jason Posted April 25, 2013 Report Share Posted April 25, 2013 This is for those needing a little more visual representation... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
'TD' Posted April 25, 2013 Report Share Posted April 25, 2013 I know they are trying to say that WR is an option in the draft, but to have both yellow is silly to me. Marshall is arguably the best player at his position on the team. One circle should be blue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adam Posted April 25, 2013 Report Share Posted April 25, 2013 WR and both OTs are questionable? Bushrod? Marshall, Jeffery? Safety? We are so deep at safety. Both Guards are trouble? Slauson? DT and CB are good? I am confused, this is not very accurate. I would say OG, LB, DT, CB, OT, C, WR then QB would be the order. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scs787 Posted April 25, 2013 Report Share Posted April 25, 2013 I know they are trying to say that WR is an option in the draft, but to have both yellow is silly to me. Marshall is arguably the best player at his position on the team. One circle should be blue. Same could be said with LT and one of the guard spots. Bushrod and Slausson are virtual locks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
'TD' Posted April 25, 2013 Report Share Posted April 25, 2013 Same could be said with LT and one of the guard spots. Bushrod and Slausson are virtual locks. Yea, I noticed that too. If they are grouping the positions together instead of looking at the player, I think I see it a lot different. If I was just going to group all the positions, I would do it like this. With yellow and red being positions I could see arguments for players to be picked in the first 3 rounds, and blue being ones I see likely to be undrafted. Blue RB, S, K, P Yellow T,WR, TE, QB, OLB, CB, DT, DE Red C, G, ILB Blue being positions that have depth and little need of being drafted. Yellow needing depth, has questions at starters, or aging vets that will need replaced. Red needs addressed. Major questions at starters and/or depth and/or contracts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrackerDog Posted April 25, 2013 Report Share Posted April 25, 2013 The chart is complete horse shit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bears4Ever_34 Posted April 25, 2013 Report Share Posted April 25, 2013 I'm actually not a fan of either of our safeties, so I could see why they'd be listed as questionable. That said, I'm also sick and tired of drafting a safety every year, so unless we're getting Kenny Vacarro or some bonafide stud, like Mark Barron was last year, then it doesn't make sense. I don't want anymore Brandon Hardin's in the 3rd round. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted April 25, 2013 Author Report Share Posted April 25, 2013 Yea, I noticed that too. If they are grouping the positions together instead of looking at the player, I think I see it a lot different. If I was just going to group all the positions, I would do it like this. With yellow and red being positions I could see arguments for players to be picked in the first 3 rounds, and blue being ones I see likely to be undrafted. Blue RB, S, K, P Yellow T,WR, TE, QB, OLB, CB, DT, DE Red C, G, ILB Blue being positions that have depth and little need of being drafted. Yellow needing depth, has questions at starters, or aging vets that will need replaced. Red needs addressed. Major questions at starters and/or depth and/or contracts. That's exactly how I interpreted the chart. It was a position grouping chart. Obviously nobody actually thinks the Bears need to draft a #1 WR with Marshall in town. But until someone steps up beside him, it is a questionable area. Not as questionable as other positions, but the point remains. FWIW - I also completely agree with your specific color-coding. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BearFan PHX Posted April 25, 2013 Report Share Posted April 25, 2013 I sure as hell hope we're not drafting Te'o 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.