Lucky Luciano

i have been watching NFL football for 40+ years. i have seen the touch rule applied a number of times over that period but in all of that time i have never seen or even heard of a situation where the ball was "touched" and batted back out of the endzone and the receiving team player was tackled in the endzone after an attempt to advance the ball with or without any penalty. it is extremely rare (at least to me). the only estimated conclusion i can come up with is that like i stated in the past post that whatever "post-punt" penalty was enforced on the receiving team would not constitute a turnover (a safety is the only result i could see that could possibly be called in this instance), but would result in any penalty of holding or a block in the back would be enforced from the spot of the touch. in other words if the officials considered the "touch" in the endzone as a touchback then the resulting penalty that happened IN the endzone by the receiving team after a touch rule possession would be enforced from the 20 yard line... ball spotted on the 10. if it was determined the ball was to be spotted on the 2 where it was tried by the receiving team to advance the ball it would be half the distance to the goal with the penalty enforced (i agree with crackerdogs estimation of it being a touchback but am just playing the devils advocate if the ball was considered "touched" on the 2. so this all leads back to whether any penalty can result in a change of possession for the kicking team once the ball leaves the LOS cleanly on a "touch". i am not saying you are wrong about this but would like to read the rule that was stated in the "NOTE" portion of your copy of an actual rule. as i don't have a rule book i can't judge what the "NOTE" ruling pertains to in context with your post. in essence you may be spot on. but... without reading this or an official interpretation to me it seems more logical to assume a change of possession is not warranted once the ball is cleanly punted past the LOS with or without any penalty on the receiving team.

i agree that is how i would think it would stand also but as strange as it was, the first touch player was never on the ground. so does it relate to his position in the EZ or where the ball actually was put into play on the turf? as we both surmise i believe it would have been a touchback but with some very unusual circumstances.

i am not sure of how your statement relates to an actual instance (not saying you are wrong just that i don't understand the context of the situation you are stating from this rule). i will try and clarify my thoughts on this. lets call the punting team A and the receiving team B. 1. if there is any foul that is called on team B *prior to the ball actually being punted, team A has the 'option' to accept that penalty and replay that down no matter what happens from that point forward (unless there would be offset penalties on both teams prior to the punt and in that case the down would be replayed). this would negate the touch rule we have been discussing due to a *pre-punt penalty if team A accepted the penalty. just a few examples: more players on the field than legal by team B, offsides by team B prior to the snap, *roughing the kicker by team B, personal foul on a player from team B prior to the punt etc. if the roles were reversed and team A caused a foul pre-punt then team B would have the option in most instances of either accepting the penalty and replaying the down or refusing the penalty and accepting the results of what happened post punt. 2. post punt: if there is no roughing the kicker penalty (or infraction by team B pre-punt) and the punt was clean past the LOS the touch rule should be in effect from that point forward. once the ball is past the LOS and is touched by anyone on team A first it becomes a live ball for anyone on team B to pick up the ball, unless it is downed by team A, and try to advance it without any loss of yardage or possession from that spot of the touch. there is no downside for team B to do so. at the worst team B will retain possession from the spot of the touched ball by team A even if he loses yardage or fumbles the ball to be recovered by team A. i have seen this rule in effect over the years play out as i have described. in regards to penalties on team B that occur once the punt is past the LOS... as in all instances the penalty invoked will be enforced upon team B either from the spot of initial possession (where touched by team A if the ball is not advanced by team OR the spot of the infraction if the penalty dictates and the ball was advanced past this point by team B. unless there are new rules in effect, there should be no post-punt possession by team A once the touch rule is in effect due to any turnover regardless of rule infractions by team B. it was a smart play by weems in my opinion and trestman was correct in his statement although... i have to say i have never seen a player from team A actually knock the ball out of the endzone into the field of play and create a touch rule scenario that ended up as a team B possession in the endzone and knocked out by a player from team A. it certainly had me scratching my head on what would have happened if weems had retained possession in the endzone. the player from team A actually first touched the ball in the endzone and knocked it out. where would the ball have been spotted? where weems touched it or where it was actually first touched by a player from team A which would have been a touchback? wow, there is something to think about.

