bradjock

Jones is egotistical, but he's not retarded. Marion Barber is damn good running back, a restricted free agent, and it's likely he'll be locked up by them long before the draft on April 26th. Why the hell would the Cowboys give up two draft picks to take a running-back, when they already have a top-shelf guy? While I assume McFadden will be gone, many mocks have Mendenhall available when the Cowboys draft at #22. It just doesn't make sense IMO.

Eventually they were solid pick-ups, but immediately they were huge dissappointments. In their first seasons with the Bears: Tait: Played RT for arguably the worst o-line the NFL has ever seen. Shea & Q-Mitchell were the main culprits, but he was part of a god-awful mess. Don't forget Tait was only 28 when we signed him. Wale: Was injured most of his first season with the Bears & his 15 sacks dropped to 5. He only started 12 games. This is the first season with Chicago he's lived up to his paycheck. Thomas Jones: He was mediocre enough that we targeted Cedric with the #4 pick the next year. I forgot to mention that last year's major acquisitions were Arch & Walker. In other words, whatever player we pick up, we had better not expect great results immediately.

But you're forgetting that the Bears didn't pay most of that money. The Redskins did. The one thing I'll say about Archuletta is that the guy appeared to bust his ass and do everything he could. The problem with him is not his mind or his desire, but with his ability. He's just too damn slow to play the position anymore. If I think a Bear player is dogging it I'll call them an asshole (Cedric). I can't say that about Arch.

What scares me is: 1) His age. The guy's 31 years old already and he'll want a 5 year deal. 2) Why is Pittsburgh ready to let him walk? Pittsburgh and New England have a talent for letting good players walk at the right time. 3) Unless they sign with New England, FA's rarely do as well as expected. Big name guys the Bears have signed in the past few years, Moose, Tait, Wale, and even Thomas Jones, had very questionable first seasons. Maybe they were bad because the players around them were bad, but they were still bad. In other words, if we signed Faneca, he's likely to have a down 2007. So we'll be hoping for more in 2008 when he's 32? I'd just rather we don't over-pay for a guard, and if we do, find one who is not as old.

According to LT, he's on the book for 960,000 or something like that (thanks LT). That's chump change by cap standards. That being said, what's the rush? If we draft a guy and decide to keep Mike Brown, maybe you go ahead and clear him out. Otherwise we have until the September 1st cuts to get rid of him and he wouldn't hurt our cap space. If he does go into training camp, we'd have to be very suspicious of what the coaching staff says. They really bragged him up, yet every day there was a "Bradley/Hester/Berrian (take your pick) made a great TD on Arch today." If it doesn't cost us anything to keep him around, why not keep him around?

I REALLY can't see us trading anyone for a 2nd rounder. Teams value those 2nd round picks incredibly high. Who would we offer? That being said, it depends on what we do in free agency. For instance, I suspect that we'll restructure Darwin Walker's deal. We should have some resolution with his situation one way or another well before the April 26th draft. We know Tommie, Dvoracek, and Anthony Adams are all certain to be back. Either way, it wouldn't surprise me to see us draft a DT in the 2nd round. I didn't think we needed another D-lineman when we draft Tank, Mark Anderson, Dusty Dvoracek, or Dan Bazuin. I'd be a little upset, since that's not our greatest need (O-line, WR, QB, WR, Safety . . . I left off RB since I really believe we'll address that during free agency.

A few years back Moose was cut on like a Tuesday or Wednesday, and the Bears inked him Friday night and the news story broke the next morning. Angelo didn't waste no time on a guy he wanted. He also signed Thomas Jones like 15 minutes into the free agency period. In other words, if he believes in a guy, he'll get it done. I'd much rather have a GM who was careful & patient then one who shops like my wife does.

What I failed to mention is that the guys signing 50 million $$$ deals are getting around 20 million of it guaranteed. For instance, last season Leonard Davis signed with the Cowboys for 49.6 million (as per espn.com) 18.75 was guaranteed, and he'll receiver 24 million over the first 3 seasons. I'm no cap expert, but I'm guessing the 18.75 was spread out over 6 years, (meaning he'll receive over 3 million a year for six years, depending on how it was distributed.) Which means if they dump him after year 3 they'd still owe him 9 million (I probably screwed that way up.) I'm the wrong person to be arguing this (because I'm retarded in cap matters) but the bottom line is, top players & agents aren't going to settle for a stupid deal. Faneca will cost a shit load and he's already 31.

HUH??? Have you seen the deals top guards are getting??? We're talking at least 50+ million. Fanacea is the best guard available, and most teams have tons of dough to spend. If he were younger I think he'd be worth it. But at his age, and considering we need major help at the tackle position, it's just too much to ask.

As per profootballtalk.com. Reportedly it was a low signing bonus with a good annual salary. No other details were available. Damn that was quick. I read the headline on PFT, "Wahle signs" and my first thought was, "Did the Bears get him?!"

