nfoligno

Since we can't get Gross, you are saying you want and OT and OG with your first 2 picks (because there are 2 rounds on day 1), which means we won't address WR, S, QB, SLB, DE or QB with one of our top 2 picks? I'm not sure I'm on board with that. The problem here is Angelo painted himself into a corner by not adding anything last year. Now we have 2 years worth of holes to fill in one off-season, and there isn't any realistic way to do it. We need a star at safety given its importance in our system, and there isn't one available in the draft (according to the experts) or FA. We need some youth to rush the passer, but it's hard to find a primo DE outside the top half of the first round. We need a fixture at RT, and we nee to start overhauling the interior of the line, because they aren't getting any push. We have zero talent at WR. Orton is a couple bad games from being benched. How Angelo could possibly address all of that in one off-season is beyond me, particularly the way he's drafted the last couple years. No, we are not going to fill "all" holes in one season, but I would argue that addressing the OL may go the furthest toward that end. You mention QB and WR as needs. No argument there. But if we build the OL (top two picks) might that not also upgrade our outlook at QB and WR? If the OL could actually block for more than a 3 step drop, maybe that would help Orton and the receivers. Not to mention what actual holes could do for Forte, which again, also benefits our QB and WRs. So an improved OL truly has ripple effects on the offense as a whole. While I want to upgrade at many other positions too, I am not sure anything benefits as greatly as strong push for our OL. As for needs on defense, no question. But, at most positions/needs, I think we have at least some reasonable hope that improved coaching can provide improved play, where as I do not feel the same way about OL. At DL, the hope is Marinelli can improve the level of play. At CB, I think there is a combo of (a) improved health leads to improved play ( new coaching leads to improved play and © improved DL due to Marinelli, leads to improved coverage. Now personally, I am not sure any of that helps our FS situation, but I am also not sold there is a difference maker at FS day one anyway. So again, I go back to this. A combination of OT and OG w/ our first two picks simply may provide a greater overall benefit to the team that any other combination I think can be thrown out there.

No thanks. He wants to be the highest paid defensive player in the NFL, and is seeking a bonus of greater than $32m. If I could get some form of guarantee (which I can not) that he will play at the same level as this last year, I might then consider the deal, but I just don't see it. He was good two years ago, but it really wasn't until this past season his play went to the premier level, and that was coincidentally in a contract season. I predict he gets fat and happy after signing his new deal, and his new team regrets the decision.

Okay, despite some of our smaller disagreements, lets focus for a moment on where we do agree. Our OL must be resolved, whether that means over-compensating or not. I felt last year our OL was weak. It was simply bad, IMHO, in run blocking. Many felt it was improved in pass protection, but I always felt that had more to do w/ Orton than the OL. Now, I am reading that another key was the system. Per a Sun Times articles, we rarely (or never) had a 7 step drop last year. We basically ran 3 step drops, and when we tried even a 5 step drop, the OL was overwhelmed w/ pressure. So there is only more evidence how bad our OL truly is. I want to upgrade numerous positions, but none come close to OL. While I think VERY little of our receivers, I also question how much we can expect our WRs to develop when the QB can not do more than 3 step drops. We need to protect the QB, and better open holes for Forte. The only area we disagree is, I feel we need to move forward under the expectation that Williams is our LT. That doesn't mean I don't see the value of a backup plan, but simply that I feel he should be plan A. Unlike you, I simply am not sold he can play OG or RT. We agree about going after Gross, though I would put him at RT. From what I have read, while he is capable of playing LT, many feel he is best at RT. Better, but similar to Tait, in that regard. Williams and Gross as our OTs, and I think we would have our bookends. Problem is, we still lack much, even w/ Gross. We still need another OT (swing) as well as two OGs. I would love to get Gross, but do not see it happening. So I would be quite happy going after Carey and St. Clair both. Carey plays RT. St. Clair can play LG, and be our primary option at OT if one goes down. Further, even w/ these two players added, I would still look at OT AND OG in the draft. Jason and I have screamed for ridiculous OL drafting for years. Heck, last year each of us threw out there mock drafts where we basically took OL in every round, and were only slightly joking. Our OL has been ignored for far too long, and we need to really invest in that unit, both for the present and the future.

