nfoligno

First, I am pretty sure Henderson has always been w/ NO. I believe they drafted him. I want a WR upgrade as bad as any, but not Henderson, who I actually liked in the draft when he came out. But the reality is, he is a one trick pony. He has speed to burn, and can tear downfield and make big plays, but that is all he can do, and even in that, he tends to drop the ball. He has had opportunity after opportunity w/ NO, but has never been able to become more than a 3rd or 4th WR. He is one of the best deep threats, as seen w/ his 20 ypc (or something like that) but he just doesn't have any other aspects of the game developed.

Yes.

I don't think anyone wants to overpay, except Snyder. My point is in questioning when a team "overpays". I think we enter FA w/ a market in mind for players, but if that market turns out to be different, is the player overpaid or were our initial thoughts of their market simply wrong?

Imagine if Atlanta passed on Ryan believing they needed to first build their OL.

Why? I am not arguing so much as just asking. To me, the main thing that held Rex back (beyond surrounding personnel) was his inability to read the field, as well as his questionable feel inside the pocket. He just didn't read coverages very well, and didn't handle the pressure well either. I do not know for a fact, but I have not seen where these were big issues for Cutler. He is an aggressive QB, like Rex, but I am not sure he is Rex part two.

For the record, I basically agree about Carr, but in that example, it also goes w/ what I am saying. Houston fans screamed for years (along w/ Carr) about Houston doing so little and such a bad job, upgrading the OL. They drafted Carr #1, but then failed to build the OL to protect him. I think it is fine if you draft your franchise QB first, but if you do not follow that up by protecting him, then I would agree there is little point. W/ that said, I think it should also be pointed out how much better Houston's OL looked once Carr was gone. Carr had loads of talent, but was a slow decision maker, and was the sort of QB who made OLs look worse than they were. As for Cutler's contract, I think that is partially why Denver is looking to trade him. i believe he is still under his rookie contract. That, any team looking to trade for him would have to sign him to a new deal, and you can bet it would not be cheap. However, I would point out that we are a whopping $35m under the cap (not counting whatever Omiyale's cap hit this year is), and can easily afford to add him.

I like Britt too, but worry a tad about concerns that he at times seems to lack concentration and body catches the ball. I do love that he is a polished route runner, but love when I read Nicks catches everything in his zip code, while Britts has more drops than I would like.

My dream was be: Williams - Duke - Kreutz - Brandon Moore - Oher/Smith What I think it will be: Williams - Beekman - Kreutz - Omiyale - St. Clair

To me, I think the problem is/was that Angelo had a certain philosophy, and took to long to realize circumstances had changed making his philosophy poor in today's market. Angelo talked about it some last offseason. He said he felt OL took longer to develop than most other positions, and flat out said that was why he preferred adding veterans over drafting young talent. But then said things have changed. Taking it one step further... I don't think his philosophy was awful. Until recently, OGs and even RTs simply were not very expensive. LTs were always expensive, but you could add OGs and RTs through FA w/o spending a fortune, and could often get players coming off their rookie deals, thus still young, but w/ develop skills. Angelo even talked about he had no problem allowing another team to develop a player for him, which he said w/ a smile. Meanwhile, you can draft some 2nd day OL w/ the thought of depth and long term development. While I am not saying I would follow this philosophy, I think there was a time it had merit. OGs and RTs were simply never appreciated positions on the OL. They were fairly low paid, and plentiful in FA. But over the last several years, we have seen RTs and OGs getting contract previously reserved for LTs. Now, rare do you find quality young OL in FA. More often, the young OL is like Omiyale. A player who has not developed into a starter for prior team(s), but could still develop into one. Of you find OL who is on the wrong side of 30. May have a little left in the tank, but will see a decline soon, and once it begins, it is often quick. When there is a young and solid OL, regardless of where he plays on the OL, he is signing for considerable contracts. Take Jason Brown, who signed w/ St.L for 5yr/ $37m and $20m guaranteed. Problem is, it took too long to figure that out, and to be honest, I am still not sure he totally has.

