances due to the uncapped year.

 

It is true that teams generally try not to have players worrying about their contract during the season, but this year is definitely a different case.

 

As for giving Cutler a new deal, I think we need to remember that he still has THREE years left on his current deal. I don't think he's expecting a new deal this year. Players too are mindful of the upcoming CBA negotiations. If a player takes a market deal now, who's to say what a market deal will be 2 or 3 years from now? With everything up in the air, he could do himself a disservice by making a deal before he knows what the landscape looks like.

[BearSox]

It is because of this offseason that has convinced me that the only way JA loses his job next year is if the whole team completely bombs and we (well, not actually us) pick in the top 5 next year.

 

However, if we got 7-9 or 8-8 and miss the playoffs again, I think Lovie is gone for sure.

[nfoligno]

As for giving Cutler a new deal, I think we need to remember that he still has THREE years left on his current deal. I don't think he's expecting a new deal this year. Players too are mindful of the upcoming CBA negotiations. If a player takes a market deal now, who's to say what a market deal will be 2 or 3 years from now? With everything up in the air, he could do himself a disservice by making a deal before he knows what the landscape looks like.

 

Sure. No one knows what the future CBA will be like, and a great deal today may not be tomorrow. Then again, isn't that always the case? Players sign a deal today making them among the top 1%, and in a couple years, they are no longer even top 10%.

 

But I would point this out. While Cutler takes some risk that he signs a deal today worth less than what he can get tomorrow, he also gains huge security by inking a long term deal today. If he were to blow out his knee this year, what is his future value?

 

Here is my thing.

 

(a) Usually, when a team making a trade for a key level player, do they not usually follow that up w/ a new contract?

 

( We have the cap space today. That is a huge element in my eyes. If we do not spend it on Cutler, what are we spending it on. If we do not use cap space this year, what exactly is our benefit? If paying Cutler is part of the future plan, I do not see the reason to wait when you have huge cap dollars available today.

 

© If we wait a couple years, until he is closer to the end of his deal, we have no idea what sort of cap space we will have (yes, I know that assumes there is a cap).

 

I guess I just don't see the reaason to put it off. We have the money. We have nothing else which will require that sort of money.

[nfoligno]

I would say the Cutler move is the desert, as it is just so damn "sweeeeeeeet"

 

 

Isn't all the rest just free dessert with the meal?

[Mongo3451]

But I would point this out. While Cutler takes some risk that he signs a deal today worth less than what he can get tomorrow, he also gains huge security by inking a long term deal today. If he were to blow out his knee this year, what is his future value? This is probably all up to Cutler, as i think JA would do it in a heartbeat. The last thing JA wants is difficulty hammering our this deal.

 

Here is my thing.

 

(a) Usually, when a team making a trade for a key level player, do they not usually follow that up w/ a new contract? Agreed

 

( We have the cap space today. That is a huge element in my eyes. If we do not spend it on Cutler, what are we spending it on. If we do not use cap space this year, what exactly is our benefit? If paying Cutler is part of the future plan, I do not see the reason to wait when you have huge cap dollars available today. Agreed

 

© If we wait a couple years, until he is closer to the end of his deal, we have no idea what sort of cap space we will have (yes, I know that assumes there is a cap). Agreed again.

 

I guess I just don't see the reaason to put it off. We have the money. We have nothing else which will require that sort of money. Agreed with a twist. I would not tear up the old contract, but simply extend. He can get his bonus money now, and play out his Denver contract. This would allow us to pay a little forward with our extra cap space while securing Cutler for the next decade with continued cap excellence. Then do Forte next year.

[LT2_3]

As for giving Cutler a new deal, I think we need to remember that he still has THREE years left on his current deal. I don't think he's expecting a new deal this year. Players too are mindful of the upcoming CBA negotiations. If a player takes a market deal now, who's to say what a market deal will be 2 or 3 years from now? With everything up in the air, he could do himself a disservice by making a deal before he knows what the landscape looks like.

 

Sure. No one knows what the future CBA will be like, and a great deal today may not be tomorrow. Then again, isn't that always the case? Players sign a deal today making them among the top 1%, and in a couple years, they are no longer even top 10%.