I'm also of the mind that you don't trade away the face of your franchise for short term goals. The negative effect that would have on Chicago would last for many years. I don't know about that. Its one thing when you are talking about sending away the face of your franchise when he is still in his prime, but when he appears on the decline, I am not sure the effect is the same. Seriously, take a look around the NFL. How many players, considered the face of their team, end up elsewhere? Seems like the examples are just too numerous. I still can not believe Emmitt Smith didn't finish as a Cowboy, or Eddie George as a Titan. Farve as a Packer? Hell, I have even heard Tony Gonzalez wants a trade. I think a team losing the face of the organization is just not as big as it once was. Further, I question whether Urlacher is really the face of the organization anymore. Heck, most do not even believe the is the best LB on the team anymore. I am a Sox fan. I remember a time when it was blasphamy to consider trading Frank Thomas. Then I recall when the comments began such as, "I can deal w/ Frank being gone, but not Konerko". And more recently, fans were asking, "so what will the Angels give us for Konerko?" Point is, you say face of the organization, but we are talking short term. We are not talking Mount Rushmore faces (Michael Jordan, Walter Payton, etc). They may be the most recent faces, but they are not the ones etched in stone.

This is my only issue w/ your reasoning. I think Jason and I would both be in favor of "over-compensating" at the OL position in order to get it right. Frankly, we are so far from set on the OL that we need not only starters, but depth as well. But where I disagree somewhat is the idea that any LT drafted can automatically move inside or to RT. While this is often true, I do not believe it always is. Some LTs are just too tall (for example) to play inside, and don't have the knee bend. Some have the lateral ability to play LT, but maybe not the power to move elsewhere. You and I have discussed this some already, but the fact that we drafted Williams last year is my hangup. You say he has added power and bulked up, but I have to sort of question that. While he spent a lot of time working out, what was the starting point coming off injury? I wonder how much strength he really added. I made the comparison before, but to me, Williams seems very much like Blake Brockemeyer. He is a finesse OT who can use quickness and agility to seal the outside, and try to open holes. If he can single block a DE like Freeney, he earns his pay, but he will likely never be an great run blocker, and may have more trouble w/ power rushers than speed rushers. If you move him inside, how well does his game translate? I am just not sure, but I read enough questioning this last year. Heading into this draft, I am all for drafting OL in the 1st, even if we were to sign Gross. But rather than plan on a competition, what I think I would be looking to do is drafting an OL who (a) I believe could be a great OG and ( who potentially could play LT. If we found that player, we could start him out inside, and if Williams doesn't workout, we have a backup plan. Hell, I would even still sign St. Clair. Think about this OL for just a moment. Williams - St. Clair - Kreutz - Otah - Gross. I like that. This thread is quite stupid to be perfectly honest. I agree with you and I started it. I think it's completely idiotic that this is the 3rd year in a row for this conversation. Not nearly enough attention has been paid to OL by Angelo and now someone is going to pay whether it be him or Orton or us fans.. Chris Williams is going to be given every chance to succeed at LT. Agreed he should, but what is the contengency plan if he fails? Do you trust St. Clair? It would be beyond insanely idiotic to draft yet another LT in back to back years, AND sign Jordan Gross. My original post what intended to overcompensate to get these positions right. Once that occurs, you can usually move the left-over to OG if you've aquired a versitile enough player. Odds are that someone is not going to pan out.

If they tag and trade Peppers, they will no longer be on the hook for any of the money. Essentially, they would instantly free up $17m in cap space. But that isn't the point. The point is, how do they get there? Trades take time, and I think it is less than likely they workout a trade before FA. As they only have one tag, that means they have to re-sign Gross prior to the start of FA. They have about $10m in cap space, so that is possible. But that will wipe out the majorty of their cap space. Now, they have to find a ton more money to tag Peppers. Is it doable? Maybe. But finding $10-15m in cap space is not as easy as you think. You can restructure (creating cap problems in the future) some, but you will also likely need to cut players, and likely some you don't want to cut. Now think about this also. You are cutting players in order to free up cap space for a player you have no intention of keeping. Hey, the Redskins have proven anything is possible when it comes to the cap. My point though is, the circumstances may not be there for Carolina to do everything they want. Obviously they do not want to lose either Peppers or Gross, much less w/o compensation, but they may not be in a salary cap position to have a choice in the matter.