i do not believe you are interpreting this correctly. PUNT ONLY - the reason for this rule is to prevent the kicking team from purposely knocking the ball into a receiver (NOT downing it) thus making it a live ball or knocking the ball further down the field making the spot of the ball into the advantage of the kicking team. in other words they could virtually keep knocking the ball until it rested on the receiving teams goal line. that is the intent of this rule. if there is a foul on the receiving team prior to the ball being downed then the penalty (if it is post kick) is enforced from the point of either where the foul occurred or at the spot of possession by the receiving team. in any case the ball is a free play for the receiving team with no penalty for fumble/turnover or loss of yardage. with loss of yardage the ball returns to the spot of first touch by the kicking team and the same is true on a turnover. now having said that... i do not have a copy of the rules. the rules have changed so much over the years maybe there is merit to your suggestion. please post the rule in reference to your "Note" to give it context.

you are right. but... the DB's did a 'reasonable' job considering that there was no pass rush at all against some of the best receivers in the nfl. to me, the pass rush is a serious concern. we will have to see what happens in that area from here on, but it's something to watch. if meltons game doesn't improve a lot this season, it may be a blessing we tagged him instead of a major cap hit contract for years.

yea i can almost see it now.... new system and culter makes 5 7 step drop passes in a row and gets dropped himself for the season. it's a breath of fresh air he is gone.

to me i did see some change and in my opinion for the better. our corners were playing up on the LOS a hell of a lot more than any of lovies 10 yard cushion and back pedal at the snap. that in itself is going to pay dividends in the long run in my opinion. i have been waiting for that for 10 years.

what i like is the 'apparent' ability of the offensive coaching staff to actually coach players and make them as good as they can be. trestman seems like a cerebral type of coach which reminds me of a joe gibbs or john madden (football smarts) type of coach. i'll take that type coach any day of the week. i'm certainly not putting trestman in that category yet but for the first time in bears modern history we MAY have a real head coach that can think offensively with the best of them. what a refreshing idea.

it was played close to the vest as it should have been by an offensive coaching system that had any semblance of talent. you WANT to see what your linemen and TE's can and can't do in your blocking schemes before you just throw the qb to the wolves and screw him up yet again. this is not the last of your conservative play this season. expect some more until everyone on board feels comfortable, including the coaches, without putting your franchise player on IR. it was SMART football even if we would have taken the loss in the first game.

i flat out disagree. this was the shakedown game with a brand new everything. if anyone believed the bears would look like the patriots offense this soon in the season they are delusional. it is going to take at least half a season to bring all the players together on one page with any consistency. the offensive line... we flat out had one of, if not THE, worst OL's in the entire NFL last season. we are sporting a complete revamp and starting 2 rookies and yet this line looked like a pro unit on the field instead of the semi-pro garbage we have seen for umpteen years. our linemen have a serious attitude and actual talent which is miles beyond anything we have seen for years. they can only get better with experience and continuity. if long continues to improve we will have a perennial all-pro lineman (think a hutchinson caliber player in our future). mills looks exceptional so far for a 5th round rookie. probably the weakest link so far was slausen our LG and with time this could change when our line starts to gel. CONCLUSION: this may not be the final end game for the years to come with this personnel but there is just so much you can do in one season and i like what i see. coaches that can really evaluate talent and put them in a position to win and cut the dead wood and players with real potential instead of the wait until next year. QB... you seriously did not see cutler start to gain confidence as the game went on? for how many years has he taken a beating in chicago? it's going to take time for him to come out of his shell, reset the clock in his head and trust the offensive line enough to play up to his potential. there is no WAY our staff is going to hang cutler out to dry without real game experience on the OL unless they were imbeciles. they appear not to be. i just have to chime in on the INT... it's a 50/50 chance it was cutlers fault. watch the tape if you have it (i don't), he is getting pulled on by the DE just before he released the ball. it changed the trajectory. that said, this is cutlers M.O. he is going to give you a few INT's and make up for it with good play in most instances. i know i will accept that instead of the humps we have had over the last 25 years. finally: believe me this game did NOT look like a shoop offense. in fact this was really the first time i looked at our offense for a very, very long time and thought it finally looks like it is run by professionals instead of a bunch of semi-pro hacks. it's only going to get better.

