How does this sound to you?

[scs787]

I dont think they need to address WR early in the draft, Marshall is an obvious 1, Bennett with his connection with Cut I think will be a good #2, Hester in the slot as a deep threat, then I'd love to see them grab A.J. Jenkins whos projected as a 5th rounder in the draft, then Dane is a serviceable 5 and Weems is there for depth and a special teams ace.

 

I posted this on soxtalk (idk if its all the same people here that it is there)

 

RD1 Whitney Mercilus DE

RD2 Jayron Hosley CB

RD3 Bruce Irvine OLB

RD4 Ladarius Green TE

RD5 A.J. Jenkins WR

 

I think this would be a perfect draft If the bears can address the oline and S in FA.

[jason]

Oh eating crow now huh........I know why the Bears signed him and I stated that but the fact remains the same ....they did just get two WR during the FA period and may still indeed draft either Floyd or Hill. So now Komar and Sanazenbacher may not be one the team much longer after camp.

 

Dude, you're delusional. I'm not eating crow. If they sign a midget and call him a WR, that doesn't mean it's the same as the fantasy football stuff you want. What you were talking about was a #1 (BM), #1A (L. Robinson), and draft a #1 (Floyd). It's stupid. Right now the Bears have a depth chart that begins with Brandon Marshall, fits in Bennett at #2 or #3, lets Knox/Hester put in word after that, and has room for a ST guy like Weems. Maybe Sanz. But it is most certainly not the same as what you were talking about. Signing Weems is the equivalent of me leaving a tip at a restaurant. Signing one of the others is similar to buying another meal even though you've just eaten (BM).

 

It's time to focus on other positions. WR should be done until the draft.

[jason]

I understand what you are saying but tell me why we didnt winanything last year or this year passing game flaws (and backup QB)......we have the defense and the running game as you well know. But our neglect of a good WR or two over the years has always cost us. Now that you mention the Packers and the Colts and even the Saints neither teams has a team of all pros but......... did they not get where they are now with bad WR'S and a weak passing game????? But you have to focus on what you need to make your team good if not great. Looks at the years that Denver had a great line. hell every back they brought in ran for 1000 yards, now that they have a sorry line what happened 759 tops QB leading rusher.......lol. Now I'm sure you have watched the Bears over the years with a good defense and can't even score in the red zone or better yet convert on third down because our WR's can't catch.......yes you have seen it many times. but with better WR's comes better results.

 

If that's your take on why the Bears offense wasn't good, and why the Bears didn't win anything last year, then you're not watching the entire field, and you're certainly not watching all positions.

 

Just look at the play Cutler was injured on. Pressure up the middle, LG blown up, C has to provide support, quick throw, Knox falls down, INT. When situations arise like that, Cutler needs a go to guy. The Bears got him. There's a reason you don't ever hear anyone say "go to guys." At the same time, other positions are necessary, and if given more time and he might not have to make that throw.

[jason]

How are you defining the slot/outside guys? I always thought of a slot guy as more of a possession, over the middle kind of guy, and I think I put Bennett in that role, while the "outside guy" in the 2 spot is a nice deep threat, which if they're healthy Hester and Knox do sorta fill that role.

 

With Weems on board I'm not sure if they count that role as filled or not. He's only been a 10 catch a year guy with the Falcons but the Bears might want to expand his role there as well. If they think he's just a 10 catch a year gimmick guy, then the Bears could still use an additional WR, but it's not a giant priority now...a 2nd-3rd round priority perhaps. TE and the defensive spots are moving up the priority list now.

 

We're agreeing more and more lately.

 

With BM as the sure #1, Hester works perfectly as the inside short slant guy, Knox is great as the deep threat, and Bennett is a very good possession guy.

[Wesson44]

If that's your take on why the Bears offense wasn't good, and why the Bears didn't win anything last year, then you're not watching the entire field, and you're certainly not watching all positions.

 

Just look at the play Cutler was injured on. Pressure up the middle, LG blown up, C has to provide support, quick throw, Knox falls down, INT. When situations arise like that, Cutler needs a go to guy. The Bears got him. There's a reason you don't ever hear anyone say "go to guys." At the same time, other positions are necessary, and if given more time and he might not have to make that throw.

