Lucky Luciano

if i thought your opinion was in any way knowledgeable or worth a tinkers dam on any subject relating to professional football i would respond. as it is? so it goes.

coach killer? really?? shanny got fired because he wasn't producing with or without cutler (cutler was ONLY in his 2nd season in denver under shanny) once elway retired and he fielded the mighty griese and the indomitable jake plummer over an 8 year stretch. he was in denver for 14 years and was fired by the same IDIOT that hired mcdaniels as a HC. that in itself says it all. turner? are you serious? turner never even should have been hired as any kind of a coach after the performance as HC of illinois. where did he land after the bears? hmmm martz?? surely you jest. again another coach from the dust bin nobody in their right mind BUT lovie and angelo would have wanted as ANY kind of coach. with the personnel he had in chicago trying to run the same rams offense was ludicrous and nearly ended cutlers life. where did he go after chicago? hmmmmmm tice??? this guy may have been even worse than shoop-a-doop. a complete idiot who NEVER was an OC in his life and never should have been. another genius hire by super coach lovie smith and the always amazing jerry angelo. and where is this juggernaut of an offensive genius? hmmmmmmmmmmmmm and finally trestman - he has been here for 1 1/2 seasons!!! how is that any judge of a first-go-round HC in the NFL who landed in chicago with the worst personnel on a roster of ANY team i can remember. we had absolutely NOTHING on offense OR defense except a qb and rb. puhhleease.

i can't agree more. we have had a laughable offense with the exception of a year or two with mcmahon at the helm, who had the luxury of one of if not 'the' best defenses in NFL history, for over 5 decades and now we want to throw this out the window by firing a really good offensive minded head coach who really gets it and arguably the best QB in our franchise history? all this after 1 1/4 seasons??? sure trestman has problems but come on... fire him this soon? i even gave lovie 3-4 years before i called for his head. and emery... he has done some things i don't like either (especially the tucker hire) but exactly what do you people think he can do in 2 freaking seasons to replenish a completely bankrupt roster? do you really expect 7 pro-bowl rookies per draft to fill the gaps that knucklehead angelo left us with after 10 years of garbage drafts and defensive dinosaurs for good players left on the roster? our offense was complete trash with the exception of cutler and forte and a couple of average players. it was the worst offensive line i had EVER seen take the field in chicago. it has gotten light years better over the last 2 seasons. our defense had absolutely no young talent on the roster from top to bottom. it is going to take at least 2 drafts to fix this if we focus on defense (and not even to say we need to draft MORE talent on the offensive side of the ball also). so, are some red flags up at this point? sure. but i need to give this team some more time to gel before i chop it off at the knees (with the exception of firing tucker if things don't drastically change THIS season. record breaking bad just has to be taken into consideration).

not really. you have turf advantage of conditions on your home field. non on the field advantage: you have normal routine at home. you don't have travel lag or hotel time.

i seriously can't imagine that that a special teams guy who is one step away from the practice squad or being cut could be more needed or more VALUABLE than play we can possibly get out of a potential HOF bailey. if bailey is healthy enough to play he can start at safety and SUB at corner if needed. he brings smarts with him to compensate for any loss of speed and safety should be a much better fit. he is a stop gap signing that could bring huge dividends to our team if we really are trying to win a super bowl this season. can ANYONE say they would rather have DIXON at safety than bailey if he can remotely adjust and is healthy? how often on this board, with me leading the charge, were we touting the best position for peanut would be SAFETY? it's no different for bailey. we have canon fodder playing our safety and corner positions at this time with the exception of fuller and 'possibly' jennings who has played poorly. we have frey for depth at corner and he is barely adequate so there is no depth there either. with bailey we would have a decent #2 CB in bailey if we sustain another injury during the season or a starting FS. finally... special teams does NOT trump a starting every down player in a critical position where we have great need.

i have no problem bringing him in for a workout. if he is healthy enough to play sign him as a stop gap player through the rest of the season and see how he plays. IF he can't adjust to free safety then cut him. simple as that. we could shore up the weakest position on our defense. how could we lose?