ANYBODY can make short yardage throws in the NFL if you are playing against a PREVENT DEFENSE that puts little or no pressure on the qb and leaves him a wide open zone for short 5-10 yard passes!!!!!!! also, you tell me after looking at those statistics in the bears game wasn't nearly EVERY throw he made a short yardage pass?? my god man we have seen this CRAP play (inaccuracy, slow release, inaccuracy, sacks. poor decisions AND inaccuracy) from nearly every qb we have fielded in 40 FREAKING YEARS and you want another one with the media baggage this guy brings????!!! bring back cade mcnown... he fits the bill perfectly. what freaking EVER!!! this guy doesn't show up for 3 1/2 quarters and scrapes together a couple of cheap scores in a low scoring game >>>LOW SCORING GAME does quinn sound familiar? cade mcnown, caleb hanie, chad hutchinson, kordell stewart, chris chandler, henry burris, shane mathews, steve stenstrom, moses moreno, rick mirer, and on and on and on? yea right. the packers and ANY team that can score a normal amount of points in a game during those previous 3.5 quarters would eat us alive!! they could give him 20 in a row completed short passes and never even blink. ok i'm not that familiar with mccown's abilities. so tell me how much better little timmy is and all the amazing upside he has more than mccown. other than mobility is it on field EXPERIENCE, age? arm strength? smarts, interplanetary carrisma? mccown: http://www.nfl.com/player/joshmccown/2505076/careerstats

hmmmm.... his intangibles. you mean like these? FIRST QUARTER 1st drive 3 and out - 1 pass attempt - sacked 2nd drive 3 and out - 2 pass attempts - tebow minus 3 yds rushing - 1 short pass for 10 yds - incomplete pass - punt 3rd drive - 6 pass attempts - 1 short left for 12 yds - incomplete - delay of game - 1 pass complete deep left 23 yds - incomplete with roughing penalty on bears - incomplete - incomplete and intercepted by bears SECOND QUARTER 1st drive sacked - run for 16 yds - sacked - incomplete with roughing the passer bears - run for 9 yds - incomplete - incomplete - 20 yd field goal blocked by bears 2nd drive 3 and out - 1 pass attempt - incomplete - tebow run for 5 yds then punt 3rd drive 2 pass attempts - incomplete - incomplete - spiked ball end of half THIRD QUARTER 1st drive 3 and out - 2 pass attempts - incomplete - incomplete 2nd drive 3 and out - tebow run for 9 yds - tebow run for no gain 3rd drive 3 and out - 1 pass attempt - incomplete - tebow run for 6 yds FOURTH QUARTER 1st drive 3 and out - no pass attempts - tebow run for 3 yds 2nd drive 4 pass attempts - tebow run for minus 1 yd - pass short left 14 yds - pass short left 9 yds - short left for 14 yds - tebow run minus 2 yds - sacked and fumbled bears recover 3rd drive 4 pass attempts - complete deep left 23 yds - incomplete - incomplete - complete 1 yd - punt 4th drive 7 pass attempts - complete short right 7 yds - complete short right 10 yds - complete middle 8 yds - complete short left 3 yds - complete deep middle 19 yds - complete short right 10 yds - complete short right 10 yds touchdown 5th drive 5 pass attempts - complete short left 9 yds - complete short left 11 yds - complete short right 19 yds - incomplete - incomplete - tebow rush no yds - field goal ties game and sends into OT OT 5 pass attempts - incomplete - pass short right 2 yds - pass short right 10 yds - sacked - pass deep right 16 yds - tebow run 5 yds - tebow run 1 yd - 51 yard field goal END OF GAME you want to hang your hat on that kind of qb play?? this wasn't some end of the rainbow finish from a HOF qb it was just another idiotic display of lovie smith's soft prevent (a win) defense and one of the worst offenses in the entire NFL. tell ya what… take a long look at cade mcnowns rookie season highlights. in fact take a look at mcnowns career – they are like siamese twins separated at birth. i’m sure he is available too and probably cheaper LOL. cade mcnown: http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/stats/_/id/1763/cade-mcnown timmy tebow: http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/stats/_/id/13200/tim-tebow one final question. if anyone believes that trestman can turn this lump of qb sewage tebow into a starting quarterback why can’t he do it with mccown the guy we already HAVE on our roster?

have any of you tebow supporters watched this guy play?? the only thing i see is that this guy fits perfectly in the GIANT laundry list of worthless qb's we have fielded for 40+ YEARS!! so yea - a perfect fit for chicago's tradition of qb's from the stone age. that said... why would you want a ham-and-egger, at his very best, qb in chicago now that we have the makings of a real offensive minded coach calling the shots? you DON'T want to bring in some guy that will take 10+ years to become average (quinn ring any bells?). you want to bring in some young talent that you can mold and develop into a good qb and use him as trade bait (if your #1 is STILL a #1) and garner some 1st and 2nd round picks in your future like the packers and patriots do. it's mindboggling anyone would want this guy to waste a roster spot on with no future gains out of it.