3. I suspect Angelo makes an offer for a guy and does not waver much. Last year we saw this with Briggs & Berrian where the offers did not change. Hell, we probably could have gotten Briggs to take less money by the end, but we kept our offer the same. This year we've seen Angelo not buge on his offer for St. Clair. The word is that Angelo made an offer, and St. Clair counter-offered to no avail. We have to appreciate Angelo for not getting being emotional & caught in a bidding war. He's good at determining the general market for a player and sticking to it, thus not over-paying. Did anyone notice Tampa Bay signed Mark Clayton for 5 years 26 million??? How the hell does that happen? The guy has been bad since his rookie year. Wow they got screwed. Just curous, when you say Angelo is good at knowing the market for a player and sticking to it, thus not over-paying, who are you thinking about. Briggs, okay. But one player does not mean a lot. Just means he got it right w/ one player. Yea, I saw where TB signed Clatyor to that deal, but while you wonder about that, do you think anyone out there is wondering about our giving a 4 year backup OL a deal that could be worth as much as $15m, w/ $5.5m guaranteed. I realize Omiyale's deal isn't huge, he is the sort of player who pretty recently would not have seen much more than the veteran minimum. I think FA and the market are very subjective. I mean, we say a player is over-paid, but if several teams were making significant offers, then maybe his market was simply higher than we thought. I think often we say a player is/was overpaid based on what we felt his market value should have been, but that often proves wrong. No one wants to overpay for a player. At the same time, do we really want to take the take it or leave it stance? Seems like that was the sort of style Ditka had back in the day as he never really was capable of working in FA. He had a price he felt a player was worth, and would not change that even if the market proved different for that player. Sounds like a smart business way of doing things until you realize that system just doesn't work. All the quality signs w/ other teams, and you are left w/ the players no one else wanted.

If our key moves in FA are adding Omiyale and St. Clair, do you really think we are going to follow that up by going OL in the 1st? How well does Cutler work w/ our WRs? Easy initial answer is, better than what we have, and I am an Orton supporter. But I think few would question whether Cutler would be an upgrade. No, he likely would not put up 4,500 yards w/ our personnel, but I think he would help raise their play. He may better help develop Hester and Bennett. And again, I go back to the chicken and egg. If we wait until all the pieces are in place, we will never get that franchise QB. Instead, why not add that franchise QB and begin building around him.

EXACTLY! Turner said himself we ran 3 step drops nearly exclusively this year to keep Orton vertical. Turner knew well our deficiencies on the OL, and tried to compensate. Does anyone think our OL will be that much better next year? Further, Mac is far from a polished route runner. He may have all the talent in the world, but I think he would just be running around and doing little in terms of production on our team. Give me Nicks, who I think could far better elevate the play of the entire offense.

Give me Nicks over Mac. I realize full well Mac is easily the 2nd highest rated WR prospect, but I want no part of him. Mac is another raw product who will need coaching and time in the NFL, neither of which we have. Seems like every year we see players entering the draft who looked good/great in so many areas of the game, but I would rather get a player who simply had one position. Mac was used everywhere, but IMHO, those players are usually behind in terms of development at one position. If I made a check list of what I want in a WR, I think Nicks would likely have every box marked off. The only thing he lacks is elite speed, but I am fine w/ that. That does not mean he is slow, or that he can only run a 10 yard route. He has been compared often to Boldin, and I think few would say he lacks downfield ability. Nicks is exactly the type of WR I think we need on this team. I think he would quickly become Orton's best friend. Further, I think he is one of the most developed/polished receivers in the draft, and thus may rely less on our coaching staff to develop him. Mac may have the most pure talent and upside, but when you factor our team and coaches, i also think his floor is WAY LOW. In Nicks, I think the upside is high, though maybe not as high as Mac. At the same time, I think the floor is much higher than Macs.

chicken and egg. If we take the position we can not try and get a franchise QB until all the pieces are in place, I guarantee you we will never get a franchise QB. Few want to upgrade the OL as much as I, and I realize all the arguments about how a bad OL effects the QB. At the same time, if a francise QB is available, you do not say, "Well, I really like him, but I think we need to build our OL before we consider QB". Go the damn QB, and then build your OL. Hell, I would argue that we can get Cutler and still begin to build the OL now. FA is still open, and we can add OL like Duke (for example) in the 2nd round.

