madlithuanian

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/...family-reunion/

Pretty much my point...

Bingo! My thought on trading him wasn't based solely on his jacka$$ comments.

His silly response prompted mine! (Although I'm not sure mine's so silly!)

Trade Briggs. I'm sick of his bad additude and crummy leadership. And poor driving skills.

For $2M, I think that's reasonable. Doubt he'll take it...

I thnk the list is a bit in flux still. Until we really hit FA and the draft, it's just premature. Keeping or dropping Peppers will make a huge impact. Assuming it is what PFF says, I pretty much agree with your assessment on Bostic. or, really I hope you are right. I think it's more gray really. Can't argue on your assessment of Frey either. I'm just thrilled Long is a solid contributor!

https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2014/...-chicago-bears/ Obviously a little dated since we signed some guys and this was done in mid Feb. But interesting nonetheless.

Agreed. I'm not saying in my example that the DB's be awful, they just need not be great. Part of that is also scheme. And there I have big concerns as well. I do think a lot of our failing in your examples on D in the 80's was scheme related. It certainly was under Smith. I can't remember how many times I yeled at the TV saying to get up the damn LOS only to see the opponent connect for a 6 yard completion! Agreed. We need improvement in all 3 areas. To that, I'm in 100% agreement. I think we only disagree in the value placed on the 3 segments. I'm placing more on the front and you're placing more on the back. Neither of us are discounting any segment...just placing greater value on one segment over another.

Bottom line, is I really can't argue against your points. All seem valid (Epsecially on Fencik...hell, I think you may have just convninced me he was better than Plank. Almost) I just look at successful SB teams, and they are the ones that get to the QB consitently. Ones that have long sustained drives utilizing smart QB play and good running. The reason our 80's Bears teams failed was because of the O after McMahon's injury, not because of the D. Also, that they ran up agasint great teams like the Giants, SF, and when the planets aligned for the Redskins. It's easy to say we should have won more, but we weren't the only good team in the NFC. Our D did decline, but in 1986, it was actually ranked better than 85. And it declined slowly. It's the lack of QB and WR that killed us. We have the O right now. But we are miles away on D. To bridge that gap fast...the best way, in my opinion, is on the DL. You try to get better everywhere on D, but you place the big bet on the DL.

I follow your takes. And I really don't disagree. My overall thought is very "broad brush stroke". However, I just want a b=pretty good defense right now. Killer isn't an option with what we have. A lot of your complains on the quick release have more to due with scheme. Recall Ditka screaming at Ryan to change it up... *** Fencik was one of Chicago's best. Not an all time best. I love me some Fencik! Don't get me wrong. He was smart and a hard hitter. I think Plank was better. He was great. But, I'll give you Fencik was great...but I think I'm only doing so because I'm a homer and love that team too much to disagree! I actually think Mike Brown was better. But injuries killed a potential HoF career. ******* Overall, I still stand by my thoughts. When starting from scratch, you want the most bang up front. Then the next level at LB, and then lastly on the last line of defense. A SB can't be poor in any of those areas. But w/o being great on the line, there is not chance at all. So, that's my my eggs are in that basket. I can easily flip flop B & C between the LB and DB corps. And at every level, there needs to be a good solid B player. So even a corps of C level DB's, there needs to be one Solid B. OUr DB's last year were not C average. They were D. Tillman was a C (he wasn't on the filed enough) and Jennings didn't play at that great of a level either (C+). It's just that Wrigth and Conte played at F levels. I look at grades as A having HoF calibur players. B haveing pro bowl calibur level players. And C being just decent starter guys that will make a play and get burned 50/50. Average. I see SEA last year as an A-/B+ on the DL, an A- at DB, and about a B- at LB. That's damn excellent. We, on the other hand were about a C-/D+ on the DL, about a C- on LB, and about a D on DB. Overall a D+. Our record and stats show it. Until we get to a solid B average, we won't win it all. That means isf we get lucky with some signings and the draft our DL needs to get to a C+, LB goes to a B, and CB goes to a C+. Then, we have a shot.

I would not be shocked if Hester can't get a good deal elsewhere, if the Bears make an offer. But, I honestly think these is 1 out of 31 clubs that will be willing to overpay for the opportunity to put some fans in the stands. Like Jax, Cle, Mia...or back to TB with Smith. Hester does still have something left. It's just that the Bears have determined that what is left is not what they are willing to pay for given all their other needs.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/...the-loyalty-is/

bingo!

I do agree. Every talking head can't be wrong...games are won and lost in the trenches we've been told for eons. It's like everything else...if you have great other parts, they make up for elements of the bad parts. But if you are in the QB's dish consistently or stuff runs consistently...the need for top tier LB's and DB's is lessened. Just my thought, but I value the areas of D as such: DL - A LB - B DB - C Look at 85. Those were virtually the grades. We all love Fencik, Duerson, Richardson, etc. But they were not great. They were just good. I'm talking as a group. Having A+ on the Dl and LB corps, made a C+ group look like B's and A's every now and then. Sure, every now and then great groups of DB's get coverage sacks, etc. But that happens less often than pure old fashioned pressure. Don't get me wrong, I want all A's! But, if I had to choose, my preference would be in the order above.

Yeah, but those guys are the like having the Avengers on your team...

Ronnie Lott was another. However, exceptions make the rules...

Agreed. He'll demand more than we should pay.

Thanks. Now that it looks certain, I fully stand by what I posted. Thank you again Devin!

Hey. Skunks are cute. Why go there?

I won't fully but iy until he signs elsewhere... But if true, I am sad. I know it was bound to happen and on a pure logical level it should happen. But, I will always cherish the excitement he brought to each and every kickoff. I will never again watch a punted or kicked-off ball with the same anticipation. Devin, if you are truly not in our plans...with all my heart as a Bears fan...thank you. You have been and always will be part of our storied history. Now bust one more wherever you go and seal the deal. Bear down.

I tend to agree with your logic on these...

Just because Angelo whiffed, doesn't mean we shouldn't try to bring in players inlater rounds that could eventually be good. All your options you mention sound fine to me. Overall, Slauson, Bushrod and Garza aren't getting any younger. We need to start bringing more bodies in. I don't expect much this year due to the high need on D, but over the next few, we nned to continue to stock up OL talent.

Love it!

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/...-dante-rosario/