McGowan Posted February 8, 2012 Report Share Posted February 8, 2012 I wanted to get other fan's opinions on this topic because I am stuck in between on this one. On one hand, if Cutler and Forte don't get hurt, IMO they finish 12-4 with an outside shot at beating GB in Lambeau to finish 13-3. That would suggest that they are right there and only need a few tweaks to get there, mainly a #1 WR and a LT. OTOH, the Bears defense is aging with all of their stars on the wrong side of 30, and on offense, Cutler is going to be 29 this season, so he probably has 4-6 years left of being a reliable option before his skills start to erode. I would probably go for it in the 2012 season, and win or lose, dismantle the team after the season. They should cap screw themselves and just say f*** it we're going for it and this is the last hurrah for this team. Emery should let Lovie go after the season if they fall short, and if they win because of the new direction of the team, ask him to resign.(as in quit) Cutler goes after the season too, because when the team is good again, he won't be. The team is then Emery's baby and they can rebuild going forward. motto: "In Phil We Trust" If Emery thinks that the Bears can't win this season because DET/GB are too good, then by all means dismantle the team this offseason. I would like to argue that if you think that the Bears are 3+ seasons away from winning the SB, then why do you want to keep Jay Cutler on this team? If that is the case, then the 2 firsts+ would be more valuable to the team long-term than Cutler would be. I'm sure that the Redskins would pay a ridiculous price for him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
balta1701-A Posted February 8, 2012 Report Share Posted February 8, 2012 I'd have said the Bears were a legit threat to go to the Super Bowl at the middle of the season last year, and they were clearly a legit Super Bowl threat the year before, where they pushed the team that won the Super Bowl nearly to the breaking point with their backup QB. There are clear needs, but a ton of cap space available. Go for broke this season. The roster is ready-made for a run. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted February 8, 2012 Report Share Posted February 8, 2012 I wanted to get other fan's opinions on this topic because I am stuck in between on this one. On one hand, if Cutler and Forte don't get hurt, IMO they finish 12-4 with an outside shot at beating GB in Lambeau to finish 13-3. That would suggest that they are right there and only need a few tweaks to get there, mainly a #1 WR and a LT. OTOH, the Bears defense is aging with all of their stars on the wrong side of 30, and on offense, Cutler is going to be 29 this season, so he probably has 4-6 years left of being a reliable option before his skills start to erode. I would probably go for it in the 2012 season, and win or lose, dismantle the team after the season. They should cap screw themselves and just say f*** it we're going for it and this is the last hurrah for this team. Emery should let Lovie go after the season if they fall short, and if they win because of the new direction of the team, ask him to resign.(as in quit) Cutler goes after the season too, because when the team is good again, he won't be. The team is then Emery's baby and they can rebuild going forward. motto: "In Phil We Trust" If Emery thinks that the Bears can't win this season because DET/GB are too good, then by all means dismantle the team this offseason. I would like to argue that if you think that the Bears are 3+ seasons away from winning the SB, then why do you want to keep Jay Cutler on this team? If that is the case, then the 2 firsts+ would be more valuable to the team long-term than Cutler would be. I'm sure that the Redskins would pay a ridiculous price for him. You had me at first, and then started going off the deep end (i.e. get rid of Lovie even if the Bears go to the SB - that will never happen). Are they close? Yes. Absolutely. With Cutler, Forte, and Carimi coming back, add in a healthy draft pick or two and a FA or two, there is no reason why they're not right there competing. Hell, getting in the playoffs is the key, because any team can get hot. Are they close for a long period of time? No. As you mentioned, age is going to start affecting the team. Depth isn't great. I see a two or three year window. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stinger226 Posted February 8, 2012 Report Share Posted February 8, 2012 I'd have said the Bears were a legit threat to go to the Super Bowl at the middle of the season last year, and they were clearly a legit Super Bowl threat the year before, where they pushed the team that won the Super Bowl nearly to the breaking point with their backup QB. There are clear needs, but a ton of cap space available. Go for broke this season. The roster is ready-made for a run. Can some one let me know what the cap space. Everybody says we have a lot, but from what I read it is 20 mil and you take out Forte and 5 mil for rookies I see 7 mil left over, doesn't seem like enough to do our business. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