I thought he'd be in the mix for running backs the Bears hope to bring in for competition (Translation: To replace the overpaid asswhipe who started the season for us this year) Although I'm surprised he signed this early and for this cheap. It gives me hope that a guy like Julius Jones will be "inexpensive." Here's the story from PFT.: "After generating only 1,016 yards in four full seasons with the Raiders, running back Justin Fargas busted out in 2007, nearly equaling that totaling 14 games, with seven starts. For that, Fargas has been rewarded with a new contract. According to Adam Schefter of NFL Network, it's a three-year, $12 million deal with $6 million in guaranteed money. Fargas was a third-round pick in the 2003 draft. He was scheduled to become a free agent on February 29. "

One time I called my buddy a jag-bag. He looks at me and says, "What's a jag-bag?" My response? "YOU'RE A JAG-BAG! JAG-BAG!!!" (Sadly enough I think of that as my greatest come-back of all time. Thanks for the insight of knowing that it's the "scrotum of someone who masturbates." I'll be honest, I'd never really thought about it before. While we're on the subject, why exactly is it a bad-thing to "Go F--- yourself."?

I'm convinced Haas is like P.J. Pope. Pope looked great in pre-season in 2006, Lovie declared he'd be on a team somewhere. After bouncing around with different teams Pope wound up back on the Bear's practice squad in 2007 (before being IR'ed.) Pope's likely gone after we bring in competition for Cedric. (which will make 4 running backs) If Haas couldn't be activated in 16 games, especially when we're out of it, either: a) The whole damn coaching staff should be fired immediately, or He's not NFL worthy. I give the coaches the benefit of the doubt on this one. (although why he was placed on the 53 man roster to begin with is a different argument. ) I'm guessing Haas might make it as a deep reserve & special teams guy (except he's slow) but that's it.

Madlith, I know it's coming across that I hate Booker but it's not true. I'm annoyed that Moose is not nearly as bad as we're making him out to be, and I'm annoyed the Booker is not nearly as good as we're making him out to be. Moose was paid a ton of $$$ to be a #1 WR & he's not. Good blocker, good route runner, voted team captain, puts up solid numbers every year, but not a #1. I think a lot of Bear's fans are pissed (including myself at times) that he's never came close to approaching the numbers he put up in Carolina when we signed him. Then we have this perception of Booker that he's a great WR who has been misused or not given the right opportunity. Miami's had 3 different OC's since he's been there and none are that high on him. There's a reason for that. While everyone is bitching about Moose's hands, Moose is bigger and a much more physical WR then Booker. That somewhat compensates for the bad hands, and makes him more ideal at going over the middle. Either way, I don't see how the hell Booker would be an upgrade. As for Moose throwing his QB under the bus, in 2005 he made some comment on Orton because he wanted Rex in. In 2007, on a terrible Rex throw that was intercepted, he said he ran the correct route. (I have no idea whether that's true or not.) Two minor incidents in 3 years does not earn him the reputation as a QB killer IMO.

But you're ignoring the fact that in 4 years with Miami, Booker was under 3 different head coaches (Wanny, Saban, & Cameron), 3 different OC's, and the results each year were pretty much similar. San Diego must have had no interest in trading for Booker & he obviously would have been available. Not to mention Shea was happy to get rid of him. That's a bunch of different coaches & organizations that feel the same way. Once again, I like Booker. I hated to see him leave Chicago. I would not be upset if we signed him. It's just that having two old/slow/average WR's on the same team is not good. Especially when you have an OC that wants to stretch the field (want in one hand, shit in the other . . . ) I just don't see how anyone could realistically expect that he would put up better numbers then Moose.

I've honestly believed some of the hype coming out of Halas that Miller was horrible this year because of injuries, and the team still has a ton of faith in him. Maybe that's all B.S., and as you've pointed out previously, Miller wasn't great in 2006 either. I am curious as to why this team has a lack of faith in St. Clair. Miller was benched mainly because he was flat-out horrible, and couldn't quit jumping off sides. St. Clair was not great, but seemed better then Miller. Then after 2 or 3 games, Miller was inserted back at RT. At this point in the season we were pretty much out of it. I wondered then why the hell we didn't just let St. Clair finish out the season at RT to see if he could get it done on a consistent basis. Then we moved St. Clair to LG. The offensive line seemed improved with him there. That might have been because Orton doesn't get sacked 9 times a game. I was thinking we might keep him starting there. I'm still skeptical, but you're right, that is one helluva a savings to dump a bad RT. I'd have no problem dumping Fred Miller as long as we annoit St. Clair our starting RT, and make any rookie win the starting job.

I hate to state the stupidly obvious, but if he catches everything thrown to him, why didn't the Dolphins throw his way every time? As bad as Miami QB's have been, other teams traded to get Welker & Chambers, yet Miami dumps the guy that catches everything? Sorry, but that makes no sense.

When an agent contacts the team, and the agent lets the media know they are talking with the team, that's the agent trying to get better for his client. Other then the fact that "Angelo likes Booker" (he probably likes a lot of former players not named Tank) there is nothing to suggest the Bears have any interest.

