Wesson44 Posted October 6, 2010 Report Share Posted October 6, 2010 I dont know about you guys but for me cutting R Davis and moving Bennet to his spot is a no brainer. Then you go and get Vincent Jackson and put him and DA on the outside WR spot and Hester,Knox and Bennett in the slot. We then shorten the 7 step drops to 3 with quick passes to the speedsters and make the D move back(as in the Dallas game). We then use our screen game!! We need a big WR for Cutler to throw to other than Olsen period!!!!! Moss, Jackson, anybody. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
balta1701-A Posted October 6, 2010 Report Share Posted October 6, 2010 Vincent Jackson doesn't solve the Bears' problems. He's not going to play for another couple games, he's going to cost a lot, and he's a free agent at the end of the season who has shown little indication of willingness to get signed. Oh, and he's 1 drug violation away from a season long suspension. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Connorbear Posted October 6, 2010 Report Share Posted October 6, 2010 Vincent Jackson doesn't solve the Bears' problems. He's not going to play for another couple games, he's going to cost a lot, and he's a free agent at the end of the season who has shown little indication of willingness to get signed. Oh, and he's 1 drug violation away from a season long suspension. Ding, ding, ding. We have a winner. WRs aren't the issue. Fix the f'ing o-line. Peace Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
balta1701-A Posted October 6, 2010 Report Share Posted October 6, 2010 WRs aren't the issue. Fix the f'ing o-line. Yeah, that too. Vincent Jackson isn't a blocker. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted October 6, 2010 Report Share Posted October 6, 2010 Vincent Jackson doesn't solve the Bears' problems. He's not going to play for another couple games, he's going to cost a lot, and he's a free agent at the end of the season who has shown little indication of willingness to get signed. Oh, and he's 1 drug violation away from a season long suspension. End of thread Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DABEARSDABOMB Posted October 6, 2010 Report Share Posted October 6, 2010 If we wanted a vet receiver to help, we should have went after TJ Whoseyourmamma. The Bears need oline help and stat. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wesson44 Posted October 6, 2010 Author Report Share Posted October 6, 2010 ok so you have your points but with a bad line i would throw quickly to the 6'5 WR all day over your little 5'11 DB. You dont know anything about football if you cant create a mismatch that will stop the pass rush. Look at the Dallas game as proof. So stop bashing me for real life accouts of a game I have played. Why is Cutler getting sacked .....the line you will say and to a degree thats true, but did you notice all his WR are 5-11 to 6-1 so he has to hold the ball longer. He has to there is no 6'5 guy to lob the ball to. Olsen has made some of those plays becausae he is 6'5. Just like in basketball that taller you are you can do more over the smaller players. Is Moss alawys open, what about larry Fitzgerald so when you are in the shotgun a have a bigger guy to throw to you can have a quicker release. But yes BLOCKING does help. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madlithuanian Posted October 6, 2010 Report Share Posted October 6, 2010 Wesson, don't let the "OL is our only problem, all else if fine" bullies tell you otherwise! I'm the first to say OL is the issue that must be solved, and right away. However, I'm not going to let a beast like Jackson get nabbed up by some competitor when he can seriously help us out. Part of the sack issue is our dingbat WR's not running good routes, part of the pick problem is receivers' not fighting for catches. A big proven target does not hurt us. I could give a F about Virgie's money. And if we're going to sit around and do nothing about OL, then for all that's holy, do something...anything to help Cutler! Get a big target! All the league is trying to get better, and we bring in an ass clown that helped get a pregrant woman killed, that will be suspended for Star Caps in 3 years, and just got cut by an also-ran football league. Yay Jerry. I'm with you, bring in Jackson... If he bites us in the ass with another suspension, so be it. Although it will probably happen with the putrid luck we have as a franchise... Damn we are snake-bit like no other... ok so you have your points but with a bad line i would throw quickly to the 6'5 WR all day over your little 5'11 DB. You dont know anything about football if you cant create a mismatch that will stop the pass rush. Look at the Dallas game as proof. So stop bashing me for real life accouts of a game I have played. Why is Cutler getting sacked .....the line you will say and to a degree thats true, but did you notice all his WR are 5-11 to 6-1 so he has to hold the ball longer. He has to there is no 6'5 guy to lob the ball to. Olsen has made some of those plays becausae he is 6'5. Just like in basketball that taller you are you can do more over the smaller players. Is Moss alawys open, what about larry Fitzgerald so when you are in the shotgun a have a bigger guy to throw to you can have a quicker release. But yes BLOCKING does help. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Connorbear Posted October 6, 2010 Report Share Posted October 6, 2010 Wesson, don't let the "OL is our only problem, all else if fine" bullies tell you otherwise! I'm the first to say OL is the issue that must be solved, and right away. However, I'm not going to let a beast like Jackson get nabbed up by some competitor when he can seriously help us out. Part of the sack issue is our dingbat WR's not running good routes, part of the pick problem is receivers' not fighting for catches. A big proven target does not hurt us. I could give a F about Virgie's money. And if we're going to sit around and do nothing about OL, then for all that's holy, do something...anything to help Cutler! Get a big target! All the league is trying to get better, and we bring in an ass clown that helped get a pregrant woman killed, that will be suspended for Star Caps in 3 years, and just got cut by an also-ran football league. Yay Jerry. I'm with you, bring in Jackson... If he bites us in the ass with another suspension, so be it. Although it will probably happen with the putrid luck we have as a franchise... Damn we are snake-bit like no other... You have a big target on the team that Cutler used extensively at the end of last year - DA. You have to prioritize. If you do not fix the o-line, Cutler is going to get killed. I would much rather trade a pick for Logan Menkins than Jackson. Peace Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madlithuanian Posted October 6, 2010 Report Share Posted October 6, 2010 He has the dropsies... And who knows the real reason he isn't seeing the field... I'm not sure you guys are getting my point. OL is the #1 priority. But that doesn't mean you should overlook all other concerns... Hey, I would get Mankins in a heartbeat too. But right now the deal on hand was Moss for a 3rd. I'd have done it. Cutler needs all the help he can get. Period. You have a big target on the team that Cutler used extensively at the end of last year - DA. You have to prioritize. If you do not fix the o-line, Cutler is going to get killed. I would much rather trade a pick for Logan Menkins than Jackson. Peace Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DABEARSDABOMB Posted October 6, 2010 Report Share Posted October 6, 2010 He has the dropsies... And who knows the real reason he isn't seeing the field... I'm not sure you guys are getting my point. OL is the #1 priority. But that doesn't mean you should overlook all other concerns... Hey, I would get Mankins in a heartbeat too. But right now the deal on hand was Moss for a 3rd. I'd have done it. Cutler needs all the help he can get. Period. I disagree. A wide-receiver for the remainder of the season won't really help us. Does Moss make us better, sure, but at the expense of a 3rd round pick, which could go to a guard or center prospect in the draft, I'd rather go with that choice. I say that because one year of Moss isn't worth what the loss in draft pick will force the Bears to do. Part of why we find oursleves in this problem is because the Bears have drafted poorly (or just ignored) the oline position (along with other positions). Another issue is that because we have lacked picks in the last 1 to 2 years we've had to use the picks we do have to try and address glaring holes and that sometimes prevents you from going best player available. Bottom line, we've clearly had some issues with some poor top 3 round picks and that needs to change. But in no way shape or form am I dealing our 3rd round pick for a cry-baby wide-out who is signed for just the remainder of the year and after that will command a ton of money. That money would limit the ability for the Bears to invest in there oline. One random question. Do we have the lowest paid oline in the league? I can't think of anyone on our line, outside of Kreutz, who gets paid much (Omilaye and Williams don't get a ton given the respected positions they play). Clearly we need to start investing in that oline and I think every single poster on this site has been behind that idea for a long time (yourself included Mad). I think the Bears have one 3rd to dangle and a Tommie Harris to dangle and if we can find a starting caliber oline man we should get him. Mankins would be great, so would McNeil, but I'm sure there are other guys that would work fnie too. The hard part is working them in mid-season, but than again, we can't figure out who the hell is on our oline anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Connorbear Posted October 6, 2010 Report Share Posted October 6, 2010 He has the dropsies... And who knows the real reason he isn't seeing the field... I'm not sure you guys are getting my point. OL is the #1 priority. But that doesn't mean you should overlook all other concerns... Hey, I would get Mankins in a heartbeat too. But right now the deal on hand was Moss for a 3rd. I'd have done it. Cutler needs all the help he can get. Period. He looked great the at the end of last year. He had one bad game and he is in the dog house. I think he can play and have no idea WTF this coaching staff is doing with him. If I was going to prioritize issues on the team right now they would be: O-line D-line WR is way down the list for me. Peace Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DABEARSDABOMB Posted October 6, 