Lucky Luciano

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?

at least the bears weren't stupid enough to draft a punter in the second round. oh wait.... wanny DID that. traded a 10 sack-a-year LEFT defensive end in his prime for a 2nd round pick and drafted a PUNTER!! seriously though, a punter in the 6th is NO big deal especially if he has the qualifications this guy has. this is where you fill you needs on special teams so instead of a guy who probably doesn't make the cut we get a possible high quality punter which we desperately needed.

i give the bears draft a solid B+ to A- fuller - a high quality cover corner we have needed.... forever. trumps a safety or DT any day of the week. ferguson - i like this pick. this appears to be a SOLID tackle to shore up the worst run defense in our entire history. whether he turns out to be a top pass rusher is unimportant to me. i want someone who does NOT end up 5 yards downfield after the snap of the ball or end up, like paea, standing in front of the RT after a guard shoves him down the entire line. here is what USA Today Sports pre-draft edition says about him: "PRO's: Does a good job of exploding and extending low and crossing the face of a blocker. Good lateral quickness. Naturally strong at holding his ground. Played in a rotation his first two years for the Tigers where his main job was to help secure the middle of the defense. Plays with leverage on blocks and is rarely sealed. Finishes pursuit on plays to the outside. When rushing the passer, has good hand strength to control movement. CONS: Needs technique work as an inside pass rusher. sutton - another DT who is more of a pass rusher type tackle. makes up for our loss and trumps all who wanted donald. carey - to me a superb pick. THIS is the guy we need in short yardage. like an ironhead hayward type of back who can still start if needed. the value was there and not in a safety at this point in the draft. again we build strength upon strength for the future. vereen - THIS was the time to move up and pick a player with some real potential and at a position of need. giving up a 5th rounder next season is no big deal. to me anything after the 4th is reasonable to trade out of. sometimes even the 4th unless you are moving up big in the first 3 rounds for a very special player. finally... the last 2 years drafts are the first time since jim finks and jerry vanesie (sp?) were in charge that i am not angry on draft day. his scouting department seems light years ahead of what we had pre trestman and post finks (time will tell over the next few years as these drafted players develop or fail). PLUS: emery held to our position in the first 3 rounds instead of the idiotic trading down we saw from angie compiling a hundred 7th round draft picks we usually cut during camp or picking second quality players that looked like angies scouting departments main concern was how much free beer was served during their evaluations. in my opinion his drafts are geared to win superbowls by picking players who do NOT need to necessarily be the "most ready to start player" and "win it now" nonsense we have heard bear management, draft anylizers and fans spout for decades. PLUS: he is using stop gap veterans in many instances to give potential primo players he drafts a chance to become aclimated into the NFL. especially given what angelo left us on this depleted, talentless, aging roster he has moved this team forward as much as any GM possible given the restrictions. PLUS: he focuses on key players and positions needed to WIN superbowls. 1. quarterback - first and foremost surrounding him FINALLY with at least SOME quality talent on the offensive line to keep him off of the IR. another aspect of your QB is receivers - marshall and jeffrie - a stroke of genius bringing in marshall to work with cutler and young draft talent until they reach an NFL level. finally someone sees a need for high quality talent in this important aspect of todays game. 2. defensive ends - no more hanging on to an aging player who is not producing anymore (or ever) but setting up the future with time to find replacements for aging or depleted players with still hungry veterans or veteran prospects. this gives us time to groom future draft picks that we hopefully won't be able to draft in a top 10 environment because of our record. 3. cornerbacks - to me this is the key every GM since finks has failed at and a major component in winning multiple superbowls. all that TRIPE about not needing very good to excellent CB's because we run a zone/cover nobody defense is ludicrous and always has been. you need to draft these guys high in the first round generally because everyone wants one. this draft was the time to go for that position while we still had a pick that high. since the 1990's the NFL has become do to rule changes a passing league and if anyone thinks that a high end safety or a pass rush exempts this need for a high quality cover CB is in my opinion delusional. know the importance of key positions and draft them well. this is how you build dynasties and win multiple superbowls.

agreed but that is always the risk in the draft. but... the only players that can compare to a CB in value are QB, LOT and DE. if the film shows out that gilbert can play and he truly looks like a man coverage player i would TAKE him.