if we're talking new DC i want wade phillips if he is not under contract. he SHOULD have been the replacement THIS season for tucker.

i agree with you it's preseason. the final outcome or even scores don't mean a lot. i don't expect to see exotic blitzing schemes and stunting but... what we are NOT seeing are fundamentals. even in vanilla schemes you need to see basic football skills and smarts. in past teams you knew that these things were there because you have seen them performed in the real season previously. this is not the case with this team. our team is showing none of those things. what is worse is we are seeing the same mistakes that were made last season over and over again. THAT is concerning stuff that our coaching staff should have been working on all preseason. can it turn around when they play for real? sure. but if they can't even perform the basics in a 3rd preseason game it's a leap of faith to assume they will when we start the season. if it takes us 4 real season games to even grasp these concepts that is FAR too long and could put ourselves out of contention before we hit stride.

i disagree. with how this defense is looking we will need to average about 75 points a game on offense. LOL!! seriously... DEFENSE: even in a vanilla preseason mode the players STILL look confused and unsure where their assignments should be. i can't emphasize enough that the pursuit was overrunning misdirection plays all first half leaving an entire open field for their RB to run around RT for massive amounts of yardage. this is the same CRAP we saw last year when out LB's and DE's were being sucked inside on misdirection plays making our safeties and corners make plays on TE's and RB's and it hasn't gotten any better. there just is plain flat out no containment. next... again we see this loose cover nobody defense with holes big enough to park a mack truck in for easy receptions by anyone with a pair of hands. i was hoping with lovie gone we would see an end to that for the most part. obviously just dreaming on that aspect. holes up the middle? yikes. even in the red zone they are gaining 6 yds. a carry not to mention our corners playing so soft behind the receiver at times (IN the endzone) that ANY reception is an automatic TD. i have NEVER been a tucker advocate and unless we see a complete turnaround from this preseason garbage it is going to be a very, very LONG season with tucker trying to break the record for bad that he installed last year (just what does it take to get fired in this organization?). SPECIAL TEAMS: wow!! did we ever even get to the 20 yard line on kick returns? that was 4 tries!! blocking assignments? WHAT blocking assignments? and again we were completely lost on containment and guys staying in their lanes just like last season on the punting team. when our kicker continually is the only guy near the returner that's a freaking problem. so like tucker... just what does it take to get fired from this team as a coach?? this squad is going to kill us this year if this isn't just preseason vanilla. OFFENSE: i see absolutely no reason to be worried about most of what you are seeing with maybe the exception of our right tackle position. this is preseason and shaking out the rust and fitting in contending starters at TE, WR and RB. cutler looks just fine out there. a few bone head plays? like that is any type of surprise? this is the way he works and did so before we acquired him. there is no perfection in the NFL. even the greats have/had their moments each game that have/had you scratching your head. the same goes for the dropped balls which were critical in a number of instances. don't worry about it YET. it's part of the game. one critical aspect of our offense on coaching. for god's sake LOSE the pulling guards plays inside the 5 or 10 yard line. it's amateurish college crap that will fail more times than not for a loss you can't afford in that situation.

the NFL was a bit different in that era. there was no salary cap and there were only 28 teams vs. 32 teams of today. that is a huge difference maker in the amount of quality players being drafted (over 200 more players of today and roughly 88 more starters per year out of the talent pool). plus today with the cap in place your high pick draftee's salaries can limit what you can accomplish if one becomes a bust or is injured. we have SEEN this personally in chicago with our first round busts do to injury, talent or the combination of both. also the type of play, the rules, and the speed of the game were different 25 years ago. that said... if it were me i certainly would never have put the 5th pick in the draft on special teams as a kick returner as a rookie even in THAT era. then again nobody ever contended campbell or hanifan should have been inducted into the hall-of-fame as NFL coaches either. i think the RISK does not even come close to the reward. but then, to each his own. so it goes.