One, this OL would make me sick heading into next year. In fact, I think the only ones would would be more sick are: Jason, Orton and Forte. Two, I really think Beunning is a favorite on this board, but not at Halas. Every time I hear our staff talk, Beunning is never brought up. I have read that he was brought in last year, and was expected to do something in '08, rather than what some posters have said, that we brought him here in '08 for '09. He didn't impress the staff, and right now, I just do not think he is a key part of the plans, much less factored as a starter. If no further upgrades, then I think Beekman would have the start. Not thrilled w/ Omiyale as a starter. Nice depth, but starter? Neither Atlanta, nor Carolina viewed him as a starter. Further, while I keep reading about how he can play OG, when we he looked at there? Seems like both former teams viewed him as an OT. St. Clair as our starting RT just does nothing for me. Upgrade over Tait? Maybe. But that isn't saying much. What I am still hoping our OL looks like: Williams - Duke - Kreutz - Omiyale - Oher/Smith. If we were to add Duke and Oher or Smith, I could far better accept Omiyale. This would not be a very experienced OL, but I think it would be talented and one that could develop together into something special.

But if that is the attitude we are going to take, how many positions/things are we going to give up on? We do not seem to do well in the 1st round of the draft. Give up? Our success in finding a QB is worse than WR. Give up? We have not done too well at DE. Should we quite? I think you get the point. We have not done too well at WR, but why does that mean we give up? Hell, if we go off your logic, does that not mean we also toss out the idea Bennett can play. I mean, if what you say is correct, (a) we don't have the staff to find anyone good and ( we don't have the ability to develop anyone. Two things I would throw out there. One. While he may have never reached the level we all wanted, I would argue Berrian did in fact develop pretty well for a 3rd round pick. Two. If you believe our coaches are so lacking in ability to develop, would that not indicate we should look more at finished products rather than young players who need to be developed? In a WR like TJ Hous, we would be adding a finished product. A player who does not rely on the staff to take him game to another level. Is that not better than expecting our staff to develop a WR? You can I have always been on the same page when it comes to the OL. Right now, I am utterly sick at what I am seeing us do in FA at OL. However, at the same time, I also believe we need to upgrade our WR corp. I have never understood the argument we had to focus only on one area. I see no reason we can not upgrade both. It's too late, but I see no reason we could not have added, for example, Brandon Moore AND TJ Hous, while then focusing on the OL during the draft.

I don't know. Look at Baseball. No cap there, and absolutely a sport where some teams spend massively more than others, yet that spending does not always show in the results. Yankees always seem to spend a gazillion dollars, and when was their last world series win? On the other end, you have a team like Minny who just spend much, but always seems to play well. Chi Sox are not cheap, but are FAR from free-spenders, and yet won the series a couple years ago, and have been mostly good since. Back to football, even w/ the cap, Wash seems to always spend a crap load, but at the same time, they continue to suck. Throwing a ton of money around does mean you will win. Now, the problem for us is, I don't think we have the scouting, management or coaching to compensate for a lack of spending, and that could really be bad if the day comes when the cap is gone. The only good thing I can say is, at least most of the perceived big spenders also have questionably run front offices. Dallas and Wash may try and outspend everyone, but it may not even matter.