first, i want to qualify that i do not watch much college ball anymore and i am not basing any decision on how the players actually performed, just on what is written in this article. that said... the most important and hard to fill position in the group from that article to me is hands down cornerback. that leads me to take a lightning fast 6-0' CB justin glbert over any other player in that list. we have not had a #1 shutdown, man-on-man CB in chicago since i can remember and it has hurt us for decades. the need is there especially in today's pass oriented NFL. peanut is all but done and even then he was never a #1 CB in my opinion. we need REAL talent to fill this position and not some flyer on a guy in later rounds. we will probably not be picking this high again for sometime and the talent requirements at that position demands you draft one high in the first for your BEST chance at finding gold. there is absolutely no possible way i would take any kind of safety OR a defensive tackle over a corner of that caliber.

if they determine he isn't mental a possible scenario would be sign him to a LOW 2 yr. contract and use him as trade bait as the season progresses if some teams qb goes down. let him play preseason to showcase his abilities under trestman and we might get a 3rd round pick or higher for him. similar to what the packers had done during the favre era. if he doesn't shine in preseason then cut him.

look, past your prime in professional sports means this... you are age-wise and/or talent wise on the decline from the very best you will be 95% of the time from that point on. does it always mean you won't have more success or even a good declining career from that point on? no. a prime example could be a QB. but it does usually mean that due to age or injury your body can never recover the ability to do the things it had prior to that point. your body does not heal or regenerate the elasticity and top end refined muscle mass it had at a younger age. thus your skills decline. this is especially true with anyone who uses their legs as a means of making a living in the high end sports arena. gravity is your worst enemy. but the point of this all is that hester HAS declined in his abilities. i have watched every game he has ever played in as a pro and he flat out has lost a step. in fact he has been deteriorating over the last 2+ years. he does NOT have that same burst of speed to get around the edge into an open field and even more importantly he can't generate enough top-end speed to outrun a fast defender. i have seen him be caught from behind more than once over this period. 4-7 years ago if he broke free there wasn't more than 1, maybe 2, players in the entire nfl who could possibly catch him. so this led to his release and in my opinion unless hester would have signed for a million dollars or less he is a liability to this franchises health. maybe even then as we would have to cull our roster by releasing a younger player who could have a contributing career in this franchise. in other words i don't believe hester has enough left to be any major difference in whether this franchise makes it to the playoffs or beyond. he is a one trick pony who will only get slower every season and to believe he would gain any mental advantage due to age and experience is ludicrous. in fact he actually may be getting worse in that respect because he does not have the physical ability to do what he has done in the past and it is proving to be a mental roadblock.

i'm not a hundred percent sure deacon was better than reggie white.... though maybe. i didn't really get a chance to watch a lot of rams games in the 60's for obvious reasons (although the *fearsome foursome got quite a bit of notoriety on the idiot box) but i did see some they televised. as good as jones was, even with the unheard of sack stat, reggie white did things i had never seen before. the power and leverage he used to blow off or absorb tackles, even in the open field, is something that was truly amazing. so i have to say to me, without seeing a lot of tape to compare, the overall "player" and not the sack statistic, reggie white certainly gives jones a run for his money. *the fearsome foursome of rosy grear, merlin olson, deacon jones and lamar lundy was a real treat to watch. they were devastating in their day. george allen, former bear defensive coach, became head coach of the rams in the mid 60's (the unit base was actually in place by the early 60's prior to allen). although he already had the horses he did turn this unit into superstars after he became the rams HC.

what exactly are you trying to do? convert an image to fit "X" dimensions for your banner? if the proportions of your image at 72 pixels per inch is smaller than the size of the final file dimensions for the finished image you will have pixelization no matter what you do. you can't add size beyond that point without affecting the image quality. if your image has a larger pixel count then you CAN convert it down and if the dimensions correspond with the width and height of your final target no problem. if they do NOT fit the final size then what you will have to do is create a new file the size you want and paste the image into it and size it to the best fit. if you can contact me through this site by email i can help you out a little more if you need it.

although peanut is one of my all-time favorite bears i just gotta disagree. peanut was never a lock down corner. he didn't and doesn't have close to the speed to be one. he was always a #2 corner since the day he was drafted (except lovie tried to make him a #1). angie drafted him as a counter to randy moss and the big green bay receivers. he did this very, very well. as time went by his ability to strip the ball became phenomenal but his speed is literally what held him back. i rate peanut as one of the best #2 corners to play the game. if they had moved him to free safety in his prime he could have possibly gone to the HOF.