i can agree completely using your backups or even 2nd round down draft picks to temporarily fit in on special teams until they establish the quality of player they are. THEN i'd be damned if i would put a stud starting player on ST for any reason other than to win a superbowl IN the superbowl. i also would NOT put in a first round rookie pick on ST's and especially the core players i list below!!! it is flat out stupid to do so before you know what kind of quality you have in that player and risk injury to someone getting paid that much money and who is THAT important to the health of your franchise to WIN a superbowl. now, i really hate to bring this guy into the equation cause in my opinion he was a terrible QB but... lets say Teebo was a good QB and would have been good enough to get drafted in the top 5 even. he certainly has enough physical ability to play on special teams. would you have started him on ST's his rookie season? in my opinion there are four to five key franchise core players that can make or break a team. in number of importance - QB, pass rushing DE, CB or LT (take your pick on these two). every one of these key players are RARE for a franchise to find a stud even drafting high in the first round. so, would i bet MY franchises future by putting one of these 1st round pick players on special teams his rookie season? no! the chance of injury is more than doubled if you do. but you ask... what about special teams and their importance. this is what drafting well and good choices in free agency does. it fills up these ST spots with lower picked/quality players needed to develop or work their way into a starting position and not risking every down good starters.

i don't see a difference between offensive and defensive players in this scenario. if that's the case, then you're good with this if we drafted a QB number one overall and putting him on special teams? what the league does and what is smart do NOT always coincide.

ummmm.... no. a first round pick is a franchise move. it effects the health of your team, cap and starter quality, for years to come who hopefully turn out to be a part of the core of your offense and defense. to throw specific (as i stated in previous posts) types of first round picks out there on special teams is ludicrous whether it is common practice in the NFL or not. a cornerback is NOT like any other player with the exception of a speed DE and one you will pay through the nose to draft or find in free agency (IF it's even possible) and keep on your roster. to take a chance on this important of a player getting injured by some 2nd or 3rd string wannabe trying to make the team or hold his position as a backup player defies common sense.

that is great on the injury report. on the url playing as a rookie... i believe it is a different scenario. ultimate speed is not as critical to a linebacker or even other positions with the possible exception of a high pick speed oriented defensive end. a corner is all about speed and coverage ability. without speed you can have a good or better #2 corner such as peanut but a high flight cover corner relies on speed without exception.

in most instances i would agree. but with players that are that hard to come by in my opinion it's flat out stupid. would we draft a QB in the first round and put him on special teams? if not then i question their policy with this high of a pick of a player that is this scarce to find quality in. one knee injury on special teams and you have virtually wasted a top flight corner for no reason. and peanut on special teams? he has NO business in there especially considering his quality and age unless it is in a superbowl and you are going all out with the possibility to still win that particular game. EDIT: leslie fraser comes to mind where we virtually destroyed our best corner on special teams play (although being in a superbowl game it is SOMEWHAT understandable though i still believe it was a mistake).

i guess for the same STUPID reason peanut was. i understand you want rookies to get some game experience and a feel for the NFL but.... why put your premium players at risk in a high impact, high risk squad? cornerback is one of the premium positions and next to QB the hardest to replace, or even FIND in the draft, with a high quality starting player.

you may have your offensive tackles flipped?

you are quite welcome:) seriously... as i have stated numerous times i have no problem with infighting on this site. THAT is the instance when anyone can bypass it and if a woman or child reads it it certainly is not crudely or graphically offensive. i don't either unless you want to insist that some of that type of graphic language in your post was called for. you can never convince me that it is acceptable language to use around a woman or a child. actually i just don't care who won or lost. i think with the tone of the language used this SITE lost. and yet again with the censorship BS. what the hell is the matter with all you people?? you think freedom of speech or your non-censorship agenda is some mantra from heaven allowing you free rein to do or say anything you please anywhere you want to say it? if you REALLY don't get it why don't you give your grandmother, mother or your minister a call and repeat to them the same message using them as the point of reference. or maybe if you go to class with your kids stand up before the 3rd grade and start talking like that. see how that goes. i really have no problem with you striking back at all. it was just in the type of content in the message i personally have a problem with. WHY you ask? again... because i do NOT believe it appropriate to speak such in front of women and children. call me old fashioned, in fact call me anything you want to just do it reasonably cleanly. we can banter that back and forth just like this one. as far as YOU or anyone else on this board knowing the age or sex of a person coming to this site to read about the bears is ludicrous. so what does that tell you? you behave or you SHOULD behave, in my opinion, as if the lowest denominator that COULD be on this site is HERE!!! yet nobody seems to understand this. yes let's.

