Alaskan Grizzly

Concur. Just because tradition suggests pay a player "X amount" means you have to pay the player "X amount". Urlacher has contributed his lion's share to the organization and what it is today. The defense is and was successful because Urlacher was and is a part of it. Just because physically he's diminshed does'nt mean he's diminished in knowledge and skill (mentally). And the point you make about paying him around $4million is a very valid point. Why would the team want to pay a FA LB to take his place at probably more cost? What you gain in youth (maybe) you lose in experience, knowledge, familarity, leadership... And to go a step further, why would you want to draft that replacement to start now only to save a few bucks?

I was going to say that teams aren't looking at just the top level Division I schools as much. A few examples, Joe Flacco (Univ. of Deleware), Danieal Manning (Abileine Christian), Brian Waters (North Texas), Brandon Marshall (Central Florida), Pierre Garcon (Mount Union) and the list goes on. There is defintitely something to be said for good scouting now a days.

Didn't Kelvin Hayden play for Indy in a "similar defense" for a few years? Hmmm.

Now now...I'll give you the first two, but SMC's impact remains to be seen. What I envision for him is a reversal of the Sophomore slump. Whether they try him as a Pass rushing DE (with more bulk) or a stand up OLB in a 3-4 configuration, I can see him having a blowout year this next year. Heck, he might even be the answer for Urlacher's leaving the team someday (who knows?) If Emery is as good as everyone thinks he is, I believe this was more a pick based on his scouting more than anything, I think he'll (SMC) pan out.

Gotta say I agree with your side on things. Someone else here proposed the idea of a "transitional" type of contract. Where Urlacher is signed on for an additional 2 years and in that time the team can find a player (this year or next) that can learn from Url. Then at the end of the deal, Urlacher moves on. Hopefully with two rings on his hand. Realisitically though, earlier this year Url was asked about the potential of his retirement. I believe it was near the end of the 7-1 run. And he said that if they get to the Super Bowl he was done. So in his mind he's thinking about it. Obviously if he comes back its because he wants to try to get back to the Super Bowl one last time. I would much rather see him (and I would bet he too) stay in a Bears uniform and do all the things he still can do, like you mentioned. Otherwise the alternative is him playing for a team like the Patriots where his chances are even better.

Actually Lucky L addressed sorta what I was going to say. I agree that the "talent pool" is getting diluted. And what we did "20+ years ago" is a whole lot different than what we are doing nowadays. Gone are the days of "traditional" team building where players make a name for themselves with one team and they stay with their team throughout their career. A few factors because of this are, like Urlacher, eventually a player gets old and not able to perform like he did when he was younger. Yet still has the skill and knowledge a lot of teams would give anything for despite it not being what it once was. Then there is the almighty dollar that can be used to lure a player away from a team after only being with that team for 3-5 years. Both models of OL building can fall victim to the "needing constant attention" as with the FA signed solution obviously the player ages out of the system. Where the second (drafting) can find the player look for a higher paying offer from another team once their rookie contract runs out. Not as likely, but still a probability.

Well not to be technical with you Brian but all (or most at least) good OL's and the men within were probably drafted. But we don't really agree..per se. Using our own Bears as an example: 2006 team (the one that last made it to the Super Bowl) made up of OLmen including Ruben Brown, John Tait, Roberto Garza and Fred Miller. All of which were not drafted by the Bears but signed as FA's. 1985 team (the last team before '06 that went to the Super Bowl) actually two (LT Covert and RT Van Horne) were drafted in round 1 and the other three were not; LG Bortz (drafted round 8), Center Hilgenburg (not drafted) and RG Thayer (drafted round 4). The example of "crabs" I gave was in deference, not in agreement, to the anology of the "sex" one earlier offered up. Like Terra Tor I'm a little skeptical at drafting OL in the first round....Unless you get that Barret Jones from Alabama.

Hindsight is always 20/20. Pre-draft information on both Williams and Carimi. (Which were 1st round draft talent...pre-draft). Williams: http://www.nfldraftscout.com/ratings/dspro...8&genpos=OT Carimi: http://www.nfldraftscout.com/ratings/dspro...1&genpos=OT The analogy used previously does not correlate to what happened here. It should be more 'You got laid twice and caught the crabs both times, so should you try it again?'

So this article caught my attention yesterday: http://www.twincities.com/vikings/ci_22440...r-bill-callahan Although I'm not quite sure what happened in reading this article Trestman's silence is worth noting. That and stories that have circulated that Trestman has been difficult to work with in the past could gain traction and especially explain why he didn't get his chance in the big time until as of late. I can tell you that Callahan is in fact a pile of dung. Being a follower of Nebraska football I can tell you between he and AD Peterson in the early 2000's they knocked Nebraska football back a few years by tinkering with what worked for decades. Callahan was hired because he was an "NFL guru" that understood the new and exciting West Coast offense and some alums were hoping to make it big time after spending big bucks on Memorial stadium upgrades etc in Lincoln. However after a few years of sub-mediocrity, Callahan was fired (thankfully) by former coaching legend and new AD Tom Osbourne. Anyhow the damage that Callahan brought (to include some of his recruits ) had been done. Since, it seems that Nebraska has never been quite the same. At any rate, didn't mean to prolong this, but I hope that Brown and Rice don't have dirt that includes Trestmans implication and this becomes a "non-story".