 

At least, for the past few years, teams and agents have had a pretty good idea what the salary cap will be for at least the next 3 years. There is just so much up in the air. The landscape is going to change and nobody knows how it will change. For instance, without a salary cap a team could write a contract that pays the player $2 mil per year for 10 years AFTER they retire and that could be the first $20 mil guaranteed on a new contract. If there might be no cap, any agent worth his salt will tell players to sign short contracts - and Cutler still has 3 years to go.

 

But I would point this out. While Cutler takes some risk that he signs a deal today worth less than what he can get tomorrow, he also gains huge security by inking a long term deal today. If he were to blow out his knee this year, what is his future value?

 

Make it a throwing shoulder injury and you have a point. But on the other hand, Cutler really has no leverage.

 

Here is my thing.

 

a. Usually, when a team making a trade for a key level player, do they not usually follow that up w/ a new contract?

 

It depends on the circumstances. Usually the player is getting traded because they are in a dispute over their compensation. In that case, the team negotiates a new contract before the trade is made. Sometimes a team wants to rework the player's current deal to add a few years and reduce the early cap hit by replacing salary with a proratable bonus. Cutler is a very unique case because he wasn't being a pain over money.

 

B. We have the cap space today. That is a huge element in my eyes. If we do not spend it on Cutler, what are we spending it on. If we do not use cap space this year, what exactly is our benefit? If paying Cutler is part of the future plan, I do not see the reason to wait when you have huge cap dollars available today.

 

The thing is that right now the cap doesn't mean anything. It's all about actual capital outlay. Even if there is a cap next year at about $133 million, the Bears will again have ridiculous amounts of cap space. The cap has been growing so fast so quickly since the last CBA, that there is really no reason to conserve cap space anymore. There simply aren't players available across the league that are worth the money.

 

c. If we wait a couple years, until he is closer to the end of his deal, we have no idea what sort of cap space we will have (yes, I know that assumes there is a cap).

 

I guess I just don't see the reaason to put it off. We have the money. We have nothing else which will require that sort of money.

 

If there is still a cap, there is no reason to think that it will go down significantly. I don't have everything handy, but Angelo has front loaded most of the big deals that he's written in recent years. That means that the guys currently under contract are going to have decreasing cap hits in future years. So without adding more FA or extending current guys, our cap space this year will be even more next year.

 

I hear what you're saying, but until the NFLPA and the league sit down to start negotiations and people get a better sense of what each side is proposing, there is really no point in talking yet. They should have some idea closer to the start of the season. I think the owners are having meetings soon. Maybe we'll learn more soon after that.

[Lucky Luciano]

The first point I would make is, with the exception of LT, I think you would find that many teams create their OLs w/o top draft picks. The LT position is an obvious exception, and there we have a 1st round pick. Yes, I know he will move to RT today, but I think the play for tomorrow is still LT.

 

The second point is, while the OL may not be loaded w/ "highly touted" talent (top draft picks or upper tier FAs) that does not mean it is w/o talent. They have questions, but (a) I think there is reason to believe the players do in fact have talent and especially on the OL, players drafted later, or even undrafted, can still prove to be very good. Many OL in the NFL are drafted day two and still go on to be very good players. While I think this is more an exception to the rule at many positions, I think it happens often enough on the OL to question the rule itself.

 

Third point is, we have gotten considerably younger at the position. Sure, it still comes down to talent, and whether we added the right talent or not, but we have seriously infused the OL w/ youth. Gone are Miller, Brown, Tait and St.Clair, all of which were on the backend of their careers. Garza just turned 30, but we also have Beekman, Buenning, Omiyale and Shaffer all under 30, and all have starting experience, though Omiyale has the least.

 

1. when did i ever say we had to create our offensive line exclusively with top draft picks? what i HAVE said in the past is if you want to find high quality LT's you will have to draft high in the 1st round more likely than not, high quality projected RT's in the lower 1st or in the 2nd, top tier guards/centers in the 2nd or 3rd, and project tackles and guards/centers to groom into good ball players from there on down. of course there are exceptions to every rule but a general yardstick is if you are looking for a starter at a position within the 1st or even 2nd year of drafting a player at these positions this rule in general holds true.

