Alaskan Grizzly

No.

I really shouldn't have 'gone there' and perhaps this is a topic deserving of its own thread. At any rate... Until last year Webb was playing for Seattle and the year before that, Williams was still playing as a Guard for STL/LA. So it would seem that Tice wasn't alone in analyzing the skills of these guys and their positions. The point I was trying to make with Long and Whitehair was just that; sometimes you have to move people based on need or simply they're no good where they are projected to be. I think somewhere deep in the discourse we agree to that basic thought. DBDB highlights a very frustrating point about 'the experts' and their analysis of where they think players will succeed in the NFL. In the case of Carimi and Williams; both were projected as 1st round talent and the Bears bit both times. Similar to Colombo. Can't fault the Bears too much for doing what you want and getting what they thought was supposed to be the talent they wanted for OL protection and it didn't work out. Same with Pace. He was a pro-bowl player for most of his career. Sitton would be this generation's example. He was out a fair amount this last year but was/is he worth the money the team paid for him? Still remains to be seen I suppose. There could be arguments (I know we've had them) all day long about when and where to draft an OLineman versus picking one up in FA. In all the situations there's always that possibility of 'getting it wrong'. Does it seem fair that our team drafts two projected 1st round starters who don't live up to the hype, where a team like Cleveland drafts Joe Thomas who lives up to the hype, yet has to play for Cleveland?

Pretty much same rationale for me as Pix. I have faith in the youth up front; Bullard, Goldman, Floyd and some of the effective FA's already in the fold like Hicks and McPhee that our team really needs to look at the defensive backfield. Next to QB that is probably the next highest (if not highest) priority. Berry right now is the best deal out there.

I know I'm going to regret this and really shouldn't but... So this moving around thing, aka "jerked around" would be different than say Kyle Long (a two time ProBowler as OG) playing Tackle? Or a Cody Whitehair who until last year never played Center? And in the end, Williams ended up starting (for another team) as OG. So... there is that.

I wont and you haven't ?. I've been up to my ears in political debate lately. Don't have the energy. Nevertheless, I'd still like that OT from Bama and their TE (Howard?). Beyond that not many other Bama players appeal to me. Not at least in positions of need. Clemson on the other hand, they got a few.

This I like. Hey Jason, didn't Cutler, Chris Williams and Earl Bennett all play at Vanderbilt together? I'd say Bennett played good while linked to Jay in Chicago whereas former 1st round pick Williams...did not.

Agreed

Dirty bird!!!!

I'm with you.

I'd rather hold final judgment until after the Senior Bowl and Combine but for now I'm still in on having a QB picked at #3 (Watson). If not at 3 and more value can be had by trading back in the 1st, and he's still available, we need to get Watson. Beyond that I feel the needs are CB and FS. I'd still like to have them consider a second QB (like Washington did a few years ago) in later rounds and the extreme needs are addressed first. Oh and I should mention the Bears should look at drafting OL (Tackle) in the early rounds. I would even say 1st only if its that animal from Alabama.

FWIW, I think your first three draft picks are awesome.

Agreed. Not sure what has gotten into you but theoretically we shouldn't be hoping to be drafting high enough next year for one of those other candidates you mention. Matt Shaub is not the solution. Thy have Barkley, Hoyer and Shaw already on the books and are familiar with the O already. See if one of them could do it and still draft Watson if not at three,trade down in first and still get him.

This article draws upon your concern and I agree with it... although not so much about the OTs. http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/rosen...101-column.html Some other points to consider. Garrapolo only played two games this year (before getting hurt). The injury by itself could prove concerning, especially if you think what NE wants for the trade; a 1st and 4th. But a point I saw elsewhere was that Barkley also played two games very well before running into issues. And he didn't even get hurt. For what it's worth, Brisset played admirably in the one (?) game he was in before he too got hurt. I think the question that bears repeating; why would Belichick want to trade Brady's potential back up is he's so good? How much longer can Brady play the way he's been going? Is a Brisset the answer for them or a potential college prospect that we should be considering?

