madlithuanian Posted March 9, 2012 Report Share Posted March 9, 2012 http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/...dianapolis-too/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chwtom Posted March 10, 2012 Report Share Posted March 10, 2012 http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/...dianapolis-too/ I wouldn't hate signing him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madlithuanian Posted March 10, 2012 Author Report Share Posted March 10, 2012 If his price is not too high... http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/...dianapolis-too/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bradjock Posted March 10, 2012 Report Share Posted March 10, 2012 If his price is not too high... Clark turns 33 in June and he's only 6-3. He's struggled with injuries and he was real bad without Peyton. He won't be expensive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wesson44 Posted March 10, 2012 Report Share Posted March 10, 2012 Clark turns 33 in June and he's only 6-3. He's struggled with injuries and he was real bad without Peyton. He won't be expensive. No....keep Davis he is taller and faster.....we just need to use him like Clark was used. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bradjock Posted March 10, 2012 Report Share Posted March 10, 2012 No....keep Davis he is taller and faster.....we just need to use him like Clark was used. But is Davis better? He seems to be mediocre at best. Realistically we could probably sign both. Either way, I'd love to see us upgrade the position to have an offensive weapon. John Carlson or Macellus Bennett would both be upgrades. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wesson44 Posted March 10, 2012 Report Share Posted March 10, 2012 But is Davis better? He seems to be mediocre at best. Realistically we could probably sign both. Either way, I'd love to see us upgrade the position to have an offensive weapon. John Carlson or Macellus Bennett would both be upgrades. The only reason you might say Clark is better is because of the number of times he is thrown to per game as to how many times Davis gets his chance to catch the ball. If I threw you the ball abou t7-8 times a game you would be better than me getting the ball once a game....right? Not really you can only judge that if they got the same amount of ball thrown their way. Colts are a passing team and the Bears "get off the bus running" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stinger226 Posted March 10, 2012 Report Share Posted March 10, 2012 The only reason you might say Clark is better is because of the number of times he is thrown to per game as to how many times Davis gets his chance to catch the ball. If I threw you the ball abou t7-8 times a game you would be better than me getting the ball once a game....right? Not really you can only judge that if they got the same amount of ball thrown their way. Colts are a passing team and the Bears "get off the bus running" The problem is with Davis you take the risk of him not being good, since we dont have the film to determine differently. I would rather take a chance on someone that has actually did it on the field. If we sign Davis back and he sucks then what? You going to rely on Speath to be the guy? He blocks, and thats not going to get us vertical. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
balta1701-A Posted March 10, 2012 Report Share Posted March 10, 2012 The problem is with Davis you take the risk of him not being good, since we dont have the film to determine differently. I would rather take a chance on someone that has actually did it on the field. If we sign Davis back and he sucks then what? You going to rely on Speath to be the guy? He blocks, and thats not going to get us vertical. The obvious reply then is what happens if you sign Clark and he misses 8 games? I actually think Clark would be a good fit, but look, played 6 games in 2010 and 11 games in 2011. You have to have a backup option behind him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stinger226 Posted March 10, 2012 Report Share Posted March 10, 2012 The obvious reply then is what happens if you sign Clark and he misses 8 games? I actually think Clark would be a good fit, but look, played 6 games in 2010 and 11 games in 2011. You have to have a backup option behind him. Actually I think you should sign Davis as a backup and Clark, then at least you have options. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