 

another factor i would like to point out is the availability of quality offensive linemen in todays draft era (over the last 10-15 years). the costs of linemen, including guards, over this period of time has GREATLY increased causing cap ramifications for teams trying to plug in quality free agents to keep their high priced franchise qb's healthy. this has led to runs on offensive linemen in the drafts first 3 rounds that were never there in the past thus creating shortages of quality prospects/players in lower rounds.

 

also one of the key points you failed to bring up is angelo's failure to draft ANY substancial OL prospects even to groom into good replacement starters over the last 7 YEARS!! this is a position you have to look at long term which he has failed to even consider over his time in chicago.

 

2. highly touted or without talent? we virtually have 3 holes to fill out of a 5 man line, unless you have penciled in beekman at left guard, and that's not even including our aging center. this is 'even' considering putting in c. williams who has never even started a game at any position!! that means we have nothing on our team from previous drafts to fill any of these holes, with the exception of beekman, who has been here longer than one year or ever played a down in chicago.

 

that is the cost of poor drafting and poor long term judgment when you have to bring in 4 free agents, 3 in a single year, to compete for 3 starting slots and only two of these FA's has started more than one game in the nfl over the past 4 years. one, a starting tackle, is projected to start where? with pace penciled in at LT we put our rookie LT in the RT slot that shaffer has started in cleveland over the last 2 years. so.... that leaves us with no proven quality linemen on this team if these free agents can't play positions they have rarely or not at all played in their careers.

 

that said, you say that these guys have talent. well just who are you talking about and what evidence do you base these conclusions on?

 

3. youth? we have one projected starter in williams and the rest are old or unknown commodities castoff from other teams. the only exception to that is beekman, who in my opinion, looked less than average last season. do we need to see what all these bodies we aquired this season can do? yes. that is why i stated that the need to draft guards or tackles this season should have been put on hold for a year. we just can't fit any more into the space left on our roster.

 

I would not have been against that draft pick. At the same time, I do think you are a tad quite to dismiss Beekman. Beek was a 4th round draft pick, and while not a top tier pick, the 4th round is where many interior OL are found, including centers. He was considered our backup center, but won the starting OG last year, and while he wasn't great, he was not bad either. And it has to be factored that he was out of position. I think there is solid reason to believe he can be a solid replacement for Kreutz.

 

Few have screamed to add to the OL like Jason and I for years now. At the same time, while I would have taken a different path, I also have to admit we have added talent and youth to the OL. Draft picks would have been nice, but are far from a guarantee. I think we have a nice mix of starting talent and youth right now on the OL. Short term, veterans like Kreutz and Pace aid the development of the youth, while we have the youth to step in when those players step down.

 

i am not dismissing beekman. although i wasn't impressed last season he is young and could turn it around and be a very good ball player. with that said competition between beekman and if we drafted unger at center would have been benifitial by leaps and bounds for this franchise. unger has more size and power which playing center in our division against nose tackles like GB is projecting in their new 3/4 scheme or against the williams twins in minny can only help. at the least we would have a quality guard to fill in beekmans spot even if he did beat unger out of kreutz's position.

 

again you say we added youth AND starting talent. who?

 

would argue we have some young DBs who could be developed. Both Graham (who looked good last year at CB) and Bowman, and young, versatile and athleitc DBs who are moving to FS. Bullocks didn't live up to expectations in NO, but in a new system, could be a solid veteran. No question this is still among our weaker positions, but I disagree w/ the idea there is no hope for the future, as Graham may well provide stability. If he doesn't, this will be a position to be addressed, but there is not a team in the league w/o a single position in need of work.

 

oh really? yet again we are taking players who failed with other teams and 'hope' this crap system we run can turn them into gold. that's fine and good but when you look at the number of safeties over the last 7 years drafted/not drafted by our gm and we still have to 'hope' some other castoff FA failure can start for us in this important position it's pathetic.

 

tell me, which player on our squad we are grooming at free safety gives you hope for the future? bowman? surely you jest. in his entire career he has 1 tackle at CB and never played safety once. is it possible he could turn out to be great? who knows. it's possible he could end up in the HOF but at this point there is absolutely no data to say he will even make the cut. who else?

 

I agree we have a group of #2s, yet at the same time, continue to disagree adding a top tier, #1 CB is a prerequisite in our scheme. Further, I would add that we do have talent and youth here, mixed w/ experience. And we also drafted a CB who, while small for the position, was considered an upper tier talent.