The list of examples is long. How many times have we seen veterans, later in their career, choose to play for NE at a lower price because they want to win a ring. Well, if they took such a postion earlier in their career, they may already have that ring. If your team is not putting up a fair offer, I can understand bolting, but when your team is making a nice offer, but you want to squeeze a few extra bucks, that is what makes me sick. Take Kurt Warner. He has been offered quite a bit by AZ, a place he has seen serious sucess and where he is likely to find the most sucess going forward. They have already made a very fair offer, but he has said no. He may eventually take it, but how funny if he went to, say, Detroit for more money, but a team that was essentially end his career on a down note.

What is really sad to, for me, is that several players I had hoped we would target are not getting the huge offers they had hoped for, and yet I read nothing of our showing interest. Jason Brown supposedly got an offer from St.L in the $7m range, but reports also say he does not want to be a Ram and is hoping to get offers from other teams. In Brown, you have a young player who is considered an upper tier center who can also play very well at OG. Well, we have an immediate need at OG, and w/ Kreutz on the downside of his career, and near the end of his contract, Brown seems like an ideal fit. $7m/yr is FAR from chump change, but we have plenty of cap space, and Brown would go a long way toward fixing our OL. Brandon Moore - I have heard very little about Moore thus far, but he would be a great fit as well. Young OG who was supposedly NY's best run blocker. TJ Hous - The huge market has not materialized. Few would argue we have the need. Most who were balking at the idea of adding TJ were mostly against the massive contract he would want, but if the offers are not so massive, and he is being viewed as a upper tier possession receiver and not game changer, we absolutely should be involved. I have no problem w/ the Carolina kid we added, so long as it was done simply for depth, but w/ the lack of interest we seem to have thus far in other FAs, I fear we are looking at him as more than depth.

On the other hand, I think we are seeing a lot of players who are re-signing w/ their teams prior to FA. Take Jordan Gross. He signed w/ Carolina before FA began. While nothing is for sure, I would bet you he could have easily gotten what Carolina offered, and likely a fair amount more. But he passed on the opportunity to try and squeeze a few extra dollars in order to stay w/ the team that drafted him. Gross is not the only player that did, or has done, this. Fat Albert is definitely the type that is easy to hate. When he openly talks about how he is going to whoever offers the most, you know he doesn't care about winning. If he is willing to go to a team, and team, regardless how good the team is, simply because they offered more than the next, you know they just don't care about winning as much. What is funny is how many players, late in their career, talk about how they just want to play for a contender. This is when money isn't nearly as important, and they just want the ring. If only they could have their attitude a bit earlier on.

1. Your right. I asked why some might say he had character issues or red flags. I then questioned the answer. But did the thread/discussion have to end w/ the answer. Is there some reason we can not discuss Oher, his character, and prospects? 2. One issue I have is, many (like myself 24 hours ago) are not aware what some might talk about when saying he has character issues. I had a discussion w/ someone the other day that said he would be a bad pick because he heart Oher was a bad guy and had all these red flags. He had no idea what the discussion about Oher was, but simply that he read he had character issues. Hell, look at my original post and why this all started. Don Banks indicates Oher is falling, and follows that up by saying teams don't have the patience for players as they did in pre-Goddell days. Does that not give you the impression of more than being to close to family? Referncing Goddess implies a player who will get into trouble. I don't think you have even indicated Oher is likely to cause trouble or get on the wrong side of the law, but that sure was an implication in Banks comments. 3. I do think you can over-analyize a prospect, and would argue many GMs and scouts say the same. If you look hard and long enough, you will find problems. No one is perfect, and thus everyone has flaws. If you continue to look hard at those flaws, they become magnified. By draft day, what really is nothing big seems huge because you have focused on it too much. That is what i mean. 4. You say there were concerns prior to the combine, but that is partially my point. I really didn't hear these concerns until more recently. The book didn't suddenly come out, so why did the "concerns" seem to? You seem to put a ton of stock in the combine. I don't. I put stock in what the player does on the field. I don't think he showed a lack of committment or dedication on the field. You say you read the book, and that makes you think he won't give 100%. I argue what he did on the field in college makes that leap in logic questionable. 5. Okay, so you read the book. In the book, does it talk about how he took off plays in college, or didn't give 100%. Everything I have read about his college career would point to the opposite. In my eyes, he worked his tail off. Not only did he work hard in football, becoming one of the nation's elite LTs, but also in the classroom as he made Dean's list his sophmore year. That just doesn't sound like a guy who lacks dedication.

