selection7 Posted May 4, 2012 Report Share Posted May 4, 2012 "Hardin is just the latest safety to be drafted by the Bears, who have chosen one in eight consecutive drafts. Of the seven who came before Hardin, Conte, Al Afalava, Kevin Payne, Danieal Manning and Chris Harris all started as rookies." http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/footb...8647,full.story Even if some of those were by injury, that's amazing that almost all of our rookie safeties end up starting during year one. Hardin is likely to be the seventh in eight years. The question is, what does that say about our secondary and our coaches? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WheresMyronBaker Posted May 4, 2012 Report Share Posted May 4, 2012 Im hoping he does start. The more I think about it, I cant get myself to believe any of the ones we have are any good. Serviceable sure...but not good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lemonej Posted May 4, 2012 Report Share Posted May 4, 2012 "Hardin is just the latest safety to be drafted by the Bears, who have chosen one in eight consecutive drafts. Of the seven who came before Hardin, Conte, Al Afalava, Kevin Payne, Danieal Manning and Chris Harris all started as rookies." http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/footb...8647,full.story Even if some of those were by injury, that's amazing that almost all of our rookie safeties end up starting during year one. Hardin is likely to be the seventh in eight years. The question is, what does that say about our secondary and our coaches? What does it say about who was trying to draft safeties for this scheme over those 8 picks? In most of those cases the team stuck the rookies out there and then put them in the dog house after they continued to make mistakes. That points toward the DB coaches. I can remember Brandon Mc Gowan replacing Harris late in the season in his rookie year. All recent draft picks at this position as well as some undrafted guys from the same year have seen the field in their first year with the team. I also have to lay blame at the HC's feet since he has sometimes gotten extremely involved in trying to coach up a couple of these guys to no avail. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adam Posted May 5, 2012 Report Share Posted May 5, 2012 Hardin has the potential to be better than all of them. I guess the question about the revolving door would be in reference to JA's eye for Safeties, maybe he was trying to find the perfect Cover-2 guy where Emery just went with the one with the most potential regardless of scheme. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
selection7 Posted May 5, 2012 Author Report Share Posted May 5, 2012 I guess the thing I got tired of was...how can a guy be so good that he's starting by his rookie year (and none of these guys were first rounders, so you don't expect that), and yet the next year he's demoted, oftentimes for a new rookie for crying out loud. The coaches' ability to evaluate based on performance in Bears' practices must've been really terrible. It's one thing to not have an eye for talent in the draft, it's another to draft them anyway, start them, and it takes you a whole year to figure out they have no business starting. It's like a macro version of how we complain the Bears don't adjust at halftime. Adjust before the offseason, while you still have a chance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pixote Posted May 5, 2012 Report Share Posted May 5, 2012 I think a lot of times the rookies are forced into starting roles because starters get injured and we need to fill the hole in the lineup. It seems we have trouble keeping our Safeties healthy. So I am not sure they wind up with starting roles because our coaches think they merit the opportunity or just because they are the best option to fill in for an injured player. I am not saying it is always the case, but I believe it is more often than not the situation. To me it just means we lack experienced depth at the position so as not to have to force a rookie into a starting role he cannot fill properly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LT2_3 Posted May 5, 2012 Report Share Posted May 5, 2012 I think a lot of times the rookies are forced into starting roles because starters get injured and we need to fill the hole in the lineup. It seems we have trouble keeping our Safeties healthy. So I am not sure they wind up with starting roles because our coaches think they merit the opportunity or just because they are the best option to fill in for an injured player. I am not saying it is always the case, but I believe it is more often than not the situation. To me it just means we lack experienced depth at the position so as not to have to force a rookie into a starting role he cannot fill properly. A scenario for a rookie starting at a high injury position with 2 starters and 2 backups seems pretty likely to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ParkerBear7 Posted May 5, 2012 Report Share Posted May 5, 2012 "Hardin is just the latest safety to be drafted by the Bears, who have chosen one in eight consecutive drafts. Of the seven who came before Hardin, Conte, Al Afalava, Kevin Payne, Danieal Manning and Chris Harris all started as rookies." http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/footb...8647,full.story Even if some of those were by injury, that's amazing that almost all of our rookie safeties end up starting during year one. Hardin is likely to be the seventh in eight years. The question is, what does that say about our secondary and our coaches? Maybe if they did not look for a starting safety in the 6th & 7th rounds every year this would not be a story or trend. You know the definition of insanity is repeating the same action over and over expecting different results.... Daniel Manning.....2nd round pick REACH and look who JA passed over...see any players that could still be on this team contributing? http://insider.espn.go.com/nfl/draft/round...2%26year%3d2006 GRRRR....I hate GM's that get cute in the DRAFT ROOM!! I just went back a looked over the 2007 draft and think it maybe among the worst for the Bears in years. Now, imagine if they did not get Hester. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bradjock Posted May 5, 2012 Report Share Posted May 5, 2012 The worst part of the 2007 draft was the Bazuin, Wolf, and Okwo were all considered significant reaches. It was like everyone new they were bad except for the Bears. Makes me worry about the Hardin pick. Maybe if they did not look for a starting safety in the 6th & 7th rounds every year this would not be a story or trend. You know the definition of insanity is repeating the same action over and over expecting different results.... Daniel Manning.....2nd round pick REACH and look who JA passed over...see any players that could still be on this team contributing? http://insider.espn.go.com/nfl/draft/round...2%26year%3d2006 GRRRR....I hate GM's that get cute in the DRAFT ROOM!! I just went back a looked over the 2007 draft and think it maybe among the worst for the Bears in years. Now, imagine if they did not get Hester. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bradjock Posted May 5, 2012 Report Share Posted May 5, 2012 A scenario for a rookie starting at a high injury position with 2 starters and 2 backups seems pretty likely to me. True, but more often than not, guys were benched for being real bad. Brandon Merriweather and Chris Harris went from being starters one game to benched the next for getting beat deep in coverage repeatedly. Considering Chris Harris had a damn good year in 2010, Merriweather was a pro-bowler, Major Wright was a 2nd round player, and Craig Stettz a veteran 4th round pick, it's concerning Conte was lifted to the starting position not because he earned it, but because everyone else was worse. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fenom283 Posted May 5, 2012 Report Share Posted May 5, 2012 True, but more often than not, guys were benched for being real bad. Brandon Merriweather and Chris Harris went from being starters one game to benched the next for getting beat deep in coverage repeatedly. Considering Chris Harris had a damn good year in 2010, Merriweather was a pro-bowler, Major Wright was a 2nd round player, and Craig Stettz a veteran 4th round pick, it's concerning Conte was lifted to the starting position not because he earned it, but because everyone else was worse. Injuries have decimated the Safety position and it doesn't help that all our safety picks are from later rounds. Looking around the league there are not that many really good safeties so I guess that position is a revolving door for more than just us. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
selection7 Posted May 5, 2012 Author Report Share Posted May 5, 2012 Injuries have decimated the Safety position and it doesn't help that all our safety picks are from later rounds. Looking around the league there are not that many really good safeties so I guess that position is a revolving door for more than just us. During the last draft, ESPN did a piece on how Alabama's Mark Barron was special because these days any "safety" who can cover gets moved to CB (or maybe even RB) and any safety who's big and can play the run gets moved to LB, so college football's safety position is waning. The spread offense's dominance is supposedly causing this. I don't know if that's true, but that's roughly what the ESPN piece said. I get that we've not had deep talent at safety, but if that's true, you're better off sticking with the very first safety you draft and letting him get better over years. Imagine if we drafted a new QB every year, started him, then complained at the offseason that he just didn't meet out standards so we're benching him and drafting another one. There's a lot of ways to do it better...draft better talent, let someone stay starting at a position so they can grow, get better coaches to coach the talent better, stick to your guns with a veteran and make a young player earn the starting position...anything but the way the Bears have done it. And we've even had the problem some at CB too. If these guys are good enough to start, there's no reason they should be cut a couple of years later, or you're doing something wrong (compared to other clubs) that they were ever the best talent available at the time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LT2_3 Posted May 5, 2012 Report Share Posted May 5, 2012 During the last draft, ESPN did a piece on how Alabama's Mark Barron was special because these days any "safety" who can cover gets moved to CB (or maybe even RB) and any safety who's big and can play the run gets moved to LB, so college football's safety position is waning. The spread offense's dominance is supposedly causing this. I don't know if that's true, but that's roughly what the ESPN piece said. That is an absolutely excellent point. I get that we've not had deep talent at safety, but if that's true, you're better off sticking with the very first safety you draft and letting him get better over years. Imagine if we drafted a new QB every year, started him, then complained at the offseason that he just didn't meet out standards so we're benching him and drafting another one. There's a lot of ways to do it better...draft better talent, let someone stay starting at a position so they can grow, get better coaches to coach the talent better, stick to your guns with a veteran and make a young player earn the starting position...anything but the way the Bears have done it. And we've even had the problem some at CB too. While Lovie has had a quick hook at the safety position, and some guys get in his doghouse and have trouble getting out, we should really look at the players too. Chris Harris was a good pick and shouldn't have been traded. I think his major issue was that he couldn't keep his mouth shut. Kevin Payne seemed ok, but only had one healthy season and is now out of the NFL. Al Afalava really seemed like a keeper, but then he got injured with nerve damage and hasn't played since. Danieal Manning got moved around alot and just when he seemed to be getting it, he left via free agency for a $5 mil per year contract. I don't think it's so much giving them a chance to develop, but more a case of using them up and spitting them out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AZ54 Posted May 6, 2012 Report Share Posted May 6, 2012 All of the points in this thread seem to add proof that you are better off focusing on having a really good Dline (less likely to be injured, more talent available to draft, better impact on running and passing game when considering combined) and don't invest a lot in the safety position. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lemonej Posted May 10, 2012 Report Share Posted May 10, 2012 During the draft process Daniel Manning was looked at as CB. On nfldraftscout.com he was listed as a CB and in the East-West Shrine game which I watched he played CB in it and did well. I liked him coming out and was happy with the Bears taking him in the second round but it was obvious that he wasn't a quick study and only did well on things he didn't have to think so much about. So technically it was 6 straight years drafting a safety and 11 since 2002 with one converted to LB Rod Wilson and one CB Manning converted to safety. Here iss the complete list; Bobby Gray 5th '02 Todd Johnson 4th '03 Chris Harris 6th '05 Rod Wilson 7th '05 Manning 2nd '06 Kevin Payne 5th '07 Steltz 4th '08 Al Alfalava 6th '09 Wright 3rd '10 Conte 3rd '11 Hardin 3rd '12 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.