hmmmm.... the real fans. yea, tell me about the "real" fans. describe them for me so i too know the difference between the "real" fan and the fake(?) one like you obviously can. please enlighten me. only from birth and not conception? does that make you a "real" fan or a faux fan in your estimation? your pardon. i didn't realize i was talking to the ruler of the earth. please enlighten your subjects in great detail as to when it is correct to not be politically correct. do i understand those who feel the "need" to use profanity? i guess that is a new concept for me to feel the "need" to use it. is it physical like a drug dependency? is it psychological and can be cured through therapy? is it a vitamin deficiency? and being from rockford and living in great britain gives you this insight to "know the real Chicago"? explain the "real" chicago to me in great detail and how all chicagoans have developed this "need" to use profanity at all times in all situations from cradle to grave. can i assume the cause of this to be through the process of evolution? alien spores? do i understand? yea i understand. here is a GREAT freedom of speech concept for you to do. the next time you take some small children to a *L,SC,V PG movie, stand up halfway through the film and yell FIRE as loud as you can. it's your right to do so and they would be "DISCRIMINATING" against you if they lock you up in a padded cell. you should have no problem getting released and winning that case in court. do it for us and the cause for freedom of speech. and you know this how? you personally can determine the age and sex of every person that not only posts on this site but visits it 24 hours a day to read about the chicago bears? wow! you should join the circus (or have you?). says the great and powerful OZ you need to settle down beavis you'll stroke out. actually i think you may have mispoken. isn't it... children should be seen and not heard? and keep the little woman barefoot, pregnant and in the kitchen? but in reality you may be right. what kind of a negligent parent would think their children would be safe on a sports site reading about the chicago bears? so THAT's what a "Masters Degree" means? you graduated from the 6th grade. i'm truly impressed. i only went through the 4th grade myself but i still feel my overall comprehension level is beyond your 6th grade education do to reaching down to pull myself up by my own bootstaps and self taught lerning. so i feel like i trumped ya on that one hyuk hyuk hyuk. "Making the world lily white is artificial...and the Bears are not artificial. And neither are the guys around here." - your quote. well, lets see... ex·trap·o·late - to infer (an unknown) from something that is known; conjecture. conjecture - the formation or expression of an opinion or theory without sufficient evidence for proof. how do you know that everyone on this site is a 'guy'? are you omnipotent? ahhhhhh finally.... the old love or leave it line of crap when you don't have the guts or brains to evaluate both sides of an argument along with the merits and detriments of either or both. you are stuck in your macho manly-man world that flew high and fast 50 + years ago. enjoy it and tip another one for me at the pub, a toast to your "Masters Degree" and what it's really worth.