Yes...this!!!p

Sorry to have answered you twice but thought I'd inject this thought. Remember that I don't place a lot of faith in the so called 'draft experts'. On Dak Prescott: https://www.google.com/amp/www.cbssports.co.../?client=safari And an article about Vince Young. Most of which is described by Mike Mayock (of who I am generally not a fan). To redeem my lack of faith in him, Mayock also comments about Cutler. http://staugustine.com/stories/042906/spor...ml#.WHctMYHpqEc

I'm fairly sold on Watson and would have to go with option B. Having the cap space as you mentioned would allow the Bears in buying some pretty impressive FAs. That could possibly include Campbell and perhaps even a player like Berry. With placeholders like Hoyer, Barkley and/or Shaw you'd have a pretty good base of QB talent to work from and get Watson up to speed.

Disagree (but I hope you're right). In that if he does turn or to be the 3rd best player in the draft then the chances of the Bears getting him improve. I say BPA because if indeed he is still available at #3 he is the 'best player available' for the Bears. Not knowing really what Cleveland and Jacksonville need I can only assume Watson will be at least in the top 5. There will be players more better (not a phrase I know) that will grade out higher but again, considering what the Bears need, Watson will be the best BPA at 3. Assuming he's still there. Of course this is all my simple and non-distinguished opinion.

Agreed. I see the discussion for BPA and totally understand it. But I almost have to wonder if Watson isn't considered BPA even at 3rd overall? If you consider the overall need of our team along with if you consider the intangibles of leadership and overall intelligence (graduating in 2 1/2 years) you just about have to grade that into the equation. The guy performed on the largest stage of college football two years in a row with almost identical stats. And he did it against the vaunted Alabama (NFL production level) defense. This is pretty noteworthy in my book. The one little itty bitty thing that bothers me is that he could be considered a 'project' because he may not be NFL QB ready. He played in a system (I call it Chip Kelly offense) where the QB doesn't seem to get to make a lot of the play calls. Instead the calls come in from the sideline (in the form of gyrations and huge playing cards). The QB doesn't get a lot of opportunity to use what they've seen in the field to weigh in on the play. The especially effects their ability to call audibles if needed. I think being able to identify when and why to do an audible (at the right time) is paramount to an NFL QB. Could he learn this? Absolutely. It may just take some time.

In another forum it sounds like he wasn't too well liked (by the fans) in either NyG or Phil. But if you consider him as potentially a depth player, then it makes sense. Especially if Wilson, Royal AND AJ are gone. What does a 'futures' contract mean anyhow? Is it like being an RFA without money?

He will be this years Dak Prescott Jason. Damnit! I'll keep my fingers crossed.

I don't know bout no philosophy but whatever they do they need to draft Watson. NOW!!!

Agreed (on the 3rd overall part). I think the article highlighted that owner Irsay asked for input from the football minds on team (at the time including Polian) about their prospective pick to replace Manning. Polian suggested both RGIII and Luck with a lean towards Luck. Polian was gone later that year before the draft.

Are you questioning Polians opinion on QB evaluation? If you are then; "I find you lack of faith in Polian disturbing." In using your article and Polians history; if he thinks McCarron is better then Garappolo I'd be more apt to listen to that . So far he's been right about Manning (versus Leaf) and Luck (versus RGIII). And if I misunderstood your post, then never mind.

Yeah that's the guy. My perspective was limited due to only being able to see part of the game. From what I saw though I was impressed with the youngsters performance. His overall stats this year were in line with some of those going up for the draft this year. Given he's a sophomore I could see him getting better with more time. I wasn't able to finish hearing what Polian had to say about McCarron and would be even more intrigued by him if Polian thinks he was worthy for trade consideration.

This morning heard Bill Polian talking about potential FA QB's this next year. He seemed to echo many here that thought this year's QB draft class is weak and even went a little farther to say that some of the candidates making themselves eligible (Trubisky being one of them) shouldn't. Anyhow, some of the names he threw out that could be FA's from other teams were Glennon, Garrapollo and AJ McCarron (currently of the Bengals). I was actually thinking about him the other day but wonder really would he be even worth considering? The article below speculates that McCarron would be better suited with the Browns but have to ask; would he be worth taking a look at? http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap300000076...offseason-trade And as an extra consideration, next year Penn State QB Trace McSorley will be eligible. Saw some of his performance in the Rose Bowl and was amazed at his accurateness especially long downfield.