balta1701-A Posted February 8, 2012 Report Share Posted February 8, 2012 Can some one let me know what the cap space. Everybody says we have a lot, but from what I read it is 20 mil and you take out Forte and 5 mil for rookies I see 7 mil left over, doesn't seem like enough to do our business. Really, nobody can tell you how much cap space the team has left, because the cap hasn't been set yet for this year, and even then no one really knows what counts. What we can say with confidence is the Bears have a large amount of space available and the largest amount in the NFC North. There's also some "Carry-over" cap space from last year that I have no idea how it gets counted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bears4Ever_34 Posted February 8, 2012 Report Share Posted February 8, 2012 They were contenders this season with a healthy Cutler and after getting into the NFC Championship game last year. If they hit a homerun this offseason with the draft and FA there is no telling how good this club can be. But it has to happen within 1-2 years before the inevitable decline of some of our players on defense start to come into affect. We will need a few years of drafting to solve that issue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adam Posted February 8, 2012 Report Share Posted February 8, 2012 Here is a cap space article, says we will have about 20-24 mil in cap space, 9th best in the league for available space. A bunch of teams need to make huge cuts to get under the cap (Pittsburgh and Oakland). http://blogs.sun-sentinel.com/sports_footb...012-season.html Projected Cap (121-125 Mil) Cincinnati Bengals $80,641,237 Tennessee Titans $92,739,765 Washington Redskins $94,351,284 Kansas City Chiefs $95,844,195 Tampa Bay Buccaneers $98,899,458 Atlanta Falcons $100,227,174 Denver Broncos $101,389,121 New England Patriots $101,827,381 Chicago Bears $101,887,741 San Francisco 49ers $102,938,980 Cleveland Browns $103,789,162 Jacksonville Jaguars $107,270,274 Buffalo Bills $108,426,522 Seattle Seahawks $111,742,430 San Diego Chargers $111,960,165 New Orleans Saints $113,358,069 Philadelphia Eagles $113,964,694 Baltimore Ravens $115,670,281 Minnesota Vikings $116,078,422 Houston Texans $116,306,676 Miami Dolphins $116,636,173 Indianapolis Colts $116,773,288 Green Bay Packers $118,001,169 Arizona Cardinals $118,787,639 St. Louis Rams $120,982,904 Detroit Lions $122,760,121 New York Giants $124,735,807 New York Jets $128,092,733 Dallas Cowboys $128,910,735 Carolina Panthers $129,962,768 Oakland Raiders $140,861,316 Pittsburgh Steelers $149,885,537 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madlithuanian Posted February 8, 2012 Report Share Posted February 8, 2012 I basically agree. However, the key is Cutler. I think his window is 6 years. As long as you give him some offensive weapons, we can allow for a year or 2 of changing of the defensive guard among those 6 years in the middle. Run at it now for 2 seasons. Turnover the D for the next 2, and make one more push for the other 2. Just generally speaking.... You had me at first, and then started going off the deep end (i.e. get rid of Lovie even if the Bears go to the SB - that will never happen). Are they close? Yes. Absolutely. With Cutler, Forte, and Carimi coming back, add in a healthy draft pick or two and a FA or two, there is no reason why they're not right there competing. Hell, getting in the playoffs is the key, because any team can get hot. Are they close for a long period of time? No. As you mentioned, age is going to start affecting the team. Depth isn't great. I see a two or three year window. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bears4Ever_34 Posted February 8, 2012 Report Share Posted February 8, 2012 I don't know what number to believe when looking at what our cap space will be like this season. I've seen 24 million and 50 million. I've seen the breakdown of the latter and it's hard to dispute. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted February 8, 2012 Report Share Posted February 8, 2012 I basically agree. However, the key is Cutler. I think his window is 6 years. As long as you give him some offensive weapons, we can allow for a year or 2 of changing of the defensive guard among those 6 years in the middle. Run at it now for 2 seasons. Turnover the D for the next 2, and make one more push for the other 2. Just generally speaking.... Interesting thoughts. And I hadn't really thought of it that way. Maybe instead of tooling to fit into the ever-diminishing window for the D, the Bears should steer a majority of their focus and steer into the Cutler/Forte window? Maybe it's time the Bears actually became an offensive team? You know, like most of the rest of the NFL has attempted. I'm not saying ignore the D entirely, but wouldn't it be great if the new GM said, "Screw it, we have studs on both side of the ball, but the studs on O are younger. Let's build an offensive dynasty through the draft!" That would excite me. I'd much rather win 35-28 than lose 17-10. With that in mind, what if the new GM signed a key piece or two on D (e.g. Avril and Finnegan) then came straight out and went for O in the draft with something like the following? 