 

i know, i know, you are happy with #2 quality CB's and see no need for a #1 to be able to cover man off the LOS in the system lovie runs which gives every WR a free untouched route and a given 5-10 yd reception. my contention is and has been we don't have the talent to play bump and run which KILLS us in numerous critical ways. can our 4th round draft pick be the guy to be that #1 bump and run corner? i surely hope so.

 

One, I think many teams who have such elite talent at a position tend to have lesser depth. I think you are a tad quick to dismiss the starter talent we do have. I agree we do not have a great looking SLB, yet at the same time, question if we need one in our scheme. The SLB in our scheme is no more than a 2 down player (part time), and few teams have 3 elite LBs.

 

Further, I would argue we do in fact have depth. Williams, for example, is a player the staff we ready to insert in place of Briggs before Briggs returned at our price. You can say he isn't proven, but that is simply going to be true of most any team w/ a stud starter. When you have elite starters, your backups are going to get few chances to prove themselves. We have also just drafted another LB too.

 

I just question the idea that a team w/ talent like ours (at LB) also has these great, proven depth chart players. When you have elite starters, you simply are not going to spend the high picks or FA dollars on backups who are most likely to see action only on special teams.

 

first... elite? i would be happy with a SLB who was just plain GOOD.

 

second... what real depth at LB do you see on our squad? who is there to replace url now if injured or gone in a couple years? who would step in to replace briggs if injured or he replaced url? williams who replaced him for a few games? i could give you him for WLB depth as long as briggs didn't fill in the middle for more than a couple games but after that? SLB? we don't even have a quality starter but i could give you hilly for depth if only for a few games if you want.

 

third... not spend high draft picks? what was okwo? leon joe and j. williams were 4th round picks. how high would you go to draft a starting SLB? i would go 2nd or 3rd to get a quality player if we didn't have so many other needs because angelo's drafts were so weak.

 

But i would offer two counter-points.

 

One, while I am not going to say the WR talent has been there, I would argue it has not been a good situation to develop WRs until now. We the garbage we have had at QB, you simply are not likely to develop great WRs. Now we have a QB in Cutler who simply makes WRs better.

 

Two, while we do not have much by way or proven commodities, I would argue we have talent on youth on the roster, including 3 rookie Wrs we just added this past draft, combined w/ a 1st day (I still consider round 3 a 1st day pick) WR from last year and an explosive player in Hester. Our WRs may have a lot to prove, but I would argue we have youth, talent and potential like few times in the past, and finally a QB capable of helping move that development along.

 

hmmmm... prior to this season angelo drafted 9 WR's. although our list of qb's is atrocious, how many receivers have even sniffed a pro-bowl offer in chicago or left here to become much better than what they were here?

 

I agree, but also think you are too quick to overlook what Angelo has done of late. He has been adding more FAs on the right side of 30. Also, I see a lot of potential in the draft picks, particularly this year.

 

I agree w/ the general idea that a team is going to be in trouble if they don't hit on their earlier draft picks. At the same time, i would add that

 

(a) that is somewhat offset when you hit on players drafted later - you still hurt by way of cap hit when a player like Benson busts, but then again, is that not offset when you find a cheap playmaker like Forte?

 

if you look at the total history of Angelo, you can easily attack his drafts, but I also think his last two drafts offer a lot of increased hope. In 2008, Williams, Forte, Bennett and Harrison could all be starters, or see big roles. In 2009, Gilbert, Iglesias, Moore and Knox could all see a lot of playing time, and even see a starter or two in there.

 

So while I agree Angelo has not draft well through the years, and further, I would question many of his moves (and road taken) throughout his time, I at the same time do think he has changed course somewhat, and think there is far greater reason for hope today.

 

Today, I think we set up better overall, in terms of starters and depth, than at maybe anytime in the past.

 

Oh yea, and did I mention we finally have a franchise QB?

 

you mean what he has done this "late"? in 2007 3 out of 4 first day picks were a disaster. 2006 2 out of 3 picks were a disaster and hester is still on hold. 2005 2 out of 2 picks were a disaster. how's that for a first day massacre?

