nfoligno

1. It was pretty long ago. The key for me is, it was a totally different team. Different GM. Different coaches. Different QBs, system and players. I have never been big on using history to say this or that won't work for the team today. 2. While he was a high pick, he was also viewed as a high boom/bust potential player due to numerous red flags. 3. What did he do after his time w/ the bears. Memory may fail me, but I think he went to a pair of solid systems in Denver and NE, and failed at both. If he did well after the bears, I think it would better fit the argument that WRs come to Chicago to die, but as he was a bust after the bears, I think it more points to his simply not being an NFL caliber player. The point is still the same. Under Angelo/Lovie, when have we prioritized the WR position? It seems like we add a bunch of lesser players, and expect them to play at elite levels. While Berrian may not have ever become the elite WR many wanted, at the same time, I think he did develop on a level that shows a WR can get it done in Chicago.

I do have to wonder if there's a certain amount of misdirection involved. Angelo's philosphy has always been that it's much easier to sign an offensive tackle then draft one. So now we're expected to believe he'll draft one in consecutive years? Especially while our DE position is a mess. There is always plenty of misdirection this time of year, but I wonder if we are not simply more seeing a change if philosophy. In years past, while the LT may have cost a premium in FA, you could fairly easily find RTs and OGs, and not spend a ton in doing so. But over the last number of years, RTs are starting to be paid on levels once considered only for LTs, and frankly, top end OGs are making sick money as well. Angelo talked about this some last year. He said he always preferred signing veteran OL, but that it was becoming so expensive to get those veteran OL, the draft was more and more becoming the way to go. After he said that, many felt it was spin leading up to the draft, but then on draft day we took Williams, indicating that he may have actually had a bit of a shift in philosophy.

Is the idea of Oher over Sanchez so easy for you. I know full well your opinion of OL, and know you would so love the opportunity to draft Oher, but you are FAR from sold on Orton and I thought you actually felt our finding a franchise QB was a high priority. Is it that you (a) just do not view Sanchez as a franchise QB or ( you simply do not believe there is a point in going after a franchise QB before you build your OL?

Sort of funny to me how some feel the need to call a post "idiotic" as they only look the same in doing so. If it was an absolute Sanchez was a franchise QB, yea I thik most would take the franchise QB over the franchise OT, but the only aboluste it there is none. Many are very unsure about Sanchez.

From what I read, he signed the richest OT contract ever. The deal Jake Long signed last year was greater, but that is a bit different as Long was a #1 draft pick, and our stupid A system allows a top rookie to sign a deal greater than the most proven veterans. Anyway, the point is, Gross signed the richest FA OT contract ever, so it is more than just a great deal, it is a record setter. Could he have hit FA and potentially gotten more. I would agree that would be very possible. But he has said all along he wanted to stay in Carolina. That is the team that drafted him. It is the city where his family lives and has laid down roots. Not every player in the league looks to bleed every penny out of a team. Most players, IMHO, do factor things other than just money. Now, if Carolina didn't step up w/ a deal as large as they did, those factors may mean less, but the combo of his wanting to remain a Panther and Carolina making him the top paid veteran OT was enough to get the deal done. Players may have the rep (thanks to agents like Rosenarce) for caring about nothing but money, but I think many (if not most) do factor more than just money. How many players have we ourselves been able to re-sign, who may have hit FA and gotten a few more dollars?

Moose went from Great to bad Yes, Moose went from great to bad, but at the same time, was he ever consistently great? That is the thing that always pissed me off w/ Moose, and what pisses me off now with all the comparisons. Moose was inconsistent through his career. He would have a big year, followed by a couple very mediocre ones. We signed him off a career year, and he flopped, but I always questioned the expectations. Booker went from good to terrible Not goint to argue the terrible, but good? He had like 500 yards, one score, and one of his worst ypc averages the year prior to our signing him. How was he good. Booker was considered washed up when we signed him, and we simply took a cheap chance he had something left. He didn't. But lets not pretend he was good prior to coming to Chicago. How good could Bernard Berrian be with Indianappolis? The poor guy is rich but he's doomed to play on crappy offenses with really bad quarterbacks. No argument. Any decent WR is going to look better in a situation like Indy. At the same time, that does not mean a player from that system can not be good elsewhere. To answer your question, if we'd had Boldin & Fitz had been drafted by Chicago, they'd probably be the eqiuvalent of David Terrell & Mark Bradley right now. Yes, I'm being over-dramatic, but to answer your question, Harrison would be as useless as Booker in Chicago. Yea, I would say that is over-dramatic. Berrian had nearly 1,000 yards for us, and is no where remotely close to the talent of Fitz or Boldin. IMHO, I would look at Berrian as an example why it is not impossible for a WR to do well in Chicago. He may not have ever become the great #1 we wanted, but (a) he did develop fairly well for a 3rd round pick and ( I think few ever would have thought of him as some elite, top tier talent. If Berrian could have 1,000 yards for us, I think Boldin or Fitz could produce significantly more. But when we have ever brought in talent like Fitz or Boldin? We cry about losing Gage, Berrian or even Wade, but why do we believe we can add these later round picks and get the same results as WRs who were considered tops in their draft? Back to Harrison. I don't think anyone believes Harrison would come in and return to his glory days. Ditto w/ Holt. But the question (I don't think) is whether they could be great again, but simply whether they could improve our situation. I have a hard time understanding the logic of how they would not upgrade our WR corp, and improve our passing game. You really think we are better off w/ Davis going across the middle, rather than Harrison or Holt?

