dawhizz

Just realizing Jack may be in play for the Packers and getting worried.

5T makes sense or maybe a CB depending on how things shake out (Jackson, Alexander, Burns).

Figured he deserved his own thread. I'm sure there will be plenty of discussion.

I was concerned with Floyd's age (23), but wasn't Kyle Long a 23-year-old project when we drafted him (or something like that)?

One thing I'll say about Floyd is that he played full-time LB so he's better in coverage than someone like Lawson. Plus we can still take advantage of the depth at DL to find a starter there.

Giants would have taken him. Still don't like the pick.

Hell yes. Who even knows how old that pic is? I bet there's a similar video out there of half the first round picks, and he obviously just got hacked (though I don't know why it's still on his phone if that's the case).

Anyone seen this crazy video of Tunsil smoking weed with a gas mask? WTF!

I think the thought is Rankins would be the end when the Bears are in the 3-4 and a DT in the subpackage with a pass-rushing LB on the line at the end, so he would still be playing in all packages.

Essentially. I think there was an indication that in sub-packages the Bears are in more of a 4-3, so Rankins and Goldman would be inside with Hicks and a pass-rushing LB on the ends.

I don't trust anything new I hear the week of the draft. Remember when Ryan Nassib was a lock to go top 15?

I'll go first: 1. Most underrated prospect? - Sean Davis, S, Maryland - If you leave him at safety, he has all the tools to be an above average starter 2. Most overrated prospect? - Jason Spriggs, OT, Indiana - I know he tested well, but I don't see much dominance in the games I've seen. 3. Your favorite day 3 prospect? - Eric Striker, LB, Oklahoma - I don't know where he plays in the NFL, but he produced every game in a big time conference for a big time team. 4. Projected 1st/2nd round pick most likely to fall to day 3? - Jeremy Cash, S, Duke - I know he had a ton of tackles, but one-dimensional safeties don't impress me much. 5. Surprise 1st round pick? - Christian Hackenberg, QB, Penn State - Maybe not a shock, but I think someone in the late first, maybe in a trade up from the 2nd, takes him. 6. Your bold Bears draft prediction? - Bears take Mackensie Alexander, CB, Clemson in the 2nd. He doesn't fit he perceived size requirements for Fangio, but I think he falls out of the first round and the Bears can't pass up the value. He's still bigger than our current nickel back. 7. Guy you don't want the Bears taking in the first? - A'Shawn Robinson, DE, Alabama - I don't see enough of a difference between him and someone we could get in the 2nd. 8. Who should the Bears take in the first? - Vernon Hargreaves, CB, Florida - He's the corner who's not Ramsey most ready to contribute right away and I think he'll be there, but I don't think we take him. 9. Who will the Bears take in the first? - Shaq Lawson, DE/LB. Clemson - A fairly safe pick who can bring something the Bears need.

We're about 36 hours from the big night. Let's do a quick speed round for those who follow and are interested. Feel free to answer whatever you want: 1. Most underrated prospect? 2. Most overrated prospect? 3. Your favorite day 3 prospect? 4. Projected 1st/2nd round pick most likely to fall to day 3? 5. Surprise 1st round pick? 6. Your bold Bears draft prediction? 7. Guy you don't want the Bears taking in the first? 8. Who should the Bears take in the first? 9. Who will the Bears take in the first?

I like him. My main concern with him is where he plays for the Bears. He looks like a 4-3 DE to me. I'm never really comfortable projecting a 4-3 DE to 3-4 OLB because they are such different skill sets, so I don't know if he can do it. What I know is I haven't seen much tape of him moving in space, covering, back pedaling, etc. and what I've seen hasn't shown me that he's that fluid in that aspect. Maybe he can get there and if we take him and put him at OLB, I have to assume we are comfortable with that part of this game. I think he would be better served adding 10 lbs or so and playing DE if we were to take him. If that's what we decide we want to do, the one thing I keep coming back to in this draft is the depth of the DL pool. I feel like if the Bears are taking a DE at #11, then they have to really like him, because on paper the difference between the DE you draft in the 1st and who will be left when you pick in the second might be the smallest skill difference between two positions, whether you end up looking at Vernon Butler, Chris Jones, Jonathan Bullard, Ogbah, the list goes on. It's a little hard for me to believe the Bears love Lawson that much. But maybe they do.

These position by position rankings with "scout's notes" that Bob McGinn does are always a good read. There's always some positive and some negative, which is nice. http://www.jsonline.com/about-us/bob-mcginn-28302749.html

I guess that would arguably make sense for a team that was set at CB, but needed a S, but for the Bears he would probably be best served just staying at corner, though for his first year they would probably put Hargreaves at the nickel and Fangio could probably move him around a bit like they did with Jimmie Ward his first year, who is very similar in size and measurable to Hargreaves.

Seeing more and more about Floyd to the Bears and I still don't like it. McShay and Kiper both said last week that he's rising into the top ten and I swear I've seen 3-5 mocks in the last week with Floyd to the Bears at #11. I was already a little skeptical given his relatively lack of production and the fact he'll probably need to get bigger to be effective. Then I read that he'll turn 24 this year! I have no problem getting Fangio a developmental OLB, but I don't see why we'd take Floyd in the first when there are plenty of others just as likely to be effective at the NFL level who are younger that we can get later.

The two obvious ones to me are either: - Trade #11 and #106 to the Bucs for #9. I think most of us (and most of the general public) sees a drop off in talent after a top nine of some combination of Goff, Wentz, Tunsil, Stanley, Bosa, Buckner, Ramsey, Jack, and Elliott (with maybe Hargreaves thrown in there if you don't like Elliott). If only one of those guys is left at #9, I would strongly consider giving up a 4th and maybe a future pick to get that guy. On the flip side I could also see: - Trade #11 to the Dolphins or Raiders for their first round pick and a fourth. If Elliott is still there and the Bears don't like him as much as they seem to claim, I can see a bidding war between the Dolphins and Raiders to trade up for him that would probably net us about a 4th round pick. Unless we have one guy left on out board that's clearly valued above the rest, that should allow the Bears to still get a guy they like and pick up another valuable 4th round pick which they could use or package a couple of 4ths to move up higher.

Faulk ran a 4.28 40 at the combine. Peterson ran a 4.38. Elliott ran a 4.47.

He's not as fast as AP or Faulk. He's just not. I'm not even sure he's as fast as a healthy Gurley. I see more of a Frank Gore type back - good power, great vision, good at following his blocks, can catch and block. He's going to be a really good RB in the league.

That's what gives me hesitation. Next year you're looking at a draft with Fournette, Chubb, Cook, and McCaffery, at the least. Fournette is better than Elliott and I would argue Chubb, Cook, and McCaffery are all better than Henry. With RB generally devalued around the league no matter where we pick in the 1st round I have to think we would have a chance at one of those guys if Langford doesn't show us something this year.

I would be good with this. I probably prefer Kaufusi a little more than Nassib because he's done it more than one year, but I have no real issue with any of the picks.

I have no big problem with Conklin, but he seems a clear step below Stanley from the tape I've watched (I was not impressed with Conklin's tape against Ohio State, for instance).

I'd much rather Wilkerson. I know we'd have to give up something, but Norman is 29 years old whereas Wilkerson is 26. I'm not eager to give a wad of cash to a CB to pay for his 30s years, and Pace doesn't seem like the type to do so either. No way we get both.

Man, I've been 5 seconds late on my breaking news all day . . . Also, if someone in the top ten signs him, that might push Hargreaves down to the Bears, for those of us on the Hargreaves bandwagon.