Loyalty? What's that? Seriously. You can show loyalty, but at the same time, it is a business. Just for the record, how do you know Urlacher would not welcome the move? As the article says, Urlacher has never liked Lovie's system, and a chance of scenery/system could once again return him to a higher level of play. If he is not going to get that in Chicago, why not. Look, I know this move is not going to happen, but I am not really sure why you would be against it. Are you that dead set against our doing anything to upgrade at the WR position? If the rumor were Urlacher for Gross, would you be talking about loyalty?

You can say that of any player, but come on. He has played OT pretty much his entire career. He had a couple games playing inside due to injury need, but otherwise has been an OT all his career. You can say it is just about money, but I think its as simple as OT being the position he is comfortable w/. Does that mean he wouldn't consider OG? Not saying that. But what could be interesting to see is whether he would prefer to play OT for another team, or OG for ours.

Dude, you are a broken record. All you ever say is how Peppers will be tagged and traded, and Gross will re-sign w/ Carolina. What you never seem to answer is how they will do this. They have $10m in cap space, and just to tag Peppers, they need a total of $17m. That's $7m they have to free up just to tag Peppers. That doesn't even touch re-signing Gross. So how do they work this out?

I remember you being an advocate for him last year and agree in hindsight. Technically, I was an advocate of just about every OT that went in the 1st EXCEPT Williams, who I was not a fan of. All I can say is, I hope I was 100% WRONG! Disagree with that point. I feel he could slide to LG with relative ease. Based on what? Just asking. Per all the reports I read, he is a finesse OT. He is considered an OT that has good quickness and can block the speed DEs to the outside. What he lacks is power, and that was seen (per the reports) in his run blocking, which was considered average. He is more of a lateral guy that power burst guy. If you take him out of the LT spot, you essentially take away the reason he was drafted. You do not need great lateral quickness at OG. Just not sure someone who lacks the power and run blocking would work moving inside. Again, I feel he could move to LG easily and possibly RT. Again, this is based on what? All the reports I read very much questioned his ability to play OG or RT. Agreed, with a twist. The twist is that, cough cough, if the coaches see outside the box a way for it to work. We could have both insurance and flexibility. Hey, I love drafting tons of OL. My only point is, if we were to add Gross AND draft an OL, it would have to be an OG. Now, we can draft an OT to play OG (happens often enough) but I do not think we can have a competition at LT between the rookie and Williams. We simply have to assume Williams can man the LT spot, and need to concentrate on providing him better LG support. I still love the idea, especially if Williams is a wasted pick. Again, we are totally vulnerable at both tackle spots due to un-knowns. IMHO, we are pretty vulnerable at OG as well. I understand what you are saying, but why not instead add Gross (we agree about that) and then draft a player w/ the intention of his playing OG. I am going to stick with my original post. Gross is a stud at both sides, providing valuable insurance. As a matter of fact, I pencil him in at LT for next season. Move Williams to LG. Groom Beekman to take over for Olin in 2010. St. Clair to RG. And Oher at RT. The reasoning to add Oher to the mix is 1) he's too good of a talent to pass up, 2) Between he and Williams, the odds are one will not grade out. So you move the loser to OG for a career path. I understand, and frankly, I am not saying we should not (a) sign Gross and ( draft Oher. But, if we were to draft Oher, I think it would depend on whether Oher was seen as capable of moving inside. I think you are simply assuming any player drafted to play LT can move to other locations on the OL. Often, that is a good assumption, but I am not sure if it plays out here. If you are basing your opinion of Williams moving inside, or to RT, on something, please throw it out there. But when reports question his (a) power and ( run blocking, that does not often translate to OG or RT. Hey, few on this board more than I (and Jason) have screamed for our building up our OL. I want to add starters, as well as depth. At the same time, when you add certain players, I think you really need to give that guy a chance before you simply write him off. We need to move forward w/ the assumption Williams can play LT. Now, I have NO problem drafting a player who can play both inside and potentially LT. If Oher is viewed as a player who might be able to play OG, that would be fine by me. That would (a) give us a great OL, ( if Williams doesn't workout, give us a solid potential player to move outside. The only area i disagree w/ is the idea of having Oher compete w/ Williams. If Williams is not playing LT, I think we would find him a massive bust. Not just due to not playing LT, but because I just don't think he would be more than a spare player at OG.

