Lucky Luciano

uhhh so what? who cares what he says. if fields doesn't turn the corner moore ain't gonna offer himself up free of charge in a trade for us to move up to draft another one. if we trade fields to some crap team will he volunteer to go along?

bryce young huh? at 5'10"? i don't remember anyone calling him a generational talent before the draft. do you?? the 'odds' of every single player picked is the same in the range of what round and position you pick them. the odds that you have a better chance at a player being good is a sliding scale for each and EVERY player. just because you pick MORE doesn't mean any single one has better odds or a better chance to be an excellent player in the NFL. take a thousand dollars and go to vegas and play some roulette with your system. let me know how it works out.

agree. think on this... what players that we could pick if we trade down are considered once in 10 YEARS + quality according to ANY experts? who are these once in a lifetime players further down in the draft? if they are that good according to any analysis why are they NOT considered the top picks in the draft? would ANYBODY rather draft a franchise WR over a franchise QB? i can't even imagine it.

1. some people believe williams is too much of a risk to pick with the overall #1. he could be a bust. 2. these same people believe we should trade down and get a plethora of draft picks AND pick a lesser qb. i just gotta ask.... what makes these picks you will accrue any different from the williams pick? according to that theory, they could ALL be busts right? if you deem williams the best qb in this qb heavy draft why in the H E double hocky sticks would you NOT pick him and roll the dice that we will have a high end qb that will beat the good/accomplished qb's in our own division for a freaking decade? isn't that what this is all about? being at LEAST good enough to win the division each year to get us a SHOT at a supberbowl and WINNING IT? having a solid team that maybe makes it to the playoffs every 5 years or more as a wildcard or even rarer win our division and has an even rarer chance to win a superbowl is just not enough. it's some kind of glutton phobia some are having. for god's sake we have TWO top ten picks!!! they want to trade out of the rarest of the rare situation to land that key player that moves this franchise into a yearly contender and for what? didn't the 85 bears teach these people ANYTHING? the 85 team had all-pro/HOF players on both sides of the ball (remember this was prior the cap) yet what did they lack? a freaking QB (after mcmahon's career was stolen from him, and also a good coach i might add) to win those tight games. if we couldn't do it with that team it's insane to believe we could do it in the salary capped NFL of today!!!

wow, it sure would for me. how could you pass up the best qb in a great qb talented draft when you are holding all the cards? yikes!! listened to the phil simms video on williams. haven't seen him that animated since the 85 bears defense ran him into the ground in the playoffs.

that is true in a sense but.... 1. certain FA primo players can play into their late 30's especially offensive and possibly defensive linemen. so for instance, to drop a primo left tackles contract because you don't have the cap space is seriously dangerous in building a winning long term franchise. 2. even if you release those aging primo players, you HAVE to replace them. so if you rely on FA that's another major cap problem. if you rely on the draft, you have forced yourself to pick redundant positions to cover the loss years in advance. and if you miss on them what next? you are back to day one of drafting a player in the first or second round or using creative cap financing for a primo FA and that all comes due eventually when you borrow against the future.

if you keep cutting or trading your primo players they have to be replaced. the only option in that scenario is acquiring much less talented FA players to fill their spots while the rookies you HOPE turn out good and drafted high again figure it all out. SO, you either hope to hit the lottery in the draft in lower rounds or you have to pick more top 50 rated players to fill their spots. with a three year, as would be normal, for a rookie to start showing the quality you hoped to get by drafting him. if you miss on these newly drafted players you get from a trade/cut etc. you are stuck with 2nd or 3rd rate quality starters. for me, especially if you are building a team through the draft, you can stagger the big paydays for the high end players that turn out. otherwise if half your quality starters all come due at the same time there is no way you can have a roster that can win you superbowls.

here's the thing, ANY top end free agents will likely sign for a 4-5 + year contract. if you end up with all of these trade down first and second round picks THEIR rookie contracts will come due in that 4-5 year span. how could we possibly afford that in the cap? say all of these top two round picks pan out to be very good to excellent players. we would never be able to resign the top end free agents AND these players when their rookie contracts come due. we just couldn't afford that many contracts for high end players coming due all at once. add to this, if any believe that fields is going to be a high end qb, HIS contract will come due at the same time as the rookies and high end free agents. we would be in cap hell and have to CUT half the players we traded down to get, release the high end free agents we signed and/or release our starting qb.

they absolutely CAN'T trade down further than #2 and then ONLY if washington tells you who the pick is and it's not the one you were going to pick at #1 as your top choice. any further down and you risk your target qb (no matter who he is) will be picked before you get a chance to grab him. that's dumb management. if he is good enough to pick in the top 5 and considered the best qb in the draft then there is no way you gamble he will be there when you pick.

i CERTAINLY hope this is the year to pick the franchise qb. the first overall pick is a gift that we just can't use to stock up on filling the roster. look at it this way, we would have been happy getting a top 10 pick (#9). that we have two is just gravy and we have to pull the trigger on it to go for the franchise high end qb. is he guaranteed to become a franchise player? of course not but if you use that as a yardstick as to how to approach this they you would NEVER pick a top 10 qb. you go for broke. even loading up on first round picks if we traded down is going to cause a lot of cap troubles that will all come due at the same time. how would we pay for them in 4 years from now? it's doubtful we could even KEEP what we drafted this year if they all turn out good+ players. so stocking up with first and second round talent has serious drawbacks in our future team.

i gotta disagree. i HATE the cowboys with a passion but aikman was an excellent qb who in my opinion does belong in the HOF. the reason the stats are so skewed is because of emmit smith and the offensive line. he didn't HAVE to light it up every game. the boys running game was exemplary.