i'm sorry but you are wrong. this has NOTHING to do with population size or venue locations. it has to do with 'X' amount of large school programs that support this very expensive sport. the amount of these schools are nearly the same as they were half a century ago. the amount of players on EACH of these large A class schools is the same and it has nothing to do with student body size or population. every college is recruiting HIGH SCHOOL players to fill these limited roles, example... there are still eleven players on each side of the ball that start. so the talent pool depth is nearly the SAME as it was in 1960. the difference in how the NFL drafts? they NOW out of necessity are drafting from lower tier schools who are smaller or less funded just to fill the ranks. think about it... over a 10 year period there are 2,600 players who were not good enough to even get drafted in the first seven rounds 30 years ago and are now drafted by teams in the NFL. the smaller schools USUALLY have poorer quality talented kids in their system to a degree. there are always exceptions now and there were exceptions to this rule 50 years ago. walter payton is one example. but the reality is that there is just so many quality players available in high school. so many quality players who transgress into the college ranks. and finally there is just so many quality players who are worthy to play in the NFL. so in this instance, more is less. this is just one reason why the quality of play in the NFL has suffered and instead of doing something about the cause they just change the rules to try and mask the actual problems that are faced in NFL play in this century for the sake of money.

the difference in today and days past is the number of franchises that exist in the NFL today. since 1976 they have added 5 franchises to the NFL. with a 52 man roster that is a 260 player PER YEAR reduction in talent. that means that anyone drafted after #27 in the first round is in reality 2nd round talent. this reads the same for each round after. SUMMARY: they 'ain't makin' anymore football players than they were 50 years ago. it's not like baseball where you can bring in out of the U.S. talent. it's a U.S. based sport where nearly 100% of the talent is created in this system. so if anybody mentions we need more franchises they are completely nuts or just plain greedy (like corporate NFL). we don't have enough talent to go around as it is.

everything you list here is important information on hopefully how this franchise moves forward. to me a key point is how he will react to whoever he has running the defense and understands the nuances of what needs to be done to succeed and not just coast along as lovie did over his entire tenure in chicago. if he can refocus marinelli especially on how our DB's play and certainly his blitz packages it could work out. at this point i am happy with what we have done. i especially like the hire for OC as this gives us a HC who can groom qb's and an OC, kromer, who really understands how to work with your OL. it sounds like a great combination. emery so far (his drafts will eventually define his success or failure) has done his job well. i like the quick hire of our OC. that to me was certainly a major plus. trestman is certainly a risky choice but the rewards could be huge.

i guess i missed the restrictions that posters are allowed to comment on in this thread. why don't you post that list so myself and others don't waste our time commenting on items you personally don't like.

here is the conundrum... are you talking about the cover 2 (the steelers or bucs used) or are you talking about the lovie 2? because i can tell you with authority the difference is HUGE. i have beat my brains out for over 5 years trying to convey that the system lovie smith implements is NOT the same. with the steelers of the 70's the cover 2 was NOT the primary defense under carson. it was implemented under certain situations against specific opponents offenses no different than the 46 is now. he adjusted during game time as to what worked. he also had the horses to make his version of it work and keep offenses guessing where they were coming from. my god he had some of the best defensive talent in NFL history. the tampa 2... again this cover 2 defense is NOTHING like what we ran under lovie smith. IMPORTANT: they had a perennial pro-bowl CB in barber who could play man and bump and run off the LOS. his bookend CB also could play pretty well because the bucs had a perennial pro-bowl safety in lynch and some decent talent along side him at FS to make up the difference. they also had warren sapp who consistently collapsed pockets along mcfarland who was a pretty good tackle in that system. they had 2 pro-bowl linebackers to go along with their DB's and had a killer DE in s. rice chasing qb's to kingdom come. under lovie smith we had about 1/2 of what it takes to make that system work even IF it wasn't figured out. after mike brown started breaking down we had NO safeties worth a tinkers dam who are key in this type of system, we had not a single CB who could play bump and run off the LOS which is CRITICAL in this system and especially since the new chuck rules. we never, never, never play/played our corners up to bump any receivers off their routes because they were never taught how to by lovie or just plain good enough to do it and our safeties were not good enough to compensate for this failure. our DE's were rarely in double digit sacks until pepperman and our tackles after t. harris broke down were pathetic. that is why under the lovie 2 we always had a vacated zone 5-8 yards off the LOS for an easy completion by anybody. why do you think we made nobody qb's look like they belonged in the pro-bowl? because lovie smith was going to run this system come hell or high water because he didn't have enough football brains to adjust it or go with something that worked with the PERSONNEL HE HAD!!! you can not rely year after year on the same system of defense, or offense for that matter, without changing how you attack your opponent. you have to evolve or even devolve to an older scheme at times just to mix it up and keep your enemy guessing. which brings me to this... the lovie cover 2 as we know it will NOT work consistently against good offensive teams. they will run you into the ground and keep up those extended 5-7 minute 3rd and 4th quarter drives that keeps your offense on the sidelines when they should be doing the same to our opponents. especially with aging players the defense is just out of gas by the start of the 4th quarter!!! final NOTE: parts of the cover 2 can be used in a defensive scheme just like i mentioned the 46. it just can't work the way we run it consistently and anyone who believes that marinelli is some savior that is going to bring our defense to all-world status without serious change is sadly mistaken.