1 - Peter Konz, C, Wisc. 2 - Marvin McNutt, WR, Iowa 3a - Nick Toon, WR, Wisc. 3b - Nate Potter, LT, Boise St. 4 - LaMichael James, RB, Oregon 5 - Ladarius Green, TE, Louisiana-Lafayette 6 - Chris Rainey, WR/RB/KR/PR, Florida Or 1 - Michael Floyd, WR, ND 2 - Kelechi Osemele, OG, Iowa State 3a - Dwight Jones, WR, UNC 3b - Nate Potter, LT, Boise St. 4 - Ben Jones, C, UGA --or-- Michael Brewster, C, OSU (whoever falls) 5 - Case Keenum, QB, Houston 6 - Cody Johnson, FB, Texas Ignore the D for now. Just draft Offense and try to follow the NFL trend of outscoring your opponent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
balta1701-A Posted February 8, 2012 Report Share Posted February 8, 2012 Ignore the D for now. Just draft Offense and try to follow the NFL trend of outscoring your opponent. And yet, the teams that played in the super bowl each gave up less than 20 points and made it a competitive game basically by sitting in the cover-2 and refusing to give up big plays. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madlithuanian Posted February 8, 2012 Report Share Posted February 8, 2012 That's pretty much what I was thinking. Agreed, that you don't just ignore the D...and especially this season to get the most out of Peppers, we should get another pass rusher somehow...but it can be done in FA. I think the philosophy should change to reflect the modern game. You have the QB...focus on that! Interesting thoughts. And I hadn't really thought of it that way. Maybe instead of tooling to fit into the ever-diminishing window for the D, the Bears should steer a majority of their focus and steer into the Cutler/Forte window? Maybe it's time the Bears actually became an offensive team? You know, like most of the rest of the NFL has attempted. I'm not saying ignore the D entirely, but wouldn't it be great if the new GM said, "Screw it, we have studs on both side of the ball, but the studs on O are younger. Let's build an offensive dynasty through the draft!" That would excite me. I'd much rather win 35-28 than lose 17-10. With that in mind, what if the new GM signed a key piece or two on D (e.g. Avril and Finnegan) then came straight out and went for O in the draft with something like the following? 1 - Peter Konz, C, Wisc. 2 - Marvin McNutt, WR, Iowa 3a - Nick Toon, WR, Wisc. 3b - Nate Potter, LT, Boise St. 4 - LaMichael James, RB, Oregon 5 - Ladarius Green, TE, Louisiana-Lafayette 6 - Chris Rainey, WR/RB/KR/PR, Florida Or 1 - Michael Floyd, WR, ND 2 - Kelechi Osemele, OG, Iowa State 3a - Dwight Jones, WR, UNC 3b - Nate Potter, LT, Boise St. 4 - Ben Jones, C, UGA --or-- Michael Brewster, C, OSU (whoever falls) 5 - Case Keenum, QB, Houston 6 - Cody Johnson, FB, Texas Ignore the D for now. Just draft Offense and try to follow the NFL trend of outscoring your opponent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adam Posted February 8, 2012 Report Share Posted February 8, 2012 And yet, the teams that played in the super bowl each gave up less than 20 points and made it a competitive game basically by sitting in the cover-2 and refusing to give up big plays. The Pats defense was under-rated (they allowed less pts than the Giants during the regular season). Also, everyone talked about how hot the Giants got at just the right time. That is funny because they went 3-5 in the 2nd half of the season and were outscored for the year. After the 10th game, we had as good of a shot as anyone to win the SB. With an impact FA signing or two, and solid picks in the first few rounds, we are going to be looking pretty solid. You have to figure at least one WC will come out of the North for the foreseeable future (CHI, GB, DET). In response to Jason, there is no way we will not draft Defense in the 1st 3 rounds (4 picks). If we go FA route completely on D, we don't get much younger. We have to inject some youth in there at some point so the transition is not so severe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madlithuanian Posted February 8, 2012 Report Share Posted February 8, 2012 The Pats D wasn't that under-rated. They were not good. They had moments. But overall, they were not good. They just don't pass the smell test. I saw a ranking by points scored during the game that Collinsworth put up and they were in the middle of the pack at 15 I believe. The Giants did get hot at the right time. The right time is the playoffs. I would tend to agree that I'd be shocked if D isn't selected in the 1st 3 rounds, especially given that we have 2 3rds available. The Pats defense was under-rated (they allowed less pts than the Giants during the regular season). Also, everyone talked about how hot the Giants got at just the right time. That is funny because they went 3-5 in the 2nd half of the season and were outscored for the year. After the 10th game, we had as good of a shot as anyone to win the