 

it's way, way, to early to judge picks this season or even last season unless they are gone from the roster when the season starts.

 

finally...... i have stated in the past that angelo's free agent aquisitions and trades have been good to excellent and the most recent cutler aquasition is the only thing keeping him from a fire angelo now agenda. the cutler move took cajone's and i respect him for that and i also agree it gives him some breathing room from the headmans axe.

 

but... he HAS to start making these drafts work because you can't build a FA team if your aspirations are to win multiple superbowls. it's just not possible especially in this day of salary cap and free agency.

 

even with cutler, who i believe can be our long lost franchise qb in the making, you have to surround him with real talent that you bring up through the ranks of the draft that gives you the cohesiveness and consistency as a complete unit. there just is no other way and if he can't do it starting now, then he needs to be shown the highway.

[Lucky Luciano]

double post

[defiantgiant]

Couple of points.

 

1. when did i ever say we had to create our offensive line exclusively with top draft picks? what i HAVE said in the past is if you want to find high quality LT's you will have to draft high in the 1st round more likely than not, high quality projected RT's in the lower 1st or in the 2nd, top tier guards/centers in the 2nd or 3rd, and project tackles and guards/centers to groom into good ball players from there on down. of course there are exceptions to every rule but a general yardstick is if you are looking for a starter at a position within the 1st or even 2nd year of drafting a player at these positions this rule in general holds true.

 

This rule doesn't remotely hold true. If it were really "more likely than not" that you need two first-round picks and three 2nd-3rds to build an o-line, teams wouldn't have enough picks to go around. Can you name 17 teams in this league that have spent picks like that on their current starting o-line? If you can't, then it's not "more likely than not." Look at the Giants' line and the Patriots' line: a lot of the best lines in football are made up of mid-to-late-round guys and maybe one high pick.

 

2. highly touted or without talent? we virtually have 3 holes to fill out of a 5 man line, unless you have penciled in beekman at left guard, and that's not even including our aging center. this is 'even' considering putting in c. williams who has never even started a game at any position!! that means we have nothing on our team from previous drafts to fill any of these holes, with the exception of beekman, who has been here longer than one year or ever played a down in chicago.

 

that is the cost of poor drafting and poor long term judgment when you have to bring in 4 free agents, 3 in a single year, to compete for 3 starting slots and only two of these FA's has started more than one game in the nfl over the past 4 years. one, a starting tackle, is projected to start where? with pace penciled in at LT we put our rookie LT in the RT slot that shaffer has started in cleveland over the last 2 years. so.... that leaves us with no proven quality linemen on this team if these free agents can't play positions they have rarely or not at all played in their careers.

 

Emphasis mine. So you're saying that we have three holes on the o-line, not counting Kreutz or Williams? That means that we need an LT, LG, and RG. We have Pace and three other players on the roster with experience at LT, plus Omiyale/Beekman at LG and Garza/Buenning at RG.

 

Also, are you saying that Orlando Pace has "rarely" played left tackle in his career? If that's true, I'd like to see a guy who's played it often. It looks like Shaffer (who played both RT and LT in Cleveland) is going to be the swing backup...are you saying he's "rarely" played either tackle spot? He's played both extensively. The only guys who are moving are Omiyale and Williams, and both of them are moving from left tackle to positions generally considered less demanding.

 

i know, i know, you are happy with #2 quality CB's and see no need for a #1 to be able to cover man off the LOS in the system lovie runs which gives every WR a free untouched route and a given 5-10 yd reception. my contention is and has been we don't have the talent to play bump and run which KILLS us in numerous critical ways. can our 4th round draft pick be the guy to be that #1 bump and run corner? i surely hope so.

 

Last point. It sounds like you're assuming that bump and run is an inherently superior scheme for corners, and that teams only play zone or off-man because they don't have the personnel to play strict man bump-and-run. That's not even close to true: the way you play your corners depends very much on the rest of your defensive scheme, some schemes depend on zone coverage from corners, and some depend on man coverage. If it were really the case that not playing bump-and-run "kills [teams] in numerous critical ways" then wouldn't Philly's secondary be getting "killed"? And wouldn't the Raiders actually have good coverage, instead of everybody not named Asomugha getting picked apart? The Raiders use bump-and-run religiously, and they're a case study in its failings.