nfoligno

Post has been corrected. Late night

To me, this off-season should be all about TJ Housyourmama. I know the age is not perfect. I know he will be expensive. But he just seems to me the EXACT type of WR we need. Look at Cincy this year. They rotated QBs as if they were the bears. Their current QB is simply not good, and has a weak arm. Cincy has an awful OL, possibly worse than ours. They run game situation was so bad, they signed and started Benson. But w/ all this adversity on the offense, TJ has still producted. He has provided the QBs a reliable option. He gets clean separation off the LOS, is where he is supposed to be when the ball is thrown, and HE CATCHES THE FREAKING BALL! On this awful offense, he has 92 catchs for 904 yards. Down from the norm, but huge considering all factors. IMHO, more than anything, we need to add just such a reliable WR for Orton (or whoever). W/ a WR like TJ on one side, I think players like Hester, Bennett, or whoever, will have a much better chance to develop. Further, a WR like TJ can open things up for Olsen and Clark. I don't mean to think so narrow and see TJ as boom or bust, but when I look at our options, I do not see any that are even close. Boldin, CJ, TO or whoever else mentioned, will cost us draft picks, including (at minimum) our first round pick. That is too rich w/ other holes to fill. Some have talked about Harrison or Holt being cut, but I think they have slowed too much due to age, and speed was too much a part of their game. There are some "nice" FAs w/ potential, but none others who offer the benefits TJ does, IMHO. And finally, there is the draft, but while I do want to draft a WR high, I want that done in combination w/ TJ.

Hey, I have NO problem w/ the idea of blaming Angelo, but I also think we do have to be looking at Lovie. You mention a lot of players we had on this team, but many of them have done better since leaving. Might not part of that be due to their getting better coaching after leaving the bears? You point to Angelo for cutting Moose, Bradley and Gage loose (for example) but why should a GM keep players who are unproductive? Should the question not really be, why were they not productive for us, but productive elsewhere? I have always been on the "fire Angelo" bandwagon, but over the years, there is a greater and greater part of me which wonders whether the problem is in our inability to add talent (thus the GM), or in our inability to develop the talent which is added (thus the coaches). Likely it is both, but more and more, I do believe development of players is a huge issue.

One, I am not sure he will be available. Cincy is likely to lose TJ, who is an UFA. If they let CJ go too, they will have nothing for Palmer when he returned. Two, they turned down two #1 picks from Wash. While CJ's value may have dropped since then, I hvae a hard time seeing Cincy take significantly less, as they will have to save face. They will likely demand no less than what Dallas gave Det for Roy Willams (1st and 3rd) plus a couple later 2nd day picks, and could be seeking a 1st and 2nd. That is rich for a team w/ so many needs. Three, while I won't argue CJ was a top-notch receiver, I think it is fair to question whether he still is, or will be again. He has 53 catches for 540 yards, which makes him look more like a bear WR than a top notch WR. And before you mention their QB situation (a) isn't the idea that CJ would elevate the play of the QB and ( TJ seems to have done well enough w/ about 90 catches and 1,000 yards under the same circumstances. TJ is about to turn 31, which begs the question how long he can be counted on. Further, I would point out how this year has shown him to be a bit of a one trick pony. He is a deep threat WR, but absent a QB who can deliver the ball downfield, or an OL that buys time for downfield routes, his value is minimal. I am not saying CJ is done, or that he sucks. But I think there is plenty of reason to question whether or not he is still an elite WR, or will be again. And this is key as he will cost a ton in draft picks.

While I am saying NOTHING against Pioli, McDaniels or Cassell, I question how good any would be outside of NE. Right now, I think there is ample reason to question the individual greatness of any (outside Billichek). Pioli has done a good job bringing in talent, but at the same time, I go back to the coaching and wonder just how much is the GM and how much the coach. McDaniels - Weis and Crennel were supposed to also be geniuses, but once they left, both fell on their faces. I think the failures of these two put into question how much credibility you can put in Billicheck's staff. No question the offense has done well, but how much has really been Daniels and how much Billichek and/or system. Cassell - He looks awesome, but again, how good does this kid look outside NE? There is no arguing that NE has done very well, but I do think it can be questioned how well many of the individuals would do elsewhere.

God and I have a deal. I don't take his name in vain, and he doesn't rain on days I have a tee-time Anything is possible, but I have been lucky thus far. I think Friday is supposed to be in the 70s, so good golf weather.

Man, I really need some coffee.

GB - I'll take a nice sloppy game tonight. Both the bears and Pukers are about equal in terms of rushing offnese, but there is a huge difference in rush defense. We are the 7th ranked run D, allowing less than 100 yard per game and only 3.5 ypc average. GB meanwhile is the 27th run defense, allowing nearly 140 yards per game, and 4.7 ypc average. They have us in the passing game, both in offense and defense, but if the weather is as cold and bad as it looks, it will making passing much harder. Houston - I am really hoping for pooring down rain. I didn't realize this, but my dad (who lives in Houston) told me their roof is still not fixed, from the hurricane, and can not be closed. That is not often an issue in Houston, but this time of year, they can get rain. If it is raining, the field will be slippery as hell, which should benefit us. Houston has a hell of a passing game. They have a solid rushing game w/ their own rookie, but like w/ the above, I'll take our run defense over theirs anyday. I'll be at the Houston game, so maybe I can bring a bit of luck Speaking of weather, I just booked by annual, day after Christmas, tee-time. I just love playing golf the day after Christmas, and even better, calling my family in Chicago just to let them know what I am doing. I usually call as I am leaving the 9th green. For the life of me, w/ caller ID, I do not know why they still answer the phone when I call, because it drives them nuts that I am golfing while they are shoveling their sidewalk.

Huh? Can I assume that would be sarcasm?

Yea, I am thinking baseball. Damn, I really need more coffee.

I thought there was a rule to prevent this? Isn't there a rule that basically says, if you are slotted to play a divisional foe, the slotting changes? I could be WAY off, but I thought there was such a rule.

IMHO, wishful thinking here. It's one thing to play healthy starters and not roll over. It's another thing to play guys who are in bad shape and could do w/ the time off. Many have talked about Jacobs, as he is a big part of their offense, but also Jason Tuck. ESPN radio this morning talked about how banged up Tuck is. The good is, whatever players are out there I think will play hard. The bad is, I think we could see several key players getting the week off due to injuries.

I believe he was responding to the comment that NYG would not have had anything to play for whether they beat or lost to Carolina. As Da said, I think they may have needed another win (Minny) to lockup the #2 spot, again, if they lost to Carolina.

Not to mention the team Cassel comes from. W/ the coaching there, it is not that much of a shock he has done well, but w/o that coaching, I question what the expectations for him should be. If he were cheap, that would be one thing, but w/ the season he is having, another team is likely to pony up big bucks, and I just question how smart that would be.

While that is possible, at the same time, I would point out the following: One. While Davis has done little to stick, I think you can only expect so much turnover at a position. If we cut Davis loose too, we will need to add as many as 3 WRs. I am