Alaskan Grizzly

Tebow is only 25. You're not talking about Brett Favre or Joe Montana here. Heck Cleveland's SECOND YEAR QB Weeden is 29. I ask again, where has Tebow really had the opportunity to be given the tutelage he might actually fourish from? Sure he worked with Trestman for all of half a day....how long ago was that again? Would he have (or maybe still) been considered "raw talent" with plenty of upside? Again, I'm not suggesting someone to supplant Cutler, just step in if needed. If he comes off waivers and is available at a low cost, why not?

But Brian what I'm talking about is in relation to a BACKUP role with a chance to learn. Allegedly from some "QB guru". Where has he had that chance? You are comparing what Denver needed in a starting QB to what I'm suggesting as a backup role. And who did they choose as their backup again? Getting Manning was a gamble. What if got injured right off the bat? What if he couldnt throw the ball with accuracy after being hit? You paid $100 million for a guy that could potentially be an advisor. THAT was the 'risk' I'm referring to.

You call these "supporting arguments" for your claim? In Denver, John Elway took a chance...and it paid off....with Manning. How is that an indictment on Tebow? Manning was done in Indy (incidently, they gambled too with Luck..and for now it looks like a decent wager). So someone had to take the "chance". He wasn't going to sit around and do nothing all year. And anything substantive case you TRY to make about the Jets and that they know what they are doing, especially while Rex Ryan is head coach, is just plain silly.

No Here's something "pretty". Happy Mother's Day.

Thanks for the positive reponse. Kinda creepy, you and I agreeing. So I'll say this, what you suggest here is more "gimmicky" and a good reason NOT to bring in Tebow if to no other. I would truly like to see him as a #2 or 3 and learn from both Cutler and Trestman (accuracy, timing, defense reads and all the things you mentioned earlier). Again, and as you pointed out, he wont be costly and if for nothing else younger than McCown.

Just in time for this to be "shut down" but I think any ideas shouldn't necessarily be ignored. So this "circus" everyone keeps talking about? Who is it that fostered that? Tebow or the fans? In NY it was the Jets that were and still are the "circus". Until Rex Ryan leaves there, that is the way it'll be. The dude chose to keep Mark Sanchez as his starter and he (Sanchez) is as frustrating as they come. No wonder the fans were chanting for Tebow on a regular basis. In Denver, he played backup to Orton. Obviously a disparity in playing styles. McDaniels did select Tebow and eventually was let go more on his inability to actually coach a team, not because he chose Tebow. John Fox wasn't a fan of Tebow's....but how good is he at judging QB talent? Didn't he bring Caleb Hanie in as a backup at one point? He (Fox) has a manager that does know something in QB's in John Elway...hence the addition of Manning. Elway wasn't a fan of Tebow's either. So after Peyton made his way to Denver off went Tebow to the Ringling Bros of the NFL. Now before I get flamed I am in no way making a case for Tebow to be the starter in Chicago. Just a backup....why not #2 or even 3? I mean, allegedly Trestman is this "QB guru" so why not consider it? A few thoughts to consider before I close out. Tebow was voted #95 (of the top 100 NFL players) in 2012. A list voted on players in the NFL http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d828b...-top-100-player And this: http://www.stableytimes.com/news/the-case-...nchez-for-jets/

Wow, after watching a few of these vids and a couple others....this guy is fast!! Dosent remind me of Briggs as much as a young Urlacher. And he likes to hit. I think Emery may have done a good job. In fact I'll go out on a limb that he may be better than Teo and Brown. Looking forward to what the season has in store.

Since I'm not 'sold' quite yet on Emery I will give him this, his two 1st rounders (this year and last) are cerebral ones. And in either case and because of it he'll be proven either a genius or an egomaniac.

Good post Parker. Although I'm still going into this year with a cautious optimism, the more I think about this pick the more I am intrigued. Time and again the "experts" have said the same thing, "starting guard, eventually starting tackle". That's big for a player coming out of college. To be able to have the 'luxury' in letting a player learn the intricacies of the NFL from a protected position (Guard) for a year or two and then, if needed, move him out to an 'unprotected' position of RT or LT....talk about a quality choice. Look at what happened last when the Bears picked two OL in the first round and expected them to start in their respective positions? For one they were both Tackles and one is gone the other moved inside to Guard....for now. So the concern of him not playing a lot of college ball. Is that really a BIG concern? Not as much wear and tear and remember what I said about the "protected" position of Guard? If you HAD to learn a position on the fly, especially along the line, the Guard slot is the best. Lastly, who knows maybe we have ourselves the next Michael Jordan, Deion Sanders or Bo Jackson in regards to a two sport athlete? After all, imagine if in the off season should he decide to play for the first team he was drafted by? The White Sox. Hmmmmm.

I know you're miffed about the team not picking Ogletree (and letting Url go) but I'm fairly confident that the team will pick either Teo or Brown tomorrow. Me personally hope its Teo as I'm not convinced that Brown is the answer. Truth be told I'm really pulling for the Bears to draft both Barrett Jones and Jordan Rodgers at some point. Time will tell.

But why not have someone like Rodriguez, who is 'smaller', using the same logic? If he turns out to be a true 'pass catching TE' then how is the opposing strategy for someone like him different than having a large (Bennett-like) TE to contend with? Generally they aren't as elusive or quick as someone who is smaller but sturdier built. In my mind having a Rodriquez type receiver available, and IF he proves able to catch and run then that provides more a challenge to the opponents. You're not set on having an LB defend but maybe forced into Nickel coverage. And we all know generally Nickel corners in the league aren't as good as the #1 and 2.

