Guest TerraTor Posted April 22, 2010 Report Share Posted April 22, 2010 http://www.theredzone.org/BlogDescription/...ft/Default.aspx Once he says this munbojumbo it always is the total opposite.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mongo3451 Posted April 22, 2010 Report Share Posted April 22, 2010 http://www.theredzone.org/BlogDescription/...ft/Default.aspx Once he says this munbojumbo it always is the total opposite.... I actually believe it this time. I think with the mandate they were given; it more than likely had the stipulation that they not mortgage the future in an attempt to keep their jobs. So we'll have a friendly wager?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
defiantgiant Posted April 22, 2010 Report Share Posted April 22, 2010 I think there are arguments for both sides. If Angelo thinks he's on the hot seat as much as Lovie is, then he's got to get a starter out of this draft, no matter what the cost. If he thinks he can save his own job for one more year, even if this season tanks and Lovie gets fired, then I think he stays put. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaskan Grizzly Posted April 22, 2010 Report Share Posted April 22, 2010 I think Angelo means it this time. Going three years without a #1 (or 2 for that matter) is a lot to gamble on. I don't think it necessary to give up next years 1 anyhow. The skill positions are pretty well covered; QB - check, RB- check (2 times) WR - possibly (or at least I'm told), CB - check (despite what others think Tillman will do fine and Bowman will come into his own), LB/DE - BIG check. The only one not so sure is the FS and this draft is FULL of good talent at that position. Plenty that the Bears can wait until round three. As far as OL, I say let's see what Tice/Martz can do with what they've got before really starting to panic. And Terra... Consider your words marked and highlighted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
'TD' Posted April 22, 2010 Report Share Posted April 22, 2010 I think Angelo means it this time. Going three years without a #1 (or 2 for that matter) is a lot to gamble on. I don't think it necessary to give up next years 1 anyhow. The skill positions are pretty well covered; QB - check, RB- check (2 times) WR - possibly (or at least I'm told), CB - check (despite what others think Tillman will do fine and Bowman will come into his own), LB/DE - BIG check. The only one not so sure is the FS and this draft is FULL of good talent at that position. Plenty that the Bears can wait until round three. As far as OL, I say let's see what Tice/Martz can do with what they've got before really starting to panic. And Terra... Consider your words marked and highlighted. 3 Years in a row would suck. How about 3 first rounders still being on the team since Urlacher was drafted(2000)? One is a TE that might be traded in the next couple days, Tommie Harris (who knows if he will be good again), and Chris Williams which may or may not turn out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madlithuanian Posted April 22, 2010 Report Share Posted April 22, 2010 Your words are duly marked... http://www.theredzone.org/BlogDescription/...ft/Default.aspx Once he says this munbojumbo it always is the total opposite.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madlithuanian Posted April 22, 2010 Report Share Posted April 22, 2010 A trade up would be a tell tale sign that Angelo's days are numbered. The opposite could mean he's here longer than we'd all want. Or at least hoping he'll be... 3 Years in a row would suck. How about 3 first rounders still being on the team since Urlacher was drafted(2000)? One is a TE that might be traded in the next couple days, Tommie Harris (who knows if he will be good again), and Chris Williams which may or may not turn out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
defiantgiant Posted April 22, 2010 Report Share Posted April 22, 2010 Would it really take next year's #1 to move up, though? I mean, if we were trying to get into the top of the 2nd, sure. But what if Allen falls to #60 or so? Couldn't we swing #60 for our #75 and next year's 2nd? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madlithuanian Posted April 22, 2010 Report Share Posted April 22, 2010 Considering where we draft in the 3rd, no it wouldn't require a #1 to move up from that spot. But it would require giving something up, and probably that something is a future pick. I just prefer not to do it. Too many if's invoved to even really think about it. Would it really take next year's #1 to move up, though? I mean, if we were trying to get into the top of the 2nd, sure. But what if Allen falls to #60 or so? Couldn't we swing #60 for our #75 and next year's 2nd? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bradjock Posted April 22, 2010 Report Share Posted April 22, 2010 http://www.theredzone.org/BlogDescription/...ft/Default.aspx Once he says this munbojumbo it always is the total opposite.... The only way we move up IMO is if we trade a player and our #3. Players we might consider: 1. Olsen (might not be worth enough) 2. Hester (leave us too thin at WR) 3. Dez Clark (not worth much) 4. Danieal Manning Okay, we ain't got much. But please note that we will not move up without trading a player. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaskan Grizzly Posted April 23, 2010 Report Share Posted April 23, 2010 To borrow a phrase from an eloquent linguinist I know; "mark my words" as the Lions now have Suh we are in for a long year against Detroit. I predict Chicago goes at least .500 against the Lions, if not worse. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TerraTor Posted April 23, 2010 Report Share Posted April 23, 2010 To borrow a phrase from an eloquent linguinist I know; "mark my words" as the Lions now have Suh we are in for a long year against Detroit. I predict Chicago goes at least .500 against the Lions, if not worse. no way, they are terrible Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
defiantgiant Posted April 23, 2010 Report Share Posted April 23, 2010 no way, they are terrible Yeah, Suh's a monster, but they still don't have anyone at corner, and they gave up their 2nd-rounder to draft Jahvid Best. Even with Suh helping out their pass rush, that secondary's still going to be swiss cheese this season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flea Posted April 23, 2010 Report Share Posted April 23, 2010 Best was a nice pickup for them Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted April 23, 2010 Report Share Posted April 23, 2010 Best was a nice pickup for them He'll be a good pickup until one of the Bears gives him his next concussion. Then it's a wasted pick. Best is going to get hurt again, mark those words. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TerraTor Posted April 23, 2010 Report Share Posted April 23, 2010 He'll be a good pickup until one of the Bears gives him his next concussion. Then it's a wasted pick. Best is going to get hurt again, mark those words. dam right, what a horrible pick. Then again its the lions Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.