I think the issue is far more AP than Wolfe. I believe few here really have a problem w/ (a) Wolfe getting more carries/touches or ( Wolfe getting a shot at the role as a compliment player. The problem I think is many want a more everydown RB to backup Forte, and few believe Wofle can provide this. You said yourself we should not expect much from him running inside, but if Forte goes down, is that not something we will need? So I think that is the problem. We have 3 RBs right now. We have a damn good starter in Forte. We have in Wolfe good potential change of pace/ 3rd down style RB. In AP, we have a RB who, IMHO, is best as a special teams player. If Forte goes down, we will have to rely too heavily on AP. But there is the problem. Few, I think, believe AP is going anywhere. Yet we need a better everydown backup behind Forte. Thus, if AP is going nowhere, and Wolfe is not an everydown RB, we are faced the little choice but to add a RB. I said this last year too. I would love to see Wolfe more involved. For me, wanting another RB has nothing to do w/ Wolfe, but is because I do not like the idea of AP being our main RB if Forte goes down.

All I ever did was ask how it would be possible. I asked you this many times and I do not recall you ever giving an answer. I had not considered that teams do not have to be under the cap for another week or so. If you had provided that answer, which I asked for many times, I would have absolutely backed off the statement, but that answer was never provided. Now, what i think will be interesting is what happens now. Per Lt2, and others, teams have to be under the cap once FA begins. That gives Carolina one week to make a deal. Will they now just take the best offer available to them? I think it will be intersting to see what happens if they do not get any great offers for Peppers in the next week, and what they do then. Do they start cutting a bunch of players in order to keep the tag on him, or would they be forced to remove the tag.

Why are guys like Gross willing to resign early when it appears to be a seller's market? For a player like Gross, I think the answer may simply be he wanted to stay w/ Carolina. Sure, money is always a factor w/ FAs, but at the same time, if the team that drafted them and the team they have always been w/ offers a deal which is considered not only fair, but pays him like the top player at his position, I think it understandable he passes on FA. If Carolina didn't make an offer as great as it did, money may then trump loyalty and roots, but w/ the offer made, he was able to become one of the top paid OTs, while also staying w/ the team he said all along he wanted to remain w/. For different reasons, you have the CB from Oakland. I think the reason he signed was less wanting to stick w/ Oakland, and more about his wanting the big contract rather than dealing w/ the tag, which he knew was coming if he didn't sign.