Nor am I. That was my whole point. While Williams is no sure thing, I think we have no choice but to move forward and assume he is our LT. We can add depth, but we need to move forward w/ him in our plans at LT. My only point was that Williams was not considered as being likely to play other positions on the OL. Many rookie LTs may not make it right out of college, but many LTs are able to move inside or to RT. Williams is more of a finesse OT, and was not considered to have the power to move insdie to OG or play RT. I am NOT writing him off by any means. I am only pointing out we have little choice but to assume he is our LT moving forward.

I thought he looked good in a relative manner. We were used to seeing such AWFUL play that mediocre play looked fantastic. I would compare his play that year to Beekman this year. Not bad, but not that good either. As for whether he would accept the role, I think that may depend on FA. Do you think he would accept an extension to play OG w/o first feeling the waters in FA to see if anyone else wants him to play OT? He has said he has spent most of his career playing OT, and wants to continue there. So maybe it is a question of what is more important to him. Being a Chicago Bear or playing OT.

I would MUCH rather the problem of too many potential starters, rather than what we dealt w/ this past year choosing the best of a weak bunch. The thing w/ Holt is, he is not a long term solution (which means young WRs like Bennett and a new rookie) would not be destroyed for the future) and he is not going to be a ton of money, as players like Boldin, TJ, etc would. Honestly, I know it is all about the OL for you, but I do not see why you can not upgrade other areas. We drafted Bennett last year, and while I am NOT going to write him off, why should we at the same time not have backup plans in the works. Do you trust Angelo's drafting of WRs so much that you expect everyone to become starters, and quickly? Yea, Hester and Holt are the likely starters. Davis should not even be a factor. In a group w/ talent, Davis goes back to where he belongs (special teams). That means you have a slot opening, and a 4th WR role for the rookie. #3 and #4 WRs can get plenty of playing time, so there is no reason to say we are giving up on either.

Can I pick none of the above. Reed and Balogh don't make it above PS. Metcalf could be gone. St. Clair may not be in the plans for OG. He wants to play OT. I know some here are high on Buenning, but from what I have read, the staff has not cared for what they have seen, and he too may not be a big part of the plans. That leaves Beekman and Garza again. The only way I see a change is w/ an addition not on this list.

And just curious, how do they manage this under the cap? They need to free up around $7m just to tag Peppers. Doable, but it would mean numerous cuts. Are they going to start cutting players just to tag and trade Peppers? While I think it is possible they tag Peppers, I have a harder time seeing how they both tag peppers AND resign Gross.

I don't know. I like him too, but everything I have read indicates he will be considerably more valuable in FA. Most lists I have seen have him as a top 3 OT, and I think he will see a very nice payday.

Not sure Gross will get as much as you think, but I do agree there are several quality RTs on the market this year. This is something I have been saying for a while. So many are talking about St. Clair for RT, but I think that would be a wasted opportunity, as I think we could simply do better. I agree about re-signing st. Clair though, so long as we are not looking at him to be our RT. Williams is still a question mark, and we are still weak at OG. The only potential problem is, St. Clair has said he wants to play OT, so I think he would first see what other teams may offer him, in terms of OT, before settling w/ us to play OG.