ditka was a BAD coach. unless what we had was a complete disaster he would be one of my last choices. with the talent ditka had at that time to only win one sb is almost criminal. you talk about flus making errors costing games? ditka was the master at that. he is probably the most over rated coach in nfl history who won a superbowl on jim finks and buddy ryans shirt tails.

draft the future franchise qb. then... use baggette as you say or if he turns out looking like i THINK he could you then have a good+ qb in bagette and then can make the decision to either keep him and trade the draft pick or trade baggette for some really nice draft picks. this is how the packer org. operated. think of the qb's they drafted and traded for good draft picks or premium players all the while favre was in the fold. you then got something out of fields, a franchise prospect and a possible good+ qb in bagette. if you keep fields for that purpose you will REALLY divide the locker room and fans and make it much harder for transition of your new qb.

SIGN HIM!! my word is law

Bow down before the one you serve You're going to get what you deserve just do as 'I' say.

i AM the GM. just agree without fail to every thing i say without question. i KNOW best. us GM's do.

WTF kind of call is that? you have 3 timeouts left, need TWO scores and around a minute to go and you try running it in from the 3 on third down and burn up a timeout if he doesn't get in? that FORCES you to recover an onside kick. even with that said, the game was LOST when they decided to go for it on 4th (and how many yards) at the 30 yard line instead of tying up the game with a field goal? riddle me this batman.... what the hell is going on with the coaching in the NFL? i really don't understand it anymore. in my book you ALWAYS take the points. you don't get cute and go for on 4th down unless you are MORE than 10 points down in the last 5 min of a game. for some reason has the league made field goal points count less than TD points? is there some magical points scored if you go for it on 4th down in your OWN territory in the first 3 quarters? has overtime penalized the winning team? i see it time and time again. this is pop warner stuff that you see coaches doing nearly every game. it's so stupid i almost have to wonder if shaving points or predetermined wins and losses are involved in this. i have seen so many games determined by not going for that field goal during the game that it's mind boggling.

how do you know I'm not the GM?

i just gotta say this... after 2 years of watching a coach perform, if a GM doesn't have an idea whether he made a mistake in the hire then i question his ability to lead the franchise to the promised land. in 2 years the lag starts to catch up to us. qb wise and player contract hits. if he is not the coach of our future then we have wasted an enormous amount of time, money and draft picks if there would have been a better choice after year 2.

1. let me state this: in my opinion poles 'so far' has done an excellent job. with that in mind a couple of red flags for me have come up that bears watching. a) the defense did provide a vast improvement over the season with this caveat... against good teams with good qb's we struggled in pass protection enormously . this is to me the major flaw of this cover 2 type of defenses that goes all the way back to lovie smith and the firing of chico. good qb's will bounce the quick release and throw uncontested strikes in the soft zones all day long for 5-10 yd gains. this may beat the lower tier teams you can offensively keep up with but when it comes to high scoring playoff contenders it is a disaster. pick ANY year against green bay since favre has been here. they handed us our lunch for over 20 years with the bend don't break game plans with some outstanding defensive players on our roster during this period. payton manning crushed us in the superbowl which is where we hope we are heading into against top tier teams. b) "depending upon who he hired". this is red flag #2. i don't know the facts behind our search or hiring but if this was in the criteria of finding a DC that is a puppet or clone of flus strictly for that reason then we didn't look for the possibly best DC, we looked for the best DC that complimented flus's system. that is what this franchise has done since finks left. put the cart before the horse and if that didn't work put the cart ON the horse. all this said i am not dissing the hire but i really do not know if washington was the best DC candidate or just the best for flus.

really? maybe, maybe not. i seem to remember back when president ted phillips stood on the podium next to the family gardener and said any decisions to fire a coach/gm (there has been so many i can't remember the details of who it was) CLEARLY state he would have to talk it over with mike mccaskey. hmmmm.... not quite what they led us to believe about who was running the show. here is the FINAL NOTE: would you right now today give eberflus a 4 year extension on his contract? yes or no. if your answer is no, then why did we retain him in the first place? my thoughts on flus... could he be a good head coach? the answer is yes but only if he would stay out of the way of his assistant coaches other than to guide them in the right or at least different direction without having any stipulations on the type of coordinators or what system they chose to run. this i 'may' be calling the defense is ludicrous. lovie couldn't do it, can he?

in other words, smoke and mirrors. like mikey supposedly grabbing a hoe and doing the gardening. maybe this guy COULD be great but you have hamstrung him before he even gets here. this is the same nonsense we have pulled since jim finks had enough of this crap and walked (if anyone is wondering that's almost 45 YEARS of this ineptitude). sound similar to our great coach/OC nagy who was reed's lap dummy? or lovie hiring his linebacker coach to implement the same ole same ole? it never seems to change with this franchise. it's always a condition to hiring anyone. we will hire you but such and such stays or you have to run their type of system and on and on. nobody in this franchise can define the definition of failure. just plod on and hope it works or not.

why even hire a DC if he is just a puppet for flus? i seriously can't imagine this was the best most qualified hire given those restrictions. what DC worth a shite is going to put his name on that philosophy?

ok.... what the hell does this mean? Head coach Matt Eberflus will continue calling plays, Pelissero added. Washington returns to the Windy City after being a defensive line coach in 2010. https://www.nfl.com/news/bears-to-hire-eric-washington-as-their-new-defensive-coordinator

he has a losing record wherever he coached... nfl or college. not sure that would make me jump for joy.