balta1701-A Posted March 10, 2012 Report Share Posted March 10, 2012 Actually I think you should sign Davis as a backup and Clark, then at least you have options. I think this would make perfect sense, but it's also plausible that some team would be willing to offer more money than the Bears would to grab 1 of those guys. With the O Line and WR vacancies, that's a worry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stinger226 Posted March 10, 2012 Report Share Posted March 10, 2012 I think this would make perfect sense, but it's also plausible that some team would be willing to offer more money than the Bears would to grab 1 of those guys. With the O Line and WR vacancies, that's a worry. We have to address those two spots first then fit in whatever money we have left to get other deals done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TerraTor Posted March 10, 2012 Report Share Posted March 10, 2012 Actually I think you should sign Davis as a backup and Clark, then at least you have options. 5 years ago maybe but hes useless now. We are gonna het Carlson and porobably draft another Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stinger226 Posted March 10, 2012 Report Share Posted March 10, 2012 5 years ago maybe but hes useless now. We are gonna het Carlson and porobably draft another I would prefer that better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DABEARSDABOMB Posted March 10, 2012 Report Share Posted March 10, 2012 I agree with those that indicate we'd be better off keeping Davis or signing Carlson. I'm okay with Clark but I wouldn't not resign Davis because the club had Clark and I don't think I'd pay big money for Dallas. He's older and slowing down as a result of injuries. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted March 12, 2012 Report Share Posted March 12, 2012 I like Davis' potential. I'd like to see him signed to see what he can do in an offense that utilizes the TE position as an offensive threat. TE should be far down on the list of priorities. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
balta1701-A Posted March 12, 2012 Report Share Posted March 12, 2012 I like Davis' potential. I'd like to see him signed to see what he can do in an offense that utilizes the TE position as an offensive threat. TE should be far down on the list of priorities. Kellen Davis is not a tight end on the Chicago Bears right now. The only Tight End the Chicago Bears have under contract is Spaeth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted March 12, 2012 Report Share Posted March 12, 2012 Kellen Davis is not a tight end on the Chicago Bears right now. The only Tight End the Chicago Bears have under contract is Spaeth. What part about, "I like Davis' potential. I'd like to see him signed..." do you not understand? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
balta1701-A Posted March 12, 2012 Report Share Posted March 12, 2012 What part about, "I like Davis' potential. I'd like to see him signed..." do you not understand? The part where it says TE should be far down the list of priorities. If that position is far down the list of priorities, then it doesn't get Kellen Davis signed because signing him is a low priority. Upgrading the position from last year can be considered a low priority. But having someone at the position must be a high priority. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted March 12, 2012 Report Share Posted March 12, 2012 The part where it says TE should be far down the list of priorities. If that position is far down the list of priorities, then it doesn't get Kellen Davis signed because signing him is a low priority. Upgrading the position from last year can be considered a low priority. But having someone at the position must be a high priority. It's still a low priority, but I'd like to see Davis signed as the TE. Just because something is a low priority doesn't mean it can't happen. Since he probably has nearly no other interest, it should be an easy signing for the Bears. They throw out an offer and see if he bites. If so, great. But if he put up a fight, he can wait. Spaeth will do in a pinch. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
balta1701-A Posted March 12, 2012 Report Share Posted March 12, 2012 It's still a low priority, but I'd like to see Davis signed as the TE. Just because something is a low priority doesn't mean it can't happen. Since he probably has nearly no other interest, it should be an easy signing for the Bears. They throw out an offer and see if he bites. If so, great. But if he put up a fight, he can wait. Spaeth will do in a pinch. Frankly, I think if it were easily done, it'd be done already when the team doesn't have to compete with the rest of the league for him. The only reasons why it wouldn't be done so far are...if he thinks he's worth more on the open market than teh Bears, or the Bears want to test their other options before moving on him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AZ54 Posted March 13, 2012 Report Share Posted March 13, 2012 This is typical Bears strategy with low end FA. They are willing to let the market decide value and have the agent call them to give them a chance to beat the best offer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted March 13, 2012 Report Share Posted March 13, 2012 Frankly, I think if it were easily done, it'd be done already when the team doesn't have to compete with the rest of the league for him. The only reasons why it wouldn't be done so far are...if he thinks he's worth more on the open market than teh Bears, or the Bears want to test their other options before moving on him. All of that may be true. If so, he can take a hike. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
balta1701-A Posted March 13, 2012 Report Share Posted March 13, 2012 All of that may be true. If so, he can take a hike. And in that case, TE immediately becomes a high priority position. 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.