Yep, you're right. Time and again, many have said the Lovie 2 (or Cover 2 in general) was outdated and needed to be replaced. And I believe Lovie's reply many a times to those that questioned it was something to the effect of; 'We do what we do and you just have to beat us'. Most announcers would say that their scheme was such that it didn't change dramatically from game to game. But what made the difference in the schemes were the players playing them. So where was the defense rated this year? And the fact that four of the starters on Defense were named to the Pro Bowl should be indicitive of something. Now if the team were to go to a 3-4 would the defense necessarily drop off? I can't believe that Tillman and Jennings are going to be any less lethal at CB nor Wright and Conte as Safeties. But I would almost bet that Urlacher (although he thrived in a Cover 2 - mostly due to his past Safety experience IMHO) would benefit in having another LB covering the other half of the middle that he couldn't. The biggest drawback to the 3-4 (again, IMHO) is the vulnerability to short gains, mostly on the ground. Where the Cover 2 is vulnerable to the short West Coast style passing so too is the 3-4 in that regard. Obviously each scheme has its pros and cons but you're right, ultimately it comes down to the player(s) buying in and performing.

If they are doing a criminal investigation, they aren't doing a great job at not 'polluting the well'. Granted in today's world of cyber speed it is getting more and more difficult to do investigations like this without someone knowing...something. But, it sounds as thought Te'o knew this would be going public sometime in early December, from who I don't know. But if there were other charges stemming from this whole mess, me thinks there would have been something said about it by now. I could be wrong, been there before. But at this point the strongest case (IMHO) would be in a civil court, probably not criminal.

I dunno I think that Barrett Jones could definitely be worthy of a #1 pick (Jason will be so proud that I made that comment). Imagine the next time Cutler decided to do a "Webb shove" on someone like Jones? Talk about comedy.

Forgot about "the Purple People eater" Wooton. And I assume that most consider Paea a servicable DT? So, if the team were to someday convert to a 3-4 defense wouldn't they then need to look at another top rate LB? Especially with Urlacher uncertain this year let alone nearing the end of his shelf life?

I like this list and see good potential out of it. From what I read one of the only redeeming qualities new OC Kromer brings to the team is his connection to Bushrod while at New Orleans, so maybe that could be enough for an enticement? And I totally agree on the past of drafting in the first for LT.

There is no doubt you and I have a discord on this and oddly enough I agree moreso with TT on his outlook (although earlier he forgot the other potential bust in Carimi). You make valid points on what you outlined above (Pros and Cons) but like we have discussed before the risk for picking that "decades long bookend LT" is just that, a risk. I still think that the first round should always be a skill set player or value pick. If one of the top three rated Tackles is still available at 20 when the Bears pick then that, I would consider, is a value pick. And in case you're wondering no I don't think the Bears are in a desperate enough situation to trade up to a higher pick to get that top three talent. Conversely, if a highly touted FA is available (like there apparently will be this year) you dump as much money as you can to get that player. Again the reason being here is that the player is "proven" instead of unknown.

It appears we were both right.. http://www.hurricanesports.com/ViewArticle...TCLID=205558428 he was considered more a two way player. But regardless, my thoughts of his "career" still stand.

"Ruined his career"? You know Hester was actually a CB in college right? If he'd been drafted on that, and only that, we'd be asking 'Hester who?' Instead the dude is probably going to be in the Hall of Fame someday for his record setting returns. Not a bad career if you ask me.

Interesting how this post started about the hire of Cavanaugh but seems more focused on Tebow. When it's all said and done the likelihood of Tebow coming to Chicago is not so. But I wouldn't be surprised a QB of similar skill sets (say round 5-7) isnt looked at in the upcoming draft. That being the case, I'm not all that enthused by this hire of Cavanaugh. He doesn't have all that great a track record. And quite frankly am scratching my head why they didn't just keep Bates on to continue working with Cutler.

x2, x3, x4, x5 (for me and each of my family members). Although I am glad to see a Bear alum "represent".

My daughter thinks the Bears should use this as part of their new offensive scheme. She says she could see Jay Cutler doing this. Think Trestman would give it a try?

And Jason is exactly right in the point he's making. Some would argue (I sorta did) that Singletary did not completely fail in SF. But I believe he is smart enough to know that if given another chance, he would only get better. The comparison I made to him and Belichick and Carroll is that if they hadn't been given a second chance (based on their respective products in Cleveland and NE), where would they be now? And I'm not necessarily advocating that Singletary should / could be a great HC, but I'm pretty darn sure he could be a great DC. Hence why I compared him to Ray Lewis. You can't tell me that you as a fan wouldn't go crazy happy with a coach on the sidelines that had the passion that Ray Lewis does..especially with his knowledege of Defense? So it wouldn't be wasted energy when the player came off the sideline (like the illustration I read recently of Idonije) when the coach rips that player a new one enough to motivate him to play better now rather than after a week of practice? Or heck, send him to the locker room early like Singletary has done before?

Gotta agree Jason. I keep hearing the way of the future is this new "Pistol Offense" which I believe I even heard Trestman talk about a little. And if we look at the concept of how SF had the incumbent, this case Alex Smith, who really wasn't all that bad but obviously Kaepernick, who has a different skill set, is getting them to where they are. In the Bears' case, you could have Cutler, who I think some will argue could be limited in his skill set..mostly due to his decision factor, might actually benefit in having a Tebow on the bench. Maybe to motivate him to play better and make better decisions despite what Trestman might be able to do.

I think in Denver it was more Elway not seeing Tebow as the "solution" and instead putting his eggs in the basket known as Manning. And, if I'm not mistaken, it was Josh Daniels' pick...not Fox'. Probably not really Tebow's fault. And in Jets its purely the circus atmosphere that is Jets football run by Rex Ryan. That place is a mess and still is. They made a mistake in getting rid of their GM only, should've gone a step further. Again though, in regards to Tebow, not his fault.

2 for 2?