Man, this is one reason I liked Albert last year. I do not think Williams can really play anywhere but LT. He doesn't have the powere to play inside or RT. He was pretty much the most boom/bust OT in the draft (IMHO) as most of the rest were viewed as capable of other positions on the OL, whereas Williams was stictly a LT. That is the only problem w/ the idea of 3 stud OTs. I love the idea, but hate the idea of a wasted pick in Williams. If we get Gross, I am all for going OL in the draft, but feel we need to focus on OG, where we also are very weak, and thin.

Bears have a knack of doing this, but I am not sure this time. If he were to simply be cut, he would still likely have value on the market, and find another team to sign him. But now, he has gone public about injuries and lower level of play, and that he was thinking retirement for a couple years. That would do little to help his market, so I think Tait (if he were not serious about retirement) would rather have simply been cut. I agree 100% that his retirement gives us a great opportunity. My fear is still that we are going to simply look to re-sign St. Clair. While I like St. Clair, I just feel like he should be plan B (or C) and not the player we target for RT. Agreed about Gross, but even after him, there are a few other OTs I would prefer over St. Clair.

I don't want to make too much of it at this time. While we may not now be offering him a new deal (a) we could have our sights set on a better FS, like the one from Stl, or ( could want to see what sort of market he has. If we are unable to add a FS in FA, and Brown is getting little to no interest, we may yet look to re-sign him.

Incorrect to say he was cut. Not to nit-pic, but his contract was up, and he is simply not being offered a new deal.

I was a Benson apologist, and still believe he can do well in the NFL, and even I am saying no way. Many talk about the OL holding him back, and I agree, but I believe there is an even greater aspect. From the day Benson entered the locker room, he felt like public enemy #1. He was a holdout, and we drafted to replace a guy VERY popular w/ the rest of the team (TJ). He talked from the get go about how players were trying to hurt him in practice. Anyway, regardless of how true or false that was, it was what he believed. Some players take that chip on their shoulder and just play better. Benson obviously doesn't have the mental makeup to deal w/ things that way. He went into a shell, and that only made his feeling isolated worse. He has since gone to a new team, and according to Housyourmama, he is a great team guy. Works hard, practices hard, gets along w/ everyone. He needed a clean break from our team and players, and a fresh start. As most of the players he felt were "against him" are still here, there is just no way he would return to the bears (if the bears were to even want him). I think Benson can do very well in this league, but I do not believe that could ever happen here.

He actually looked pretty good last year w/ Cincy. I think it is a legit point. He is going to be looking for more than a compliment role, and w/ the way he performed at the end of the season, I think he could get it, especially w/ the weak RB FA class. Think about the path TJ took. He was a bust in Az, and was signed by TB. He didn't have a good start there either, but toward the end of the season, he started to look very good, and was given a chance (by us) to be the feature back, and took off w/ it. While my overall expectations for Benson were lowered (from the draft) I always felt that he could have been much better than what we saw. He felt the enemy from day one in our locker-room, and obviously doesn't have the mental makeup to deal w/ that. Thus, a fresh start was needed for him. Now that he has that, I wonder if he can't in fact become a legit 1,200 rusher.

My cocern now is that we re-sign St. Clair w/ the belief that our OT position would then be set. Sure, they might look for some depth, but would look for that in the mid 2nd day area of the draft. I don't know. I like St. Clair, but I liked the idea of signing him to compete at OG, while also providing depth at OT. IMHO, if we sign him to be our starting RT, I think we will have wasted an opportunity. I think this gives us a great excuse to go after a FA like Gross, or draft one early. But again, my fear is we will see St. Clair as more than bandaid/depth.

Those were not his "exact" words, but basically what he has said. He said he was not going to give his team a hometown discount. He has said that he has been looking forward to FA to get was he has earned. He has made several other comments, all pointing to money. He has also said he wants to be the highest paid defensive player in the NFL, which means he is looking for a deal that tops Freeney. If he knew you were going to get the Haynsworth of 2008, I think numerous teams would give him that deal. But there lies the rub. He has always had weight issues, and only this year, a contract year, did he seem to put all the work ethic and character issues behind him. What happens when he signs and gets paid. Personally, I think he goes back to being fat and lazy. W/ that said, I can see Detroit being desperate enough to give him what he wants and taking the chance.