you know, i actually find this offensive. you must have a really poor opinion of what the people of chicago (and their sport fans), as a whole, are actually like. to believe the people of chicago can't be a sports fan and communicate or make a verbal point without using the F word or other extremely crude language in a PUBLIC place is really mind boggling. that is not "not mincing words", it is having no concern or respect for other adults points of view or lifestyles, including their children's, by subjecting them to it for no apparent reason other than a lack of communication skills and good judgement. really? and how many underage children do you take to PG rated movies with the language used below? like a "Pepsi" ad? what exactly does that mean? just so i have this straight, in your opinion reading about the bears is boring unless the posters use vulgarity and crude language? is that what you are saying? really? you mean like this: EDITED "Yeah F - - - you. You DID edit a post of mine, you rewrote words and attributed them to me, as a power hungry admin. Crybaby? Nah, Id just kick your ass if you did it to my face. You're a contentious and arrogant little prick. If admins dont like this language, lets start with the guy who initiated it. Seriously, grow some F - - - ing hair on your b - - - - before you try to challenge me." or maybe: EDITED "Get your tongue out of the guy's r- - - - - for a few minutes and you might be able to see better." and you would have no problem reading this unedited to the children you are hired to protect and their parents? let me know how that goes. dude, you just stated you have a "Masters Degree" and this is the best you can extrapolate? lily white? artificial? did i ever say i was or anyone on this board had to be EVER, or that everyone had to act like they were wally cleaver? how simplistic can you get? look i'm not some holy roller damning everyone to the pits of hell. but as you stated you are an 'educated' man in the field of child protection. does that not mean you SHOULD realize when and where to impliment SOME restraint in a PUBLIC forum for the good of all? this isn't some 'good ole boy' site where we all come to get drunk and put the make on 'cyber chicks'. it's an information site for sports where women, young adults or kids should be able to participate if they see fit and have information on the chicago bears to share with EVERYONE. if TD was correct in his assessment of flea then we have lost a valued participant on this forum for no reason and we are all the poorer for it. doesn't it make you wonder how many others have we lost because of it?

well, i guess if you 'assume' it, it must be so. you are "never an opponent of catering to a select few"? then which of your multiple personalities made the statement below? i admire your broad minded approach as to who should or should not frequent this site. after all, i am sure nobody who is not a male over the age of 18 could possibly have anything worthwhile to contribute in discussing the chicago bears anyway. "I" seems to be a very large portion of your vocabulary. yup, 'love it or leave it' is always the best policy in my book. the point is this... every person that does or 'would' contribute to this site is a plus for EVERYONE involved. it expands the knowledge of what this site is all about and why people come here. so why limit it because you or someone else can't keep your fingers off of the F key? if you feel it is some kind of 'heat of the moment' thing and can't seem to control yourself, that is why they put an EDIT button below each individuals post. again, i am not trying to dictate policy here but maybe the site GOD should step in and let us ALL know just what the policies for this site really are and who it IS catering to. inquiring minds want to know.

i am not sure where your "we are all adults" comes from. this is an open forum to the public as far as i know. i have never seen any adult or men only ratings or references on this site. you have a wide variety of posters and readers on here and i can only assume that includes kids, young adults AND women trying to glean information about the chicago bears. believe me i am no prude and i can turn the air blue on occasions that would make a drunken sailor blush. but i try not to do it in public for obvious reasons (at least to me). occasional off color remarks i have no problem with but some of the graphic hard core references are a bit much in my opinion and quite frankly are embarrassing when i can only assume that some folks other than adult males are reading this. that said... i am not trying to dictate any policy or force anyone to adhere to my thoughts or opinions. i am not an admin on here and certainly don't own this site so 'those that be' can do as they wish on here. just my 2 cents worth.

free speech, where anything goes, is not an option on good post boards or forums in most instances for good reason. there has to be rules or you will drive out anyone who isn't a complete loony. most boards are put up by someone who has done the work and spent his/her coin to operate and maintain it and you live or die by their rules as it should be. the best you can hope for is that it is fair and safe for all who wish to participate without unwarranted editing or censoring board related topics or idea's. if there is a reason for an edit let the person know why and what rules were violated and if they continue to break the rules censure them after a warning. a good rule of thumb for all admins... NEVER allow race, religion or politics on a sports board. it's a disaster waiting to happen.

i agree with you that the admins really do need to start cleaning this up before the site turns into a mess. i also agree on the foul language aspect and maybe even some of the avatar's that get too far off base. there is no need for it and it was something that set this site apart from other flame sites with four letter derogatives thrown out with every other word typed by cretins with pubescency issues. i have no problems with infighting, serious arguments or even in-house flaming, but... maybe THINK before you type something you wouldn't want your 8 year old daughter reading would go a long way on this board.

you mean 'roid'-foot the misunderstood punter aka francis the talking mule?