AZ54

I kept waiting for David Terrell (1st Rd pick) and the more recent Devin Thomas (2nd Rd pick) to have their names mentioned. The reality is that most teams selecting a WR in Rd 1 have a big need for a WR so there is a reason they see the field early. Plus they need them to develop quicker and since they are losing teams it is not going to affect their W-L percentage. Their eyes are on the future. We have a little bit of a luxury in that we don't have to have Jeffrey as a starter on day one and we have a playoff ready team. It would be great if he earned it but I don't view it as an absolute unless there is an injury. You stated that people are insinuating Jeffrey will be "sitting" but I haven't seen anyone saying he should just sit on the bench. Most here feel he will (and should) get some playing time from day one and that he will progress throughout the season and earn more playing time and hopefully be a starter by season's end. Hester is going to be a part time WR for us. That means plenty of opportunity for Jeffrey to line up outside with Bennett in the slot.

I didn't say you wouldn't see him on the field. I don't care how tall he is if he runs the wrong route or runs it incorrectly. When he does run the right route if he doesn't run it well enough to separate every catch is going to be contested. Not all DBs cover like Zach Bowman. Give him some time to grow and learn the role, if he does the basics well enough then he could start but I'm not expecting that coming out of training camp.

I would love to see Alshon earn the starting role coming out of training camp but I don't see it happening. We are running an entirely new offense and we (fingers crossed) expect to be protecting Cutler with a lot more quick passes. We can't afford mistakes early in the season and I think Cutler will be most comfortable with his veterans out there. Alshon has a lot to learn and now add to that the audibles that Cutler will be calling. As the season progresses and he is more familiar with the offense then I could see it happening.

Keeping two WR solely for special teams is a waste IMO. At least one of them needs to be able to contribute on offense on a short term basis when someone is injured. I've been saying there is room for competition at Thomas' roster spot. Weems was given too much money upfront to be let go unless he totally bombs. Slot 6 is open for competition among Sanz, Thomas, and any other WR in camp. If Thomas thinks he can hang his hat on the fact that he's good in kick coverage then he better look over at the defense where there are two rookie CBs and a rookie safety all looking to earn a roster spot and playing time. They all know Corey Graham made his mark as a special teamer and it paid off for him. There is also a chance we'll go with 5 WRs and keep 4 TEs in this new offense.

I doubt Chicago would be a Superbowl city. We might have had one there but the reality is there are lots of other events in the week before the Superbowl and reasonable chances of good weather helps. Even if events are not outdoors, as many are, people have to travel all over the city (sometimes across the state) to get to these events. The Vikings will build another domed stadium but I can't see them hosting a Superbowl.

1 reason Jeffrey should not be the starter: He hasn't earned it.

I don't think he has the ability to play anymore. He certainly didn't in his last years with us and there hasn't been any indication that has changed. He also couldn't practice so that locker room effect will be negligible. Plus Tommie had a lot of head case issues (and suspensions) so I don't exactly see him as a locker room leader. In his first year I don't think Emery wants one of JAs has-beens and I think he'd tend to gamble on the younger talent to see if he develops.

I would say Tommie Harris is precarious at best. There are a lot of teams that refused to take a chance on him at vet min level even with expanded rosters heading into training camp.

Here we will have to disagree because IMO coaching and scheming can only overcome some things in terms of lack of talent. But maybe I am oversimplifying game planning because some coaches seem to be clueless when it comes to taking advantage of an opponents weakness (Mike Martz). I guess with all these assistant coaches, some dedicated to nothing but charting out the opponents tendencies on down and distance it is really difficult to figure out what they are going to do against your weaknesses/strengths (if they even know their own team that well). I'd say the same thing about talent can only overcome so much bad scheming and I'd use the 49ers turnaround under Harbaugh as an example there.

I doubt we'd go with 7 WRs because of special teams. It seems the Bears like to have a bigger guy (LB type) as one of their special teams aces. Thomas' best value on special teams is as a coverage man. There's no way a guy like this UDFA WR keeps up with his speed as a gunner so that definitely helps Thomas.

Teams can be easy to game plan for that doesn't mean your talent on defense can match up. Line up Bowman on the goal line against any Packers WR with Rodgers throwing to him and we'll lose every time even though every single fan on this board knows the game plan is the quick inside slant, or if the WR lines up outside it'll be the back shoulder throw. I give Lovie credit because he knows how to hold their offense in check although at times it is obvious players' execution isn't always good (ref. Zach Bowman, Major Wright missing tackles). Each time we've played them the last few years I thinking we're going to get blown out by halftime and we don't. That is despite having a pathetic offense that routinely went 3 and out so the defense wasn't getting much rest in those games. So giving up 22pts average given our offense's minuscule output is pretty good IMO. Clearly we don't have enough talent on D to keep them at 17pts or below consistently. Now we've added more speed off the edge to our pass rush and hopefully Melton will be more consistent in pressure up the middle. I don't think we've made enough of an improvement in our secondary to really take advantage of any improvement in the Dline forcing quicker throws. Have we made enough of an improvement on offense to outscore them? I don't know, they now have two good pass rushers coming off the edge.

There is no problem at all giving this kid a tryout. Nobody has anointed him a starter much less a roster spot just because he is tall. No different than the OT UDFA we brought in. Despite the link there is nothing in that Bears site article that says Thomas has been making people notice him on the field. At the end of training camp I just want the best 5 or 6 WR on the team and I don't care about draft status or experience. If Thomas can't beat out a UDFA rookie from a small school then it wouldn't say much for him, but I think he'll have no trouble.

