selection7 Posted March 30, 2013 Report Share Posted March 30, 2013 We're going to learn a lot about Emery and Trestman this draft. For now, we're really just guessing about what kind of management we've got. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Hochuli 3:16 Posted March 30, 2013 Report Share Posted March 30, 2013 Naw, you keep him around for depth. Right now it doesn't look like the Bears are going to need to cut anyone to free up space so cutting Earl would be a mistake. Maybe it's just me, but you don't keep a guy around who signed a 4 year, $18m deal "for depth." You keep him around because he's good and will contribute. In your scenario, Bennett isn't going to contribute unless there's an injury. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scs787 Posted March 30, 2013 Report Share Posted March 30, 2013 Maybe it's just me, but you don't keep a guy around who signed a 4 year, $18m deal "for depth." You keep him around because he's good and will contribute. In your scenario, Bennett isn't going to contribute unless there's an injury. If you wanna make it about money sure I guess I can see cutting him...Everyone wants a new speedy slot receiver so I guess if you wanna look at it financially then everyone wants Earl gone. But the thing is, it appears as though having his contract on the books isn't prohibiting us from signing someone else so you can afford that kind of depth. In either scenario, drafting another big athletic TE or a fast slot WR, you're still gonna be in the same position with Bennett as your #4 making the money he's making Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted March 31, 2013 Report Share Posted March 31, 2013 If you wanna make it about money sure I guess I can see cutting him...Everyone wants a new speedy slot receiver so I guess if you wanna look at it financially then everyone wants Earl gone. But the thing is, it appears as though having his contract on the books isn't prohibiting us from signing someone else so you can afford that kind of depth. In either scenario, drafting another big athletic TE or a fast slot WR, you're still gonna be in the same position with Bennett as your #4 making the money he's making Count me as one person who doesn't side with "everyone" on this. Earl Bennett is a great possession receiver, and should see time on the field. Right now I'd trust him more than any receiver other than Marshall. He's more reliable than Jeffery, has better hands than Hester, and is a much better route runner than probably anyone other than Marshall. Although, I'm not so sure Marshall runs great routes; he may just run good routes and have awesome ability to shield the defender. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AZ54 Posted March 31, 2013 Report Share Posted March 31, 2013 Count me as one person who doesn't side with "everyone" on this. Earl Bennett is a great possession receiver, and should see time on the field. Right now I'd trust him more than any receiver other than Marshall. He's more reliable than Jeffery, has better hands than Hester, and is a much better route runner than probably anyone other than Marshall. Although, I'm not so sure Marshall runs great routes; he may just run good routes and have awesome ability to shield the defender. Agreed, when he's on the field. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scs787 Posted March 31, 2013 Report Share Posted March 31, 2013 Count me as one person who doesn't side with "everyone" on this. Earl Bennett is a great possession receiver, and should see time on the field. Right now I'd trust him more than any receiver other than Marshall. He's more reliable than Jeffery, has better hands than Hester, and is a much better route runner than probably anyone other than Marshall. Although, I'm not so sure Marshall runs great routes; he may just run good routes and have awesome ability to shield the defender. Don't get me wrong now, I've been on record many times here saying that I like Bennett as the #3 and I agree with everything you said. The thought of having 2 big 6'6" TEs working the slot though is something that intrigues me a bit more than Earl. It can cause a ton of problems for opposing defenses. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stinger226 Posted March 31, 2013 Report Share Posted March 31, 2013 Don't get me wrong now, I've been on record many times here saying that I like Bennett as the #3 and I agree with everything you said. The thought of having 2 big 6'6" TEs working the slot though is something that intrigues me a bit more than Earl. It can cause a ton of problems for opposing defenses. Davis was 6-7, that didnt do anything for anybody. I would take Austin over drafting a TE in the 1st, if we had the luxury of many picks we could play fantasy football but we dont. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scs787 Posted March 31, 2013 Report Share Posted March 31, 2013 Davis was 6-7, that didnt do anything for anybody. I would take Austin over drafting a TE in the 1st, if we had the luxury of many picks we could play fantasy football but we dont. Davis had hands of stone and isn't in the same league as Martellus or Eifert. I'm certainly not pining for them to draft a TE at all I'm just saying it would be a very intriguing pick that would give us our own separate identity as a big physical passing team. I remember early in the offseason twig was giving me crap for wanting to be like the Saints and he doesn't wanna be the Saints, he wants to be the Chicago Bears. A move like this would give us that separate identity.....But it's not gonna happen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stinger226 Posted March 31, 2013 Report Share Posted March 31, 2013 Davis had hands of stone and isn't in the same league as Martellus or Eifert. I'm certainly not pining for them to draft a TE at all I'm just saying it would be a very intriguing pick that would give us our own separate identity as a big physical passing team. I remember early in the offseason twig was giving me crap for wanting to be like the Saints and he doesn't wanna be the Saints, he wants to be the Chicago Bears. A move like this would give us that separate identity.....But it's not gonna happen. Im sorry I got confused,its like Webb is better but you didnt say he was better, and didnt pine for him. I start to get you point on evaluation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bowlingtwig Posted March 31, 2013 Report Share Posted March 31, 2013 Davis had hands of stone and isn't in the same league as Martellus or Eifert. I'm certainly not pining for them to draft a TE at all I'm just saying it would be a very intriguing pick that would give us our own separate identity as a big physical passing team. I remember early in the offseason twig was giving me crap for wanting to be like the Saints and he doesn't wanna be the Saints, he wants to be the Chicago Bears. A move like this would give us that separate identity.....But it's not gonna happen. Lmao. This would be our own identity. I understand exactly what your saying and I agree that while it would be very intriguing we just can't see them going this direction in the draft Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wesson44 Posted April 1, 2013 Report Share Posted April 1, 2013 Lmao. This would be our own identity. I understand exactly what your saying and I agree that while it would be very intriguing we just can't see them going this direction in the draft We are not going to draft a TE....we signed two a blocking one and one that can block as well as catch. We will be drafting a speed WR instead Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bowlingtwig Posted April 1, 2013 Report Share Posted April 1, 2013 We are not going to draft a TE....we signed two a blocking one and one that can block as well as catch. We will be drafting a speed WR instead We aren't saying that we are going to draft a TE in the 1st. All SCS and myself are saying is that it would be INTRIGUING. How many times does SCS need to say that he doesn't believe it will happen. Intriguing does not mean it will happen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Hochuli 3:16 Posted April 1, 2013 Report Share Posted April 1, 2013 Drafttek has the Bears going Ogletree then...wait for it...Te'o. How f***ing dumb would that be? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bowlingtwig Posted April 1, 2013 Report Share Posted April 1, 2013 Drafttek has the Bears going Ogletree then...wait for it...Te'o. How f***ing dumb would that be? I hope for there case its an error cuz that is so far beyond dumb Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scs787 Posted April 1, 2013 Report Share Posted April 1, 2013 We aren't saying that we are going to draft a TE in the 1st. All SCS and myself are saying is that it would be INTRIGUING. How many times does SCS need to say that he doesn't believe it will happen. Intriguing does not mean it will happen Woah, Twig is on my side? This feels weird....But yeah, what he said. It's just an intriguing dynamic that would be fun to watch. Drafttek has the Bears going Ogletree then...wait for it...Te'o. How f***ing dumb would that be? I can't even make a case for this...smh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bowlingtwig Posted April 1, 2013 Report Share Posted April 1, 2013 Woah, Twig is on my side? This feels weird....But yeah, what he said. It's just an intriguing dynamic that would be fun to watch. I know right. I must be drunk or something. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted April 1, 2013 Report Share Posted April 1, 2013 I hope for there case its an error cuz that is so far beyond dumb Is it not "intriguing" to you? I don't think it's a smart draft, and I certainly wouldn't like it (I'd absolutely hate it), but it would sure as hell intrigue me. It would set up a potential move of Ogletree to WLB in preparation for a Briggs' ouster, and put Teo firmly in the middle. Of course, it would completely ignore the concept of need-based drafting, which is something I don't want. 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.