While cb's make more money, I'm not sure they hold the same value in the cover 2. I remember the year the Colts won the Super Bowl, they'd let both their safeties walk via free agency. They started two nobodies, and really didn't miss much. Meanwhile Bob Sanders was one of the best defensive players in football. Now that Peanut has gotten paid, we need to play him where he'll help the most. Period. I would agree the value of a cover two corner is less than the value of a corner in a more regular 4-3 which utilizes more man coverage. In fact, that is exactly the argument I have had of late in another thread. I also agree the value of a safety in the cover two is closer to the CB, where as in most 4-3 systems, I think the value of the CB is significantly greater. At the same time, I would still maintain the value of the CB is greater. For one thing, I think we are talking market value more than simply value to the team. Whether we are talking about a cover two corner or a man coverage corner, I would still maintain the cost of a CB is greater than the cost of a safety. For another thing, I go back to this. As we have said, you see a corner move to FS. How often do you see a FS move to CB? Not often. That is simply because safety is considered the lesser of the two positions in terms of skill. A CB that doesn't have the skill to play corner in the NFL moves to FS. Isn't this partly because all the best defensive backs in college play cornerback? First, what's your point. The point is still the same in that better athletes, whether NFL or college, play CB and not Safety. If safety were such an important position, I think we would see greater numbers at that position. On the other side, how many top free safeties are there in college? My guess is that JA would have rather had a FS over Steltz or Payne, but none were worth a damn that weren't drafted in the first round. As for our safeties being interchangeable, I have to think that's what we'd like to do, but it's not realistic. Payne/Steltz are too slow, while Manning's not a great run-stopper. One, I think there have been plenty of FS' available through the years, but I simply do not believe it is a position Angelo has EVER prioritized. Frankly, I feel the same way about SS. Think about when Angelo first got here. We had a very good SS in Parrish, but Angelo didn't want to pay him and let him walk. Okay, FA causes that to happen. But since Parrish, we have basically used nothing but late 2nd day picks to try and replace him. At FS, I see little difference, w/ DM being the only exception. You can not tell me there were never any FS prospects in any of the drafts, and that is why we waited until the late 2nd day of the draft. No, I think Safety is similar to OL in that it is simply an area Angelo has never prioritized. Two, as far as our safety positions being interchangable, this is an old pet peeve of mine, and this is how I have always reasoned it. If you write down on a piece of paper what you want for each position (the ideal player) the FS and SS likely are interchangable, but the reality is, very rarely do you find that ideal player. I think Mike Brown would have been close. He didn't have pure speed, but was very good in coverage, smart, playmaking and solid vs the run. The problem is, Brown is far more the exception rather than the rule. We have brought in SS and SS hoping they could develop coverage skills, but in the end, all proved they were in the box safeties who just were incapable of playing centerfield. The question is, have they learned? I personally doubt it as we drafted Steltz last year, and I think he was drafted w/ FS in mind, even though EVERY scout projected him to be a SS. Maybe not as good as Tillman, but finding a credible safety in free agency at this point seems damn near impossible. More importantly, I feel like we could draft a cornerback in the 2nd or 3rd round, and he could be an effective starter fairly quickly. I can't say that about any safety. I don't know. There seems to be several FS' expected to go in the 2nd round who look pretty good. Also, while the top veteran FS was tagged, that doesn't mean there is nothing available. For example, Jermaine Phillips. He has been playing SS, but has played FS and I think many feel he still can. Coming from TB, he is also familiar w/ our system. Will Allen, also w/ TB, is another I would look at. In Allen, you have a former CB who was moved to FS. I don't think he was a starter this past year, but that was more due to TB having two solid players in front of him. Eugene Wilson is a S I have also kind of liked, and we now have his DB coach. Dawan Landry (Bal) is a RFA, but I am curious what level they sign him. He is a SS, but (a) much better than what we have and ( w/ him at SS, I would feel better about whoever we have at FS. There are a few others too, but the point is, I personally do not think the options at S are quite as limited as some believe. Yes there would be an expected learning curve, but once again, if he could solidify the position for us it'd be worth it. As for finding a FS, who do you want now that Atogwe is gone? See above. My top choice right now would likely be Phillips, who I believe can play FS and would be a easy fit for our system. He would also add a veteran presence to the position, and leadership.

Two comments. One. I am not sure the Little example flies as much anymore. That happened some years ago, and prior to what seems like a newer feeling toward off-field problems. If Little ran into that problem today, I am not sure he would so easily find a home in the NFL. Two. I am NOT excusing what he did, but as ignorant as it was to get behind the wheel, what he did was an accident. I realize his driving was no accident, and I know the law and his killing someone is legally considered more than an accident. But the violent crime itself was never intentional. I think we all know he did not get behind the wheel the the intention of harming someone. Vick's crimes were willful and intional. I think you are wrong that his crimes will not sway a signle team. I think very few teams will look at signing him. Regardless how you or I feel, signing Vick is likely going to begin a firestorm of bad PR. Animal Rights Organizations can be very loud, and I think few owners want picket lines and the sort of negative PR these groups can bring. Some owners will say screw it, but I think that number will be the minority.

One. What do you mean by, "through other people". As I recall, Vick was far more than some high level sponsor of the event. Vick himself was the one who (for example) body slammed a dog to kill it because it didn't win. Two. Exactly what are you talking about w/ PacMan. I honestly do not know. I know he did a lot of bad/stupid stuff at strip clubs, fights and such, but you indicate something potentially far worse. Just curious what. Getting away from PacMan, and trying to continue w/ the point I think you may be trying to make, how about Ray Caruth as an example. As I recall, he paid to have his pregnant girlfriend shot, and went to jail for it. If he got out of jail, I would not want him either. I have avoided a couple posts on this subject, because I am not looking to make a huge political discussion out of it. I have said myself that I, myself, could easily spray holes into my own argument. For me, it is simply a personal matter. Maybe I got caught up into the whole thing. Whatever. But what Vick did disgusts me, and I frankly don't think he even today believes what he did was wrong. I believe he thinks he screwed up because he was caught, but I don't think he actually believes what he did was wrong. To me, he is a disgusting excuse for a human being, and one I want nothing to do w/. Just my opinion and how I feel.