 

Yes I agree with you on that. But I do watch the whole field and know that our line is weak at best and that played the most important part in the passing game "blocking" but when you have better WR'S (more than just one) if makes the defense defend instead of attacking meaning less rushers for the line to deal with. Do you remember when we beat the Cowboys two years ago..they were killing us in the first half because we could'nt get the ball to our WR's. Then we used Olsen in the middle of the field and they backed off trying to defend the middle and we won the game. Same applies to our team getting better at the position makes it easy on the line. Why is it that Manning, Brees, Brady, Rodgers, and a few other have the stats they have year in and year out( yes the have they blocking) but they have the guys to throw the ball to more than one target. So tell me this........if we have the guys we need and you dont want to get another WR....is our RB (FORTE) going to lead the team in catches again this year? RB=54 catches, top WR=37 catches something is wrong with that picture........yes the line is ONE and the WR is two and our system of play calling is three.

[GrizzlyBear]

As it goes I would take a guy like Stokley, He is available for cheap. He been working out with manning at Duke. Could get him for minimum dollars.

[Wesson44]

We're agreeing more and more lately.

 

With BM as the sure #1, Hester works perfectly as the inside short slant guy, Knox is great as the deep threat, and Bennett is a very good possession guy.

 

Ok good now comes the question of what if....Marshall gets hurt who do you have to replace him for Cutler? Thats why we still need another WR like Floyd/Hill. And Knox might not even play this year....he is still trying to walk right.

[lemonej]

Ok good now comes the question of what if....Marshall gets hurt who do you have to replace him for Cutler? Thats why we still need another WR like Floyd/Hill. And Knox might not even play this year....he is still trying to walk right.

Here is my list of prospects with size that should be available after round one. As for Stepen Hill I can't truly feel comfortable with him backing up Marshall when he is considered an upside prospect with the limited amount of career receptions in the option offense he played in at Ga Tech. I consider him in the same category as the Broncos Thomas who played at Tech also but took time to develop and is still a work in progress.

 

R Randle 6-3 210

 

B. Quick 6-4 220

 

G. Childs 6-3 219

 

M. Jones 6-2 199

 

N. Toon 6-2 215

 

D. Jones 6-3 230

 

J. Criner 6-3 224

 

J. Fuller 6-4 223

[balta1701-A]

Here is my list of prospects with size that should be available after round one. As for Stepen Hill I can't truly feel comfortable with him backing up Marshall when he is considered an upside prospect with the limited amount of career receptions in the option offense he played in at Ga Tech. I consider him in the same category as the Broncos Thomas who played at Tech also but took time to develop and is still a work in progress.

 

R Randle 6-3 210

 

B. Quick 6-4 220

 

G. Childs 6-3 219

 

M. Jones 6-2 199

 

N. Toon 6-2 215

 

D. Jones 6-3 230

 

J. Criner 6-3 224

 

J. Fuller 6-4 223

The Bears are in a position where their WR corps is deep enough that a "Work in progress" WR wouldn't be a bad play if it was a good value pick in the late first or 2nd round. You can put the guy on the bench for most of the first year and let him develop/learn the playbook.

[lemonej]

The Bears are in a position where their WR corps is deep enough that a "Work in progress" WR wouldn't be a bad play if it was a good value pick in the late first or 2nd round. You can put the guy on the bench for most of the first year and let him develop/learn the playbook.

Late first and 2nd rd yes but, the Bears are drafting in the mid first and that would be sitting a draft pick with mid first money and a bonus on the bench to develop. Now if another position of need is addressed at the pick

with a player that can get on the field sooner like an OT,CB or DE(Izzy still unsigned)I would feel better with that direction. I'm just a little leery of stars of the combine who don't have the history on game film to support their lofty workout numbers.

[balta1701-A]

Late first and 2nd rd yes but, the Bears are drafting in the mid first and that would be sitting a draft pick with mid first money and a bonus on the bench to develop. Now if another position of need is addressed at the pick

with a player that can get on the field sooner like an OT,CB or DE(Izzy still unsigned)I would feel better with that direction. I'm just a little leery of stars of the combine who don't have the history on game film to support their lofty workout numbers.

Basically, by saying "late first" I'm implying "Trading down from the 19th to the late first/early 2nd". Gets an extra 4th or 3rd rounder or so, where the Bears can have a number of positions that they add draft depth to.