From the "sound" of things, I think an offense with a two TE (pass catching variety) is on the horizon. And if the Bears don't go that route, despite the 'rumors' I'm fairly the other Bennet, Earl, should still be considered in the SR position. He's more than reliable over the middle. Not so much outside...but capable.

Have to say beyond C. Johnson, this list is totally out of whack. The case for Fitzgerald is a simple one, he would easily be #2. Me thinks he would be as good maybe better than Marshall, had he been in Chicago. Andre Johnson definitely deserves about #3/4. Where is Julio Jones? Where is Boldin? The guy has shown over and over his reliability and ability.

Yeah right, 'the ground' caused him to black out. No more like Corey "the purple person eater' Wootten put a lick on you. End of story...figuritively and literally.

Not so great with Hayden or Bowman. But McManis I'd like to see more of and Frey I haven't seen play yet. What do these guys have to offer. I think with what (who) is available the team doesn't need to pick CB that high.

Tillman's not exactly a young man anymore. How much longer could he go? I still think the team should consider moving him to Saferty (probably FS) to extend his playing career. I'm interested to see what Frey (injured last year) and McManis (a FA pickup last year with potential) can offer before the team drafts high at CB.

I think (philosophically at least) what this discussion is about is 'what if' Cutler doesn't work out despite all of these adds in the last two years...in what essentially is to cater to his ability? The first question is should we (as fans and as a team) continue with him if he falters? Should we then prepare ourselves 'post-Cutler'? On the other hand, if he comes out gangbusters, how do 'we' deal with that? Is it because of the new regime/scheme? Is it because he's in a contract year? All things that need to be considered for not just management but we as fans to be able to swallow whatever number appears on his new contract. A lot of factors will need to be considered another of which is his age. If he doesn't 'go Flacco' on us but still gets the team to the playoffs does he deserve a long term high dollar contract? If the team does it are we prepared to live with it?

I don't care what you say, Romo doesn't deserve what he's getting. He's way too inconsistent for that type of money. All the contractual language and cap hit issues make sense though. And with Flacco, the point I'm making is had Baltimore negotiated with him midway through the season (rather than at the end) they would have probably spent less. But, as I mentioned they may not have because their season wasn't looking so good at about midway. They probably thought they could wait and determine whether it would be worth their while to sign him on or franchise him; depending on how the season progressed. With Cutler, and as a few have suggested, the Bears would probably be better of trying to get Cutler resigned before the season is over.

Romo's ridiculous agreement doesn't help for sure. But, the Bears need to be careful and not do as the Ravens did with Flacco this last year. I think they (Balt) weren't sure how the season was going to play out, especially when they hit the slump about mid-season. We saw what happened and the price they had to pay (literally) for Flacco's continued service.

I agree that it is tacky to allow Anderson to wear the jersey, I am glad to hear he was going to "ask permission". But truth be told, half of the numbers listed above will be available as the team isn't going to be carrying that many LB's into the start of the season. IE: Trahan, DiCicco (esp if the team drafts an LB in the early rounds) and Franklin - who is he? And as a side note there are other numbers available. Believe Hunter Hillenmeyer wore 92 when he was with the team.

Well TT at the risk of being called a 'moron' I think that Emery has plans for SMC. I have a strong suspicion it's in the LB corps somewhere. Maybe he's the 'one'? At this point and the more I think of it, I'm leaning towards the team drafting BPA regardless of position...at least in round one.

Or....they could bring back Urlacher this year. And draft a new shiny LB next year.

My gut instinct tells me are ANY of the top contenders at LB necessary for the Bears to consider at this point? First the team needs to establish what type of scheme its going to run; 4-3 (cover 2) this year but possibly convert to 3-4 next year(?) Are any of the top prospects fit for one or the other or both? Is the team at a necessity right now to draft an LB at all? Personally I can't see a 'need' for an LB (especially in round 1 or 2) if the team is working on trying to get itself into more an offensive mindset. How will Wlliams and Anderson work out for the team? What about the other LB's already on the roster from last year; Costanzo, Diccio, Thomas? Instead the team should concentrate on what they need in offense. WR, OL maybe a decent QB at backup who could be developed..IF...Cutler doesn't work out. Heck if the team is going to look at defense, maybe they should look at DL, that rotation is pretty shallow. Just because Urlacher is gone doesn't mean the team needs to panic and "draft his replacement" right now.

I didn't really say that I would have "brought him back", just negotiated. The part of what went on behind closed doors none of us know. In fact you agreed that Urlacher probably wasnt aware every minute what was going on in negotiations. Sure I personally would have preferred having Urlacher back, so would Mike McCaskey, but I don't know all the intricacies of the money game. As far as saying "5 against and 2 for" that is based more on what is done. What if he had been picked up by another team (still an option). And plays all 16 games, and is on a team that goes to the Super Bowl, and is chosen for another Pro Bowl? All this in his swan song? Then the choice COULD prove the wrong one. Understand the word "subjective". At this point thats all this is. The 5-2 mark doesn't prove one side right and the other wrong....not yet. And do you mean 'valve' or 'value'?

I'll double down on what Jason said. And add, had I been in the position and known truly what was going on behind closed doors, I would have attempted to negotiate more. Probably not his 'final' asking price but somewhere in the middle...but closer to the $2 million. From my understanding there wasn't much negotiating and that can send a bad message. Part of the reason I feel it would have behooved the team to negotiate further was due to the additional loss of Roach. Granted a new twist to the scheme with Tucker so scheme familiarity is a moot point but a significant loss (if you count the current hold out in Idonijie) in player familiarity. All that considered, what's done is in fact done. Urlacher is gone and it "appears" the team made some value pickups instead. But all of these moves, to include the decision to not keep Urlacher, are subjective. In other words opinions, not facts, that it will work. All that remains to be seen.