Just saw where Peppers was tagged. What I would love to see explained is, how this was done w/in the cap. All reports previously had Carolina w/ $10m in cap space, and yet they somehow signed Gross to a massive deal AND tagged Peppers, which will count a bit under $17m against the cap. I have no idea how they were able to do this. The only thing I can think of is, maybe this is a time of the year teams are allowed to be over the cap, which I suppose would allow them to get this done. If that is in fact the case, it only further points to Carolina trading Peppers, as at some point, they would have to be under the cap, and would likely have to make massive moves to get under.

I am fine giving Wolfe more touches. What bothers me is, if Forte goes down, I do not like our backup situation. While I would like to give Wolfe more touches, I do NOT view him as being capable of stepping up if Forte goes down, and I think AP needs to stick to special teams. AP is very popular, but IMHO, he also really limits our roster.

To be honest, I am not sure I would even call it a stance so much, as w/ Vick I see a "special situation". I have seen plenty of Bears in trouble for numerous crimes, whether it be DWI, gun related or whatever, but I live in a very pro-animal house, and to support Vick, or an organization that supports him, but go against too much of what my house believes. To answer your question, if Vick were to play baseball, and the Sox signed him, I guess I would not be watching Sox games for a while either. Again, I can easily shoot holes in my own argument for hypocracy. It wouldn't be hard. But in terms of Vick, that is simply how I feel. It makes me sick, but I am sure there will be a team that gives him a chance. I can only pray it will not be my team.

But I think the key here is, there is not enough evidence to show that he actually did anything wrong. In fact, per other posters, the man who made the allegations may be brought up on charges for making false statements. I know Goodell has come down w/ a steel fist, but I don't think he can punish players who have not done anything (proven) wrong. Its one thing when you are talking about the PacMan Jones' of the league, who have a history or problems, but Harrison has a clean record. Anything is possible, but w/o the DA bringing charges, I just do not see how Harrison can be punished.

I was in agreement until you finished by saying their run blocking wasn't their primary problem. I think most felt their run blocking was the worst issue, while the pass protection was a touch better than expected, though I have always argued that was more Orton than the OL. But I think our run blocking was flat out awful. Most of Forte's bigger runs came after him bouncing to the outside when the expected hole was in fact a wall. Hell, just look how bad we did on 3rd and short or 4th and short. Not only did our OL fail to open holes. No only did our OL fail to get a push. Our OL was actually pushed backward, and our RBs were often hit behind the LOS. As bad as I personally feel our OL did vs. the pass, I think they were even worse against the run.

As much as I hate Pacman, I would not boycott the team, but I have said before that if we signed Vick, I would. No, it doesn't mean I would become a fan of GB, Minny, Dallas or anyone else. But I would not watch the bears, nor raise my children to support a team that supports an individual like Michael Vick. My personal feelings.

What issue? If the DA is not pressing charges, then there is really nothing for Goodell to do.

I would be far more comfortable w/ Payne (or Steltz) as our SS next year if we had a better FS. The idea of both safety positions being a question mark is what scares the hell out of me.

I would be all over this. No question Harrison is not the player he once was, but if he were, we would not have a shot at him. I think he, or Holt, would bring a lot to the table. Also, I think either would prove quality leaders for a group of WRs lacking in that area.

Kind of figured you would be in favor of the logic. Not sure about your mock right now though. While I think Duke will improve his position after workouts, his stock is really down right now, and would be a major reach w/ our 1st pick. He is not even among the top 10 OL in most any list I have seen, and several other interior OL have moved ahead of him. I would still LOVE to add him, but at this point, I question the value w/ our 1st pick. You also mention Loadholt, but do you think he can play OT in the NFL. Many are projecting him as an OG, as most question whether he has the foot speed to play on the outside. I think we are on the same page (going heavy OL) but I am not sure your mock matches up w/ value at this point. Right now, I am wondering if Duke might not fall to us in the 2nd. Can you imagine (though not likely) a draft where we walk away w/ both Oher and Duke? Now that would be a draft to get excited about. The only individuals I think who would be more excited than you and I are Forte and Orton.