SB. With an impact FA signing or two, and solid picks in the first few rounds, we are going to be looking pretty solid. You have to figure at least one WC will come out of the North for the foreseeable future (CHI, GB, DET). In response to Jason, there is no way we will not draft Defense in the 1st 3 rounds (4 picks). If we go FA route completely on D, we don't get much younger. We have to inject some youth in there at some point so the transition is not so severe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lemonej Posted February 9, 2012 Report Share Posted February 9, 2012 The Pats D wasn't that under-rated. They were not good. They had moments. But overall, they were not good. They just don't pass the smell test. I saw a ranking by points scored during the game that Collinsworth put up and they were in the middle of the pack at 15 I believe. The Giants did get hot at the right time. The right time is the playoffs. I would tend to agree that I'd be shocked if D isn't selected in the 1st 3 rounds, especially given that we have 2 3rds available. I think you missed what Jason said about FA. Aviril and Finnegan would be added to the defense then he would go for the offense in the draft. I personally believe that Finnegan could wind up with the Lions playing for his old DC Schwartz but I can understand the thinking just like when Jennings was signed someone will be available via FA for the secondary. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stinger226 Posted February 9, 2012 Report Share Posted February 9, 2012 Interesting thoughts. And I hadn't really thought of it that way. Maybe instead of tooling to fit into the ever-diminishing window for the D, the Bears should steer a majority of their focus and steer into the Cutler/Forte window? Maybe it's time the Bears actually became an offensive team? You know, like most of the rest of the NFL has attempted. I'm not saying ignore the D entirely, but wouldn't it be great if the new GM said, "Screw it, we have studs on both side of the ball, but the studs on O are younger. Let's build an offensive dynasty through the draft!" That would excite me. I'd much rather win 35-28 than lose 17-10. With that in mind, what if the new GM signed a key piece or two on D (e.g. Avril and Finnegan) then came straight out and went for O in the draft with something like the following? 1 - Peter Konz, C, Wisc. 2 - Marvin McNutt, WR, Iowa 3a - Nick Toon, WR, Wisc. 3b - Nate Potter, LT, Boise St. 4 - LaMichael James, RB, Oregon 5 - Ladarius Green, TE, Louisiana-Lafayette 6 - Chris Rainey, WR/RB/KR/PR, Florida Or 1 - Michael Floyd, WR, ND 2 - Kelechi Osemele, OG, Iowa State 3a - Dwight Jones, WR, UNC 3b - Nate Potter, LT, Boise St. 4 - Ben Jones, C, UGA --or-- Michael Brewster, C, OSU (whoever falls) 5 - Case Keenum, QB, Houston 6 - Cody Johnson, FB, Texas Ignore the D for now. Just draft Offense and try to follow the NFL trend of outscoring your opponent. I actually wouldnt have a problem with Konz , I have read he is a blue chip player, I also think Toon will be drafted before McNutt. Green will be drafted earlier than the 5th round. I like the players you picked just dont see them in the rounds you grabbed them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Hochuli 3:16 Posted February 9, 2012 Report Share Posted February 9, 2012 I actually wouldnt have a problem with Konz , I have read he is a blue chip player, I also think Toon will be drafted before McNutt. Green will be drafted earlier than the 5th round. I like the players you picked just dont see them in the rounds you grabbed them. Nick Toon isn't really good. I sincerely hope they don't waste a pick on him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lemonej Posted February 9, 2012 Report Share Posted February 9, 2012 Nick Toon isn't really good. I sincerely hope they don't waste a pick on him. Inconsistent is the word that most scouts agree fits Toon and he has an injury history. the thing that gets him the most hype is his pedigree but if you follow the careers of some of the Badger skill position players as they transition to the NFL mediocre at best with Lee Evans and Owen Danials being the the current best. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted February 9, 2012 Report Share Posted February 9, 2012 I actually wouldnt have a problem with Konz , I have read he is a blue chip player, I also think Toon will be drafted before McNutt. Green will be drafted earlier than the 5th round. I like the players you picked just dont see them in the rounds you grabbed them. All the rounds chosen are based upon multiple websites' round projections of these players. I believe, if these websites are remotely accurate, that there is a distinct possibility of the players going in the rounds I've listed. Having said that, RME JICO, I never said the scenario was likely, just that I'd like to see it play out that way. It would utterly thrill me to see the Bears actually put all the eggs for one year in the offensive basket. I'm tired of being historically known as a defensive team despite the fact that