dude, you HAVE to look at this as long term health of the franchise not just the immediate cap hits this season. we have NOTHING on the defensive side of the ball to hurt our cap for years. it's all nickle and dime salaries. with revis we get a big hit but it evens out over the next 3 years while the cap goes up, we get relief from the cutler bonus and our draft picks play for rookie contracts. that is true for any player in the NFL including rookies. it only stands to reason. if a qb has to wait for a pattern to develop it takes time (time for our DL to get to him). if we play bump and run man he has no quick dump outlet. this also increases the time he is holding the ball. these may only be fractions of seconds but in my opinion it DOES make a difference over a season.

well here's the thing... if someone doesn't trade with the bucs by this afternoon they cut him and get nothing. if the bears trade them briggs and a 7th round pick they get something for him. we get an elite player who doesn't touch the market this year (the pats are SERIOUSLY interested) and can work out a contract for the future to keep us inside of the cap.

this has been one of lovies greatest failures and why in my opinion he is a terrible coach that never learns from his mistakes. the cover 2 or the lovie 2 or whatever you want to call it DOES need a good + to very good CB who can cover man along with a very good safety to go with it. it is a proven fact if you look at the bucs of the sapp era. ronde barber was a very good corner that DID play a lot of bump and run off the LOS and was key to their success.

also, you seem to want to get rid of briggs. i personally don't (i have no problem with him at all) unless it would be in a trade deal with the bucs for revis. if this would work lovie gets a pro-bowl backer whom he loves and we get revis. i take a shut down corner any day of the week for an outside linebacker.

obstacles? this move helps out THREE areas of our defense in one shot!! 1. it makes our CB's elite with a shut down corner on one side and a good CB on the other. 2. it helps out our safeties tremendously. our strong safety can focus more on the run and short passing attack over the middle and our free safety can double up help with our weaker CB or cover a three receiver set. 3. it tremendously helps out our defensive line. right now we have just brought in DE who is not proficient at pressuring the qb but stout against the run. we have no good pass rushing end on this team and if we go to free agency like many want to get allen he is a stop gap with 1-2 years at best. there are NO defensive ends out there in their prime to choose from. so what happens is if our corners can cover longer it gives our DL time to make up for their lack of ability to pressure the qb. it stands to reason we can back load a big contract for revis and next season we get relief from cutlers 2nd year to bump onto revis's signing. the same holds true that we have NO high priced defensive players right now. we intend to draft the DL which gives us a 3-5 year window that they are not making the big bucks. by that time if they deserve top dollar revis's contract is on the downside. with a little thought by our franchises money man this is not any kind of detriment to our cap figures after this year.

it has been reported on NFL channel that revis is going to be traded or cut today. i would go very large on revis. we have NO high cost player on this side of the ball and he would give us the option, cost wise, to eat a large part of his contract while we groom tackles or defensive ends through the draft. revis would be the best possible scenario to come to chicago. he is the type of player we have not had maybe ever. with a very good cover corner in his PRIME we could solidify our pass defense for the next 4 + years with a real talent in a pass oriented NFL. it also gives us the option to run ANY type of defense with a cover corner who can shut down an opponents #1 receiver without safety help. now is the time for emery to make a critical move for this franchise. we missed out on charles woodson and that cost us big over the time he was in his prime in green bay. let's not do it again. NOTE: one other choice for me would be cromartie out of denver for the same reasons.

i sure wouldn't mind us giving revis a very hard look if lovie cuts him. that would give us the corner we have needed for decades and the guy is only 28. i would take a look at cormartie also and push denver's costs for him up if he stays. draft a good safety prospect in the first 3 rounds and we have a very nice DB field. we could back load a contract for one of those guys above and still get a DT or DE in free agency.

we are not really that far apart in our thinking but you have to realize this... in order to give your DL time to get to the qb you HAVE to be able to cover the wideouts off the LOS. it takes any lineman X amount of time to get to the qb unless there is a glaring mistake by an offensive tackle or guard. this is the time you need to cover that receiver to prevent the easy dump off for 4-8 yards and extending drives. i agree with the mcmahon senario. qb was our biggest problem in that era along with ditka. but if you remember watching the playoffs our defense was picked apart by teams scheming for the quick release (example west coast offense by the 9ers). we had nobody to jam them at the line to disrupt the timing and cover them long enough for hampton and dent to make a play. this is one of the same problems we had with lovie for 9 years. so yes, we need a lot better DL but to go further we also need to be able to nullify to some degree a passing attack, short OR long and stop these god awful 7 and 8 minute drives by our opponents keeping our offense off the field.