i STILL say if you want PROVEN quality that not only knows offense, can create good qb talent out of nothing and can dictate DEFENSE to a DC mike holmgren was the best pick.... period. again we want to limit our HC to knowing nearly nothing except his narrow vision expertise. it's similar to lovie's complete lack of offensive knowledge that got us to where we are now and yet here we go again only on the offensive side this time. just once i would like a good HC who has done it in the NFL and done it well. we keep getting the chances and just keep flushing em.

i just don't see the GOOD talent we have as some magnificent plus anymore. they are old. if not now when we get a fresh coach with a fresh set of eyes and outlook then when? i see absolutely no reason we can't adjust our defensive scheme to any other out there at this time. we have an entire offseason and the draft before training camp and i just can't believe that the players we have on this roster can't possibly play anything but the lovie 2 crap. and if that is so then it is imperative that we get rid of that talent now no matter who it is. year after year we keep beating the dead horses because it supposedly will kill our chances to win next seasons superbowl if we make the needed changes or draft the player that needs to develop. i can truthfully say right now that there is a one in a thousand chance the bears win the superbowl with the talent we have and a new coach in one season. so let's freaking build now for the future DECADE instead of tying off bleeders with the hope it's really going to make any serious difference.

yea, really. how many games this season did we play before we ever even seen a line stunt? how many times during a game did we take our best pass rusher in peppers off the end to play the tackle position? why do you suppose that is? this is what our tackles did for sacking the quarterback this season even considering peppers is a HOF defensive end getting double teamed 75-85% of the time... idonoje 7.5 sacks - how many of these were from the left defensive end position? 2.5 rams 2 detroit .5 titans 1 cards 1.5 sacks against teams with winning records - .5 SF 1 MIN 11 games after the bye week = 5 sacks - 1 DET .5 TEN .5 SF 1 MIN 1 ARIZ 1 DET melton 6 sacks .5 jax .5 carolina 5 sacks against teams with winning records - 2 IND 1 GB 1 DAL 1 MIN 11 games after the bye week = 1.5 sacks - .5 CAR 1 MIN paea 2.5 sacks .5 rams .5 det .5 titans 1 sack against teams with winning records - seahawks 11 games after the bye week = 1.5 sacks you ask how does this reflect on the DC? count the sacks and if you can find a statistic (i don't know where to look) for DT pressures on a qb throughout the season this sack stat alone for the final 11 games is beyond pathetic. it reeks of no adjustments being made to compensate for opponent offenses watching game film and changing their tactics and blocking schemes while we plod on the same way as always. our rushing defense? opponents averaged 4.2 yds per carry against us rushing for the season. we were ranked 14th in the NFL if i'm not mistaken. in 11 games after the bye week there were THREE games in which we didn't give up more than a hundred yards in rushing. TWO against the mighty lions and the other against the formidable cardinals. marinelli has 2 HOF players on defense in peppers and url. a multiple all-pro pro-bowler in briggs. a good #2 CB in peanut and he has improved our defense how? plus how much was him and how much was lovie? why would you want to saddle a NEW coach with old garbage like we did emery when he got here? if the new coach wants a new system GIVE IT TO HIM. marinelli is a stop gap in my opinion that we might as well dump now for a better candidate with a fresh set of ideas like the niners seem to be doing. do we have the players? yea why not? or are we somehow married to this lovie 2 crap until every premium defensive player retires?