For years everyone said our WRs were bad, now we add a good talent in the draft and he won't be able to get on the field. I don't see it, and I don't see him hurting cohesion. I'm not expecting him to be a starter but I find it hard to believe he can't be a significant contributor with at least 500yds, maybe as high as 700yds, receiving this season.

You can't switch the argument or statement from one of the Packers offense being dominant to one of the Bears defense being dominant. to borrow a term another person likes to use on this board: Read the post and the original statement. I don't consider scoring 22pts per game a huge offensive success. Pointing out plays where their players dropped passes is like saying Webb is a great LT once he gets his feet set and his hands on his man. Or should I simply state that if Major Wright didn't complete whiff on a tackle then the Packers wouldn't have scored? If Bowman doesn't line up 5 yards off his man at the goal line than that quick slant pass couldn't have been completed in the last game? If 22pts per game is your standard of excellence for offense then you should be ecstatic over the results of last year's Bears: 17 Chicago Bears 16 22.1 353 (as in 22.1pts per game average) I don't really care about other teams, because again, the statement was that all teams have struggled against the Packers offense for several years yet we have matched up well prior to last year. I simply provided some facts to show that was not the case for all teams. Remove the absolute and we are in agreement, most teams have trouble matching up with Green Bay's offense. However, it can be done.

Is your point that Thomas has been impressive in OTAs? Everything in the summer is just a fluff piece. At least they covered some details on Summers background and I think as a UDFA he's a good prospect for us. He should have a good shot at making the practice squad and might be able to compete for the last WR slot. After years in the league Thomas' best attribute as a WR is his ability to cover kick returns. That's not exactly what we want out of a WR. I don't view him as a lock to make the roster, the same goes for Sanzenbacher. At least for once we are no longer debating who will line up as the #1 WR, and even positions 2-4 are clear although I expect those players will be shuffled around. Why don't you like adding Summers as a UDFA?

"I prefer a balanced attack, but don't kid yourself, it was FAR from easy to gameplan against the Packers. They've been tearing the entire league a new ass for more than a few years." Although last year last year they ran away with it especially the last game of the season but other than that one I don't agree with your statement. Maybe scoring 10pts is getting torn up in your opinion but it seems to me one team has been right there holding their offense in check. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bears–Packers_rivalry 2009 Sunday, September 13 Green Bay Packers 21–15 Chicago Bears 70,920 Green Bay 2009 Sunday, December 13 Green Bay Packers 21–14 Chicago Bears 62,214 Chicago [edit]2010s (Packers 4-1) Year Date Winner Result Loser Attendance Location 2010 Monday, September 27 Chicago Bears 20–17 Green Bay Packers 62,179 Chicago 2011 Sunday, January 2 Green Bay Packers 10–3 Chicago Bears 70,833 Green Bay 2011 Sunday, January 23* Green Bay Packers 21-14 Chicago Bears 64,912 Chicago 2011 Sunday, September 25 Green Bay Packers 27-17 Chicago Bears 62,339 Chicago 2011 Sunday, December 25 Green Bay Packers 35-21 Chicago Bears 70,093 Green Bay

WR Chris Summers, seems like a good prospect. Seems clear there is going to be some competition for the last WR spot among Thomas, Sanz, and Summers. They had good words for Sanzenbacher but there really hasn't been anything of note said about Thomas as a WR.

Hester best PR?

Never heard of the guy and he's not even good enough to make it to a training camp with 90 players on the roster yet he's better than Webb? Webb is not that bad and I am not being generous in my evaluation of Webb.

Davis is still a big "if" after all these years. Spaeth is not a dynamic player at all but he can usually block in line. His problem is blocking on the move, isn't that right Matt Forte? Kyle Adams is a total question mark at this time although he reportedly looked pretty good in the OTAs. I think we had to add a player to the mix and create some competition. Are we going to be upset if one of these four players gets cut given the level of competition? Davis has $2.7million in signing bonus so he's not going anywhere but who are the next two on the depth chart? May the best two men win a job. Or could we keep all four and cut Clutts? If you're going H-back you probably don't need a FB. http://www.csnchicago.com/football-chicago...?blockID=669942 UPDATE: According to ProFootballTalk, Davis will earn a $2.7 million signing bonus, a $700,000 base salary and a $100,000 workout bonus in 2012. In 2013, he'll earn a $2.4 million base salary with a $100,000 workout bonus. Davis will roughly earn $6 million for his two-year deal.

Even my daughter knew enough to ignore Joe Flacco when she met him last summer but the national media?

Here's a little more insight as to why Emery made these changes: http://www.chicagobears.com/news/NewsStory.asp?story_id=8849 “We want the senior scouts to be in roles where they can see the bigger picture and see more of the better players in the country,” Emery said. “We want them to cross-check the best players so they can have a better overall take on the ability level of the best players in the country.” With a larger staff, more scouts will have seen the top prospects heading into pre-draft meetings. “In the past with six area scouts often you would go into meetings with only one evaluation on a player,” Emery said. “Now with our increased staff and their roles, we’ll have three and possibly even four evaluations of a player. That will give us a better feel for the players and put us in a better position. “Having four in-house Scouting Assistants will also allow us to do a deeper dig on background for character and medical incidents and will allow us to be more accurate and complete with our information.”

That is a huge increase in the size of the scouting department. There was a lot of loyalty as well rewarding many long time Bears scouts.

All that money and he can't afford to call a taxi? Rent a limo for the night?

I don't think Emery disregards the floor at all and nothing he has said indicates that. It appears his window of acceptability on floor-to-ceiling is probably a bit wider than JAs was. However, as MadLith said, Emery targets football players. JA always seemed to be more concerned with the floor in his first round picks than he was with the ceiling. The confidence in making these risk decisions comes from your scouting and Emery is going to be very involved in how that is done as well as doing some scouting himself.