if you are saying you don't need a good + safety i have to disagree. you can cheat with one lesser quality player at both positions but you are in trouble if both players at CB or S are less than good. you can get by with one average CB if you have a good + one who can cover man. but you need at least ONE good + safety and preferably a free safety thus for his help covering a weaker cb's man or covering a 3rd receiver.

i understand your point but i will still reiterate... you HAVE to have at least one good + cornerback. it is critical in this day and age of the rules giving the offensive passing game a high advantage. a HOF guy would be great but a guy of the quality of woodson would go a LONG way in a quest for a superbowl WIN. again in my opinion you are not correct on this. i watched fencik and planks entire careers. their combo was one of the MOST feared defensive back duo's in the entire nfl in the 70's. plank made the cover "Hitmen of the NFL" i believe in sports illustrated during that era (late 70's?). doug plank was a freaking maniac. he never would have been allowed to play in today's nfl due to the helmet hits that was his forte'. this guy had no fear and would stick a guy going full tilt for devastating hits. the problem with that is he suffered a lot of, in those days, "getting his bell rung". in other words he was getting a ton of concussions. thus his short career. planks biggest problem was he was a poor tackler or at least used tackling as a last resort if he thought he had the shot. if the ball carrier didn't drop when plank hit him at a hundred miles an hour he would be free to move down the field for extra yardage. this is where fencik came in. i can't tell you how many times i saw fencik come in and make a beautiful open field tackle on a guy plank didn't knock down or add to planks hit. it was beautiful to see and made them the deadliest most feared duo in the nfl at that time to any receiver coming over the middle. that is NOT to say that fencik was not a hard hitter either because he was. but he was smart enough to know where and when to put the big hit on. fencik finished his career with 38 interceptions, which he returned for 488 yards and a touchdown. He also recorded 2 sacks and recovered 14 fumbles, returning them for 65 yards. fencik missed very few games in his NFL career. He made the pro bowl in 1980-1981 and was voted all pro in 81. he was a field general and one of the best i have seen over the years play in the nfl. he may not go to the HOF but that certainly does not diminish his accomplishments as a top tier free safety in the nfl. i am not disagreeing with DL being the key in any defense. but if you want to win the big ones with any consistency you HAVE to have a good + group of DB's and that includes especially a cover corner. he has to be able to play bump and run and have the speed to enforce that type of play downfield by staying with his assignment. look at the mid to late 80's. we had maybe the best DL in nfl history. our problems arose in the playoffs against good + QB's who got rid of the ball before our ends and tackles could disrupt them. vestee jackson? lemon head? etc. just couldn't play man coverage (i know our offense, qb especially, was not good but the key to our defenses demise was pass coverage).

i have to disagree somewhat on this. although the DL is a high priority, in my opinion you need at least ONE good + to very good/excellent corner that can play man coverage. this is the difference between a good defense and a killer defense (you could even add one good + safety to this equation). we have seen the results of a lack of high quality corners since the mid 80's (and actually before that). if a qb has a quick release there is nearly no way to stop him unless you can play bump and run off the LOS that gives your DL time to reach the qb. remember game 13 in 1985? remember the lovie days with his 10 yard cushions even with a good DL? i have been expounding this concept for nearly a couple of decades. again i somewhat disagree. especially on your take of gary fencik. fencik was one of the best safeties to ever play in chicago's modern era of football. although lacking speed, he was extremely smart and one of the best open field tacklers i have ever seen. agree by 85 his career was winding down but to say he was only "good" is to me a misstatement. mike brown was a safety in a very similar vein. what he lacked in speed he used football smarts to make up for it and played the position at the highest level. now on to the others... richardson was a good player as you say and had flashes of better. in my opinion leslie frazier was highly underrated and i believe he could be labeled as good +. if that idiot ortego hadn't contributed to ending his career the bears would have done a lot better post 85. as i said, with a quick release qb you NEED a good + bump and run CB and at least one good to good + safety.