2010 Report Share Posted October 6, 2010 He looked great the at the end of last year. He had one bad game and he is in the dog house. I think he can play and have no idea WTF this coaching staff is doing with him. If I was going to prioritize issues on the team right now they would be: O-line D-line WR is way down the list for me. Peace I feel the same way about Chris Williams. People are writing him off, but he looked pretty solid at LT at the end of last year and he's barely played this year. While the injuries are an obvious concern, I'm not overly worried about him being a bust yet. I think we'll see our line improve significantly with him back and Omilaye on the right side. Omilaye actually has been better than I think some people realize on the left side. The problem is, it still isn't good, but thats what happens when a guy plays out of position. Much like Chris Williams on the right side for a good chunk of last year involved him playing out of position. I want to see more of DA. It is obvious that Jay is comfortable with him and its good to have that bigger target to go to on a blitz. Plus, I really like the way DA seems to adjust to the routes. Something that Greg Olsen and Devin Hester appear too retarded to do (must be the whole "U" thing). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madlithuanian Posted October 6, 2010 Report Share Posted October 6, 2010 You know you'll get no argument from me if you say the staff's decisions are bewildering! No argument on your priorities. I'd have D back 3rd and then WR. But is 1-3 aren't there to be had, I'm OK going for #4... That's really all I'm saying. He looked great the at the end of last year. He had one bad game and he is in the dog house. I think he can play and have no idea WTF this coaching staff is doing with him. If I was going to prioritize issues on the team right now they would be: O-line D-line WR is way down the list for me. Peace Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madlithuanian Posted October 6, 2010 Report Share Posted October 6, 2010 Then we just agree to disagree. I think a HoF WR would help us this year...and for a few more years while we get everything else up to speed. If it were anyone else drafting, I'd feel a little more hesitant giving a 3rd, but I have little faith in Angelo. No arguement in why we find ourselves in the spot we're in. It's basic failure. Poor drafting. Poor developing. Bad deals. We do need to remedy the problem from within, and with our current regime, I don't think it'll happen. I'm sure someone may know what we're over-pauing the line...however low it is, it's still too much! No doubt, if we can package Tommie Useless and a pick to get a stud young OL, it must be done! OL must be remedied! Won't the Pat's want one of our picks so they can have 7 draft picks in the first 3 rounds? I disagree. A wide-receiver for the remainder of the season won't really help us. Does Moss make us better, sure, but at the expense of a 3rd round pick, which could go to a guard or center prospect in the draft, I'd rather go with that choice. I say that because one year of Moss isn't worth what the loss in draft pick will force the Bears to do. Part of why we find oursleves in this problem is because the Bears have drafted poorly (or just ignored) the oline position (along with other positions). Another issue is that because we have lacked picks in the last 1 to 2 years we've had to use the picks we do have to try and address glaring holes and that sometimes prevents you from going best player available. Bottom line, we've clearly had some issues with some poor top 3 round picks and that needs to change. But in no way shape or form am I dealing our 3rd round pick for a cry-baby wide-out who is signed for just the remainder of the year and after that will command a ton of money. That money would limit the ability for the Bears to invest in there oline. One random question. Do we have the lowest paid oline in the league? I can't think of anyone on our line, outside of Kreutz, who gets paid much (Omilaye and Williams don't get a ton given the respected positions they play). Clearly we need to start investing in that oline and I think every single poster on this site has been behind that idea for a long time (yourself included Mad). I think the Bears have one 3rd to dangle and a Tommie Harris to dangle and if we can find a starting caliber oline man we should get him. Mankins would be great, so would McNeil, but I'm sure there are other guys that would work fnie too. The hard part is working them in mid-season, but than again, we can't figure out who the hell is on our oline anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Hochuli 3:16 Posted October 6, 2010 Report Share Posted October 6, 2010 So wait. Let me get this straight. Cutler is getting sacked because his WR's are short? Forget Vincent Jackson. If you're going to make a trade with the Chargers, trade for Marcus McNeil. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madlithuanian Posted October 6, 2010 Report Share Posted October 6, 2010 Not sure that was the gyst... It's more to do with savvy. Our WR's are not savvy. They are not helping the QB tremendously. A verteran, savvy, pro bowl like WR would do that. He could bail out Cutler. I think that was more of the argument. And yes, I'd rather get McNeil too. In fact, can we get them both? If I'm dreaming, it may as well be big... So wait. Let me get this straight. Cutler is getting sacked because his WR's are short? Forget Vincent Jackson. If you're going to make a trade with the Chargers, trade for Marcus McNeil. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Hochuli 3:16 Posted October 6, 2010 Report Share Posted October 6, 2010 Not sure that was the gyst... It's more to do with savvy. Our WR's are not savvy. They are not helping the QB tremendously. A verteran, savvy, pro bowl like WR would do that. He could bail out Cutler. I think that was more of the argument. And yes, I'd rather get McNeil too. In fact, can we get them both? If I'm dreaming, it may as well be big... Yeah, for our next 2 first round picks and a 3rd. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madlithuanian Posted October 6, 2010 Report Share Posted October 6, 2010 If Angelo's still drafting, I might take it. Yeah, for our next 2 first round picks and a 3rd. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted October 6, 2010 Report Share Posted October 6, 2010 ok so you have your points but with a bad line i would throw quickly to the 6'5 WR all day over your little 5'11 DB. You dont know anything about football if you cant create a mismatch that will stop the pass rush. Look at the Dallas game as proof. So stop bashing me for real life accouts of a game I have played. Why is Cutler getting sacked .....the line you will say and to a degree thats true, but did you notice all his WR are 5-11 to 6-1 so he has to hold the ball longer. He has to there is no 6'5 guy to lob the ball to. Olsen has made some of those plays becausae he is 6'5. Just like in basketball that taller you are you can do more over the smaller players. Is Moss alawys open, what about larry Fitzgerald so when you are in the shotgun a have a bigger guy to throw to you can have a quicker release. But yes BLOCKING does help. Nobody is doubting your football past. But you just don't throw continuous lob passes to tall receivers when the QB is under duress. One, this creates a situation where a QB is still getting murdered. And, two, just as important, you've now set up a situation where a WR is more likely to be injured. Most of the quick throws to Moss and Fitzgerald aren't just lob passes. But that's because those guys know how to get open better, and more often...and the OLs on their teams actually block consistently. Sorry, dude, but with the Bears of the last three years, it's ALL the OL. Fix that, and the "short" WRs won't have problems. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted October 6, 2010 Report Share Posted October 6, 2010 Not sure that was the gyst... It's more to do with savvy. Our WR's are not savvy. They are not helping the QB tremendously. A verteran, savvy, pro bowl like WR would do that. He could bail out Cutler. I think that was more of the argument. And yes, I'd rather get McNeil too. In fact, can we get them both? If I'm dreaming, it may as well be big... I hope you are speaking about Moss, and not Jackson. Because the original point of this thread was about Jackson, which is pointless. Jackson is not as good as Moss, and wouldn't help the team out enough to mortgage the future (i.e. trade a draft pick). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
balta1701-A Posted October 6, 2010 Report Share Posted October 6, 2010 I hope you are speaking about Moss, and not Jackson. Because the original point of this thread was about Jackson, which is pointless. Jackson is not as good as Moss, and wouldn't help the team out enough to mortgage the future (i.e. trade a draft pick). The Vikings supposedly offered a 2nd and a 4th for Jackson, and that was not sufficient for the Chargers to deal him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madlithuanian Posted October 6, 2010 Report Share Posted October 6, 2010 Really either... And obviously I'd be willing to give up more for Moss. If the reality of what SD wants for Jackson is the 2nd, they can keep him. I still think Moss for a 3rd is a steal. But, deals can always be made...Tommie and a 2nd for Vinny and McNeil? I'd do it easily... But, that's a pipe dream. I kind of feel like we're in desperation mode... I hope you are speaking about Moss, and not Jackson. Because the original point of this thread was about Jackson, which is pointless. Jackson is not as good as Moss, and wouldn't help the team out enough to mortgage the future (i.e. trade a draft pick). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madlithuanian Posted October 6, 2010 Report Share Posted October 6, 2010 Yeah...too much. The Vikings supposedly offered a 2nd and a 4th for Jackson, and that was not sufficient for the Chargers to deal him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AZ54 Posted October 7, 2010 Report Share Posted October 7, 2010 Dangle Tommie Harris? The only way you can dangle someone who is on the bench for a trade is to cut him. Seriously, what has Harris done in the last 3 years to make anyone want him? If he were playing at an average level we'd be better off keeping him on the field, and he's not even doing that. I think this is another reason they brought in Charles Grant...because he can play inside as well as the LDE. 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.