count me in as wanting a serious change in our defense and it's philosophy. whether our defense was dictated by marinelli or lovie smith it is not a defense that causes any concerns to the upper tier offensive teams in the nfl. it's the most predictable and easy to defeat defense in the entire nfl no matter what the rankings look like. just what has marinelli accomplished that puts him in the rarefide air? the blitz packages are ridiculous and the backward movement of our linebackers nearly every down is even more so considering that was figured out in 2007 by every NFL coach there is and now used by an aging linebacker corp who need all the help they can get and this gives them nearly none. the non-contact or super soft zones by our corners on and off the LOS is indicative to colossal failure in every sense if you play good coached offenses in post season. are our memories so completely fogged over that the last superbowl we were in is just a distant haze? doesn't anyone remember THIS season and the ease opponents moved the ball against us in the final two minutes of any half? all of our linebackers worth a dam are 30+. without urlacher (even considering his career is or nearly over) or briggs what does our defense look like? we have no tackles who can create pressure up the middle and our star DE is old and on his last leg. can anyone imagine how pathetic this defense would be without peppers? for everyone interested in hiring an offensive oriented head coach what you are handing him is a defense that opponents can move the ball on at critical times. what does the bend and don't break defense do? it takes your offense off the field throughout the game and keeps them from scoring points. it causes your defense to be worn out by mid third quarter even IF you have a young defense which we are not even close to having.

cutler or any quarterback we may envision needs more than an average or worse a mediocre line. these blows they are taking add up over the long term like body blows in a heavyweight fight. everyone looks at rogers in green bay and infer if he can take it so should ours. in reality they are cutting rogers career down by years with the abuse he is taking and all it takes is just one hit to end his career completely. but in the packers defense i also must confess that the packers understand this and DO draft high quality prospects to make their line more than average nearly every year. we have never done that in my memory. EDIT... i take that back. one GM in memory did keep drafting OL until they were of high quality and that GM was Jim Finks. the problem was that they let him walk and idiot mikey ant then angie showed up and that was that. having a mediocre offensive line also limits our offense in the running game and puts wear and tear on any high quality running back we have or may get. this also limits our superbowl contention chances. final note: we do NOT want cutler or any other franchise qb in chicago having to roll out or conceive some oddball trick plays to keep him healthy because our OL is subpar. to do this is franchise suicide!!

i have not followed long's career but IF he is young enough (isn't he still in his 20's?) and if there are no INJURY issues and he grades out top notch i would give him the keys to the ferrari any-day-of-the-week before a defensive tackle. to me that is a no brainer. the position we are in right now on the draft board dictates that unless you want to give up most of your draft we will not be drafting in the top 5 where the primo LT's are. so for me i take that in-his-prime free agent top player at LT and draft his replacement who would need some time to develop in a lower round over the next 3 years. that way we have a top LT and can groom someone with no urgency 2-4 years to replace him. i ALSO draft in the 1st-3rd round a killer guard or center. this is a MUST do. we need some YOUNG real quality talent in the middle of our OL. that is not a luxury it is a critical need right now. we then have carimi to fight for the RT spot or this scott guy. then do it again next draft. if we picked up a quality guard or center in rounds 1-3 we can go after that defensive player if we have to let melton go.

one other very, very important aspect of bringing in holmgren... i am in total agreement with you on him being a qb guru. if, and this is a very big IF, cutler is not the guy to be our future franchise player holmgren is the guy to know it. it makes this next season with cutler on contract for one more year the most important decision involving the direction this franchise takes since halas/finks hired jim mcmahon. if cutler is not the way to a superbowl holmgren will know it sooner than anyone i can even think of and save this franchise MEGA cap money for the next 3-5 years and find that guy who can. we missed out hiring shanny 2-3 years ago. we can't blow this one too. this hire does so much on so many levels it's like winning the lottery for chicago. we have been waiting for over 40 years to find this good of a prospect. if we win multiple superbowls under a holmgren regime emery will be able to write his own ticket in chicago. this scenario is what GM's dream of.