Yea, I too agree you look at it. When you risk as much as a draft pick, especially in the 1st, you look and consider everything. My two things in this discussion are: 1. I have read some refer to Oher and follow up by saying he has character issues or similar red flags. While his relationship to family may be tigher than others, I just question the talk of his having character issues, or lumping him w/ such high level characterizations as to put him w/ players who truly have character issues. 2. I have had issue w/ the idea that, because he didn't do well in the bench, he doesn't have the power to play.

Why did it him reading the press clippings to make him "prove" his toughness? Through his junior season, he got the job done w/ athleticism more than pure power. Whether press clipping or whatever, he felt the need to prove he could play w/ power as well as athleticism, and from what I have read, did just that this past season. It isn't like players are instantly polished or start out as finished products. They are works in progress, and in his senior season, he took his game to another level. Sorry, but I fail to see how this is a negative. If a RB makes a huge effort to improve, for example, his pass blocking in his senior season, and appears sucessful, is that somehow a negative? Maybe you should read the book, nfo. Seems that people who have read it seem to have these concerns. One, I would bet you money many who are throwing out some of these concerns have never read his book. Two, I just don't think it matters. I have always believed there is a level of over-evaluation in the process, and have talked about it before. It kills me when you have a (for example) RB who few could catch in college, yet he doesn't run a great 40 on a track, and is then considered slow. Ditto when you have an OT that can maul his opponents, but suddenly after a less than stellar bench, he is weak. Not just Oher, but how about Monroe, who had only 2 more reps than Oher. I don't think Monroe lacks power just because he only had 23 bench reps. Alternatively, I am also hessitant to jump on the bandwagon of players who see their stock soar in the offseason due to similar. A RB that never looked special in college, yet runs a great 40, suddenly finds himself the talk of the town. Many talk about the workout warriors and how ridiculous it is when their draft stock soars because of it, but I think there is also a similar opposite effect.

I'll send you my barf bag from last season when I hurled hearing Williams was our pick it goes down! I still have my own for that.

Didn't realize I was on a soapbox. One. We have a run 1st system? Really? Seems like we pass the ball considerably more than we run it. Also, even if we did run it more, we are not a power run team, nor do we have that style of blocking. We use (despite my wishes) a drop step technique which emphasizes athleticism FAR MORE than pure strength. As much as I like maulers, they don't really fit our system/technique. Two. I never called you out specifically. I was talking FAR MORE in general. Three. So much is being made of his bench press, but I think some are assuming everyone is throwing up like 30 reps or something, but that isn't the case. Monroe, who is considered a top 5 pick, had 23. Britton, also considered a 1st round pick, only had 24. Andre Smith choose not to even participate. So of the top 5 OTs, only Jason Smith showed power, if you consider the bench a true test of power. Does that mean Britton and Monroe are also weak? And that is sort of my point. Oher sure didn't seem to lack power on the field, and particularly this past year, many said he really stepped up the power aspect of his game. But he doesn't have a good bench rep at the combine, and suddenly is isn't considered strong enough. But again, lets not pretend the other top 5 OTs (minus Jason Smith) did so much better. As for his book, no, I didn't read it. But I am still just not buying it. Crap, I remember similar questions about Derrick Rose (Chicago Bulls). He was so close w/ his family, how would he do in the NBA and after getting "paid". Yea, sure glad Chicago didn't buy too much into all that. Also not sure many feel, as you say, that he is falling into the 2nd round. A small handfull may say that, but few I have seen have him falling beyond the mid to early 20s of the 1st round.