during Lovie's years the defense has been continually retooled and rebuilt, with far more focus than the offense, yet the defense has at best produced results inconsistently. For once it would be nice to see the Bears go all-in on offense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted February 9, 2012 Report Share Posted February 9, 2012 And yet, the teams that played in the super bowl each gave up less than 20 points and made it a competitive game basically by sitting in the cover-2 and refusing to give up big plays. And yet, the teams that played in the super bowl were 2nd and 8th in overall offense, as well as 2nd and 5th in passing offense, respectively. On top of that they were 31st and 27th defensively. Make no mistake, the Super Bowl was the exception; those teams are offense-minded first and that's what got them to the big dance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madlithuanian Posted February 9, 2012 Report Share Posted February 9, 2012 Gotcha. Although I don't see Avril going anywhere but Detroit. I think you missed what Jason said about FA. Aviril and Finnegan would be added to the defense then he would go for the offense in the draft. I personally believe that Finnegan could wind up with the Lions playing for his old DC Schwartz but I can understand the thinking just like when Jennings was signed someone will be available via FA for the secondary. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madlithuanian Posted February 9, 2012 Report Share Posted February 9, 2012 BINGO! I think you really spelled it out there. 9 times out of 10, the SB would have probably been Ravens and Saints w/ the Saints winning handily. (F Green Bay...) But, I feel also that this past SB was a bit of an anomaly, not the probable. However, I also think the idea of the offensive minded teams hag a better chance to win over the long haul of the playoffs is the way to go. Yes, the Ravens are the exception. SF was also such... But SF only got to the NY game because Smith threw like Sammy Baugh in the win over the Saints. The Pats lucked into missed FG's, last second end zone defensive heroics and poor game planning by BAL. I think if we shift our focus in Chicago to O, good things will happen. 1. Games get a bit more exciting...higher scoring, etc. 2. We can become "Saint-like" in terms that even a bad defensive showing need not be a death knell. We can score in bunches and make a game out of any game. 3. Odds are, our "Bears-ness" come to play often enough. Let's face it, D is in our collective blood. it's like magic. Somehow, we always seem to have a decent D. We will have a changing of the guard in a few years, and I think, somehow, someway, we will land a great drafted player or 2 that become the next Url/Briggs/Mike Brown/etc... Like the Packers luck into QB's, we'll luck into defensive players. It'll interesting how Emery views this. I won't judge his overall views by this year's draft. Too much is already in place, and he's probably going to lean on staff already in place to give him a bit of direction to a large extent I imagine. However, once he gets a year under his belt, and sees things first hand, I think next year's draft and actions will speak volumes. Plus, I think the salary floor hits too...if I recall correctly. And yet, the teams that played in the super bowl were 2nd and 8th in overall offense, as well as 2nd and 5th in passing offense, respectively. On top of that they were 31st and 27th defensively. Make no mistake, the Super Bowl was the exception; those teams are offense-minded first and that's what got them to the big dance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stinger226 Posted February 9, 2012 Report Share Posted February 9, 2012 Nick Toon isn't really good. I sincerely hope they don't waste a pick on him. So this is just your opinion, or how long have you been a pro scout? Could you give me your list of blue chips , so in a few years I can praise you or condemn you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Hochuli 3:16 Posted February 9, 2012 Report Share Posted February 9, 2012 So this is just your opinion, or how long have you been a pro scout? Could you give me your list of blue chips , so in a few years I can praise you or condemn you. There's a reason Toon was projected as a 1st round pick last April, and now mocks have him going anywhere from round 3 to 5. Pro scout? No. But I guarantee I watch more college football than the majority of this board. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted February 9, 2012 Report Share Posted February 9, 2012 There's a reason Toon was projected as a 1st round pick last April, and now mocks have him going anywhere from round 3 to 5. Pro scout? No. But I guarantee I watch more college football than the majority of this board. You could lose that bet with some people on this board. I generally watch five or six games each Saturday during the season (thank you DVR), and nearly all off day games. I even stay up late for the stupid West coast games. 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.