So statistics be damned, here's what I know about Booker: 1) Terry Shea did not like Booker. (which by itself means nothing until you consider) 2) EVERY year Booker's been with Miami there's been talk of them getting rid of him. 3) He was never more then an "over the middle" type receiver. 4) San Diego wanted Chambers, not Booker. 5) One of the first things Parcells does is dump Booker. Booker has the ability to be an ok #2 or #3 receiver. But isn't that what Moose is? I just REALLY don't understand how you can presume that Booker would be any better?

Leonard Davis did spend his last 3 seasons with Arizona as their starting Left Tackle, and while he wasn't great, he was good enough that they did consider putting the franchise tag on him. http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2769535 Going into free agency last year Len Pasquarreli (who's probably an idiot) ranked him as the #8 overall available free agent saying, "he is the only viable left tackle availble" (in free agency) http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/stor...&id=2784159 The Cowboy's signed him to a 49.6 million $$$ contract with the intention of playing him at RG or RT depending on what happened with Marc Colombo (I just assumed that if you spend that much money on a guy, you'd want him to play tackle . . . he's not better then Colombo???) Yes he did make the pro-bowl, but christ almighty that's expensive for a RG, the weakest position on the offensive line. Either way, getting back to my original point, to sign a tackle in free agency who's not completely worthless is going to cost the Bears one helluva a lot of money.

That's easy to say, but who the hell do we replace him with? Last year the Cowboys signed LT Leonard Davis from Arizona for something like 60 million (that's not an exact figure but I know it was a huge amoung & profootballtalk.com made a big deal out of it.) Davis was so bad, he was moved to RG, next to Marc Colombo who played tackle. Travelle Wharton is the top LT available, and Carolina's line was terrible last year. How much will that cost? You cannot count on a rookie to step in and start. We'd be nuts to do that. So are choices are: a) Pay out the ass for an average tackle, or Draft a tackle and keep Fred Miller around for one more year. As bad as he was, we could do MUCH worse then Fred Miller. I just don't see what other choice we have at this point.

Let me ask this to anyone who can explain it: How can you realistically argue that Booker would be an upgrade over Moose at this point in his career? These are their stats for the past 3 years since Moose joined the team: 2007: Moose--570 yards, 3 TD's Booker--546 yards, 1 TD 2006: Moose--863 yards, 5 TD's Booker--747 yards, 6 TD's 2005: Moose--750 yards, 4 TD's Booker--686 yards, 3 TD's I keep reading how Booker has better hands, he might be faster, he's younger . . . but statistically he's inferior. Sure there's the argument for bad QB play, but it doesn't get much worse then when Moose had Orton in 2005. Granted I haven't watched many Dolphins games, but who here has? I just maintain tha Booker is not an upgrade. Moose is due to make 3 million & that's probably around what Booker will cost. We don't need two old/mediocre WR's on this team that can't stretch the field. Making changes for the hell of it is not helpful. I love Booker. How can you not love a guy who cried when he found out he was traded from Chicago? We haven't had a great WR since him. I have a damn Christmas ornament with him & Urlacher on it. But at this point in his career, he's not going to do much to help this team.

I think we'd all LOVE it if that happened but I can't see it happening. Isn't the uncapped year supposed to happen in 2010? I base that on what I've been reading from profootballtalk.com. Hester is already a super-star in this league. Imagine what will happen if he becomes a great WR??? More importantly, what will happen if Dan Snyder can become George Steinbrenner and buy everyone. How much is Hester worth when the spending limits are off??? In most cases I think guys are nuts to pass up big money deals to hold out for a little more. It's not worth the risk. But in Hester's case, his full potential is still untapped. We signed Urlacher to a huge deal well before his contract was set to expire. But at the time, he was a pro-bowl LB. How do you set a price tag on Hester right now? Like I said, I would LOVE to see it. I just don't think it'll happen.

Damn near every time Hester went down field he had a corner all over him and a safety covering the top. Even when we didn't throw to him we had one player essentially taking two defenders out of the rest of the equation. In theory, this opens things up for our running-game and our WR's. (Sending WR's deep is why we had so much success running the ball Orton's rookie year). Guys like Moose & Booker will never see double coverage. When we had Berrian & Hester going long the 2nd half of the season, our offense started to click. Granted, it works out best if you have a guy like Randy Moss who's 6-4 and is strong enough, big enough, and fast enough to beat the coverage. But if you don't have a true #1, you're best bet is to send your speed guys to stretch the field. Either way, Booker would not bring much to this offense. Did I mention he's relatively short, slow, and he'll be 32?

Technically it's possible but highly unlikely. First off, we'd have to eat his signing bonus. Why would we do that? Secondly, why wouldn't the team we were dealing with just sign him? Why would they give up something to get him when he was just available? More importantly, NFL teams, more then any other sport, put a premium on "team." Telling a guy "we want you" then dumping his ass two weeks later is not good for team morale, and it's not good for the system.