A better question to ask is if we think Peanut can be a very good safety (and everything seems to indicate that he would be) why wouldn't we move him? Because the value of a CB is significantly greater than the value of a S. Just watch FA this year and look at the contracts the CBs will sign, compared to the Safeties. Very average CBs seem to get sizable deals. I remember when Brian Williams, a nice but not that good, CB signed w/ Jax for $30+m and better than $10m SB. You often see CBs move to FS, but RARELY do you see this done w/ a CB that is considered a very good CB. A college CB that doesn't have what it takes to play CB in the NFL may move to FS. Or a CB who is well past his prime, and can no longer get it done at corner might move to FS. But what CBs can you think of who moved to FS when they were still considered strong corners. None I can think of. The one thing I do know is that it's one helluva a lot easier for the Bears to find a cornerback then it is a free safety. I would ask, how much have we tried to find a FS? The only player I can think of who Angelo drafted to play FS is DM, which obviously didn't work out, but in 7 years, that is the only time I can recall Angelo drafting a player who ANYONE considered a FS. He drafted other safeties, but everyone of them were in the box safeties, and thus I would argue SS. Bobby Gray, Todd Johnson, Chris Harris, Payne, Steltz. Everyone of these players were projected as SS'. So is the problem we can not find a FS, or we have not spent the picks/time trying. IMHO, the greatest problem is with the idea that our safety positions are inter-changable, which is BS. There's already a lot of cb's on the market, and seemingly the only safety of real value who's available is Atogwe Not totally sure I agree w/ this either. There may be a lot of CBs on the market, but how many of them are really any good. The market just got a boost of CBs due to cuts, but are they really any good? There are some players out there like the kid from Oakland, or Houston, but both are expected to be tagged (we'll find out soon enough on them). There are a lot of names on the market at CB, but most are on the market because they didn't play well. How many CBs are on the market who are as good as Tillman? My final point is this. Many believe Tillman can play FS, and maybe he can, but I think there would have to be an expected learning curve. That would be fine if we had more stability in the rest of our secondary, but think about how our secondary would look. On one side, we would have a still young and developing Graham. On the other side, either Vasher (who has been struggling) or a new face. At FS, you would have Tillman, but Payne or Steltz at SS, neither of which have been very impressive. So the point is, you would be sacrificing any level of continuity, and I think the secondary as a whole would suffer for it. I think we are in a much better position if we keep Tillman and Graham as our starters, and simply look to upgrade the FS position, whether that be in FA or the draft. To me, the key is for us to actually look to add a FS, and not a SS to play FS.

I understand the argument, but.... (a) If we had a more stable situation at FS, I might be more inclined to go w/ a developmental player at SS. But instability at both FS and SS positions is a bit much, even in the name of player development. I think you can afford to work on developing at player at one, but not both. ( You mention Payne has only played 16 games. Hey, I would throw out there Steltz has even less, but also seems to be nearly written off. But I think, more than just throwing out the number of games played, the trick is to look at the player development. Does the player seem to be learning, developing and progressing? Or does the player just look lost, or like they are not going to reach much higher? In both Payne and Steltz, you have a pair of mid 2nd day picks who I don't think ever had super high ceilings. I think some fans around here began to put lofty expectations on them, but never understood why. That doesn't mean I am ready to give up on either, but at the same time, I am not sure either are such prospects that you sacrifice the team for their development. © I don't know what our D will look like next year, nor our chances of the SB, but I have never cared for the attitude that we don't need to retain a veteran because we are not in the running. Too many times a team (including us) was expected to be average or just plain bad, but turned out to be solid or better. In 2001, Angelo began jumping veterans to begin a rebuilding year, but the players had something to say about that as they went on to win 13. While most would agree we didn't do well enough, how many would have predicted 9 wins for us this year? We were the favorites to go to the SB the year we did? Point is, you just never know how well you are going to do, so I think you need to put the best team on the field you can. (d) For the record, understand. I am not saying Brown should already have been re-signed. I just would rather we kept his name on the list, which may in fact be the case. I think few would question we are not set at S. If we go into next season w/ DM at FS and Payne/Stelz at SS, I think we are screwed. If we can not improve otherwise, I think Brown very much would benefit the team, and at that point, I could care less about Payne or Steltz development. They can work on their game in nickel, dime and other packages.

Agreed. This is one of those mini-evalutions in football over the years. Once, it was true that your RT was a slower foot, but bigger and stronger big guy. But then you started to see more and more LDEs who were more than run stuffers. Peppers, Strahan and many other great DEs were playing front the left side, which began to place a greater priority on the RT position. The LT is still considered on a higher level, but IMHO, that is due more to protecting the QBs blind side than simply based on the level of talent the two OTs expect to block.