[jason]

Ok good now comes the question of what if....Marshall gets hurt who do you have to replace him for Cutler? Thats why we still need another WR like Floyd/Hill. And Knox might not even play this year....he is still trying to walk right.

 

What if Urlacher gets hurt? We better draft a MLB in the first round!

[jason]

The Bears are in a position where their WR corps is deep enough that a "Work in progress" WR wouldn't be a bad play if it was a good value pick in the late first or 2nd round. You can put the guy on the bench for most of the first year and let him develop/learn the playbook.

 

:blink:

Did you really just say that?

 

With the various needs the Bears have with starters, you want to take a high draft pick and have him sit for the year?

 

First round draft picks should be guys that we're ready to plug into the line on Day 1.

Second round draft pikcs should be pretty damn close to ready to start on Day 1.

 

Sitting a 1st/2nd round guy the entire year is an incredible mismanagement of personnel.

[Wesson44]

What if Urlacher gets hurt? We better draft a MLB in the first round!

 

We are looking at Hawthorne from the Seahawks just for that reason

[Wesson44]

Here is my list of prospects with size that should be available after round one. As for Stepen Hill I can't truly feel comfortable with him backing up Marshall when he is considered an upside prospect with the limited amount of career receptions in the option offense he played in at Ga Tech. I consider him in the same category as the Broncos Thomas who played at Tech also but took time to develop and is still a work in progress.

 

R Randle 6-3 210

 

B. Quick 6-4 220

 

G. Childs 6-3 219

 

M. Jones 6-2 199

 

N. Toon 6-2 215

 

D. Jones 6-3 230

 

J. Criner 6-3 224

 

J. Fuller 6-4 223

 

Well lets see didn't Calvin Johnson come from the same school with the same offense??? I'm sure of the school not the offense.

[jason]

We are looking at Hawthorne from the Seahawks just for that reason

 

What if Briggs gets hurt?!

What if Tillman gets hurt?!

What if Peppers gets hurt?!

 

We better get a backup for each of those guys who is just about as good and could start on other teams.

[Lucky Luciano]

First round draft picks should be guys that we're ready to plug into the line on Day 1.

Second round draft pikcs should be pretty damn close to ready to start on Day 1.

 

Sitting a 1st/2nd round guy the entire year is an incredible mismanagement of personnel.

 

that is not entirely true. if you have good personnel it can be a very smart move in the right circumstances.

 

example: if you have an aging LT (for that matter any offensive lineman OR quarterback) near the end of his career who is doing at least a good job can still be your starter while your round #1 drafted LT (or other) is being groomed for a season to take over that position. this holds true unless your draft pick looks exceptional in training camp and outplays the vet. this for SURE can be said of round 2 players.

 

in the case of your LT not thrown into the fire (IF you have a good veteran player starting) you just might keep your franchise QB off IR while your LT acclimates himself to the nfl.

 

the bears problems over the past decades has been nobody wants to draft players that take time to develop. it's always "DRAFT A PLAYER WHO IS READY TO START NOW!!". this is how we ended up with "the most ready to start" cade mcnown and passed on numerous good + players in the draft to keep aging stop-gap veteran FA's in a virtual rotation on our offensive line.

[azbearsfan]

that is not entirely true. if you have good personnel it can be a very smart move in the right circumstances.

 

example: if you have an aging LT (for that matter any offensive lineman OR quarterback) near the end of his career who is doing at least a good job can still be your starter while your round #1 drafted LT (or other) is being groomed for a season to take over that position. this holds true unless your draft pick looks exceptional in training camp and outplays the vet. this for SURE can be said of round 2 players.

 

in the case of your LT not thrown into the fire (IF you have a good veteran player starting) you just might keep your franchise QB off IR while your LT acclimates himself to the nfl.

 

the bears problems over the past decades has been nobody wants to draft players that take time to develop. it's always "DRAFT A PLAYER WHO IS READY TO START NOW!!". this is how we ended up with "the most ready to start" cade mcnown and passed on numerous good + players in the draft to keep aging stop-gap veteran FA's in a virtual rotation on our offensive line.

 

 

 

Exactly, the goal needs to be getting to a place where we can take BPA and let them ease into the starting gig.

[Lucky Luciano]

Exactly, the goal needs to be getting to a place where we can take BPA and let them ease into the starting gig.

 

agreed. maybe one of the best examples of this is in our own division. look how long they groomed rogers, a first round pick, to replace favre and look at the results.

 

this is what smart run franchises do. they THINK past the 'now' and look at the big picture down the road.

[balta1701-A]

agreed. maybe one of the best examples of this is in our own division. look how long they groomed rogers, a first round pick, to replace favre and look at the results.

 

this is what smart run franchises do. they THINK past the 'now' and look at the big picture down the road.

But they also endured a couple years of frankly fairly mediocre teams in there, didn't they? 4-12 in 2005, 8-8 in 2006, then 6-10 in 2008 with a 13-3 year sandwiched in there for Favre's last year. They looked down the road and did accumulate a ton of talent, but endured missing the playoffs 3 times in 4 years and having 2 seasons well below .500 to get there.

[azbearsfan]

But they also endured a couple years of frankly fairly mediocre teams in there, didn't they? 4-12 in 2005, 8-8 in 2006, then 6-10 in 2008 with a 13-3 year sandwiched in there for Favre's last year. They looked down the road and did accumulate a ton of talent, but endured missing the playoffs 3 times in 4 years and having 2 seasons well below .500 to get there.

 

 

And they took those opportunities to stock up with talent.

 

Where is the talent and depth the Bears stockpiled from being mediocre?

 

 

This is the reason JA is gone and emery is here.

[Lucky Luciano]

But they also endured a couple years of frankly fairly mediocre teams in there, didn't they? 4-12 in 2005, 8-8 in 2006, then 6-10 in 2008 with a 13-3 year sandwiched in there for Favre's last year. They looked down the road and did accumulate a ton of talent, but endured missing the playoffs 3 times in 4 years and having 2 seasons well below .500 to get there.

 

i guess i am not sure what the point is?

 

rogers was drafted in 2005 while favre's age was going to become a problem in the near future. this is the perfect scenario for someone being groomed under an aging vet who is still producing while looking at the future.

 

in 2005 rogers sat behind favre who threw for 3881 yards that season. no matter what the win/loss record was (4-12) those very KEY pieces were in play as favre was starting the downward spiral. this season injuries were also a major part of this teams problems with their offense losing walker, ahman green, franks. not to mention they lost both guards to free agency. favre also started talking about retirement.

 

in 2006 favre threw for 3885 yards with an 8-8 season. by that time favre was starting to really show his age. still the packers first round pick was tutored behind favre but the rumblings were being heard.

 

in 2007 favre makes yet another pro-bowl and throws for 4155 yards while dragging the packers to a 13-3 record. still the spiral was there to see but by this time the packers made the decision to release him and go with the younger qb. super smart move. rogers had a tone of knowledge behind favre and was more than ready by a year to take over the reins.

 

note: the packers also made it to the playoffs that season in fact they lost the the NFC championship game in OT.

 

in 2008 favre never played for the packers. he was a text messaging picture toting new york jet. so not sure if this counts at all.

[jason]

Exactly, the goal needs to be getting to a place where we can take BPA and let them ease into the starting gig.

 

I agree, but that's the ideal situation. The Bears are not in the ideal situation. When you have glaring holes, you have to address glaring holes. If it's between BPA and the #4 or #5 guy in terms of BPA, but that #4/5 guy is at your position of glaring need, you go with the #4/5 guy.

[jason]

And they took those opportunities to stock up with talent.

 

Where is the talent and depth the Bears stockpiled from being mediocre?

 

This is the reason JA is gone and emery is here.

 

 

Which is precisely why I hate Lovie and his "we should win those meaningless games at the end of the year" because it builds (whatever). This has happened more than one time on his watch. It's tough to pull off the GB strategy being mentioned in this thread when Lovie is so good at coaching a team teams towards mediocrity.

[balta1701-A]

i guess i am not sure what the point is?

Would you be willing to endure 2 seasons of 4 and 6 wins in the next 3 years in order to draft highly, give playing time to kids, and let them develop? Willing to let the careers of Urlacher, Peppers, and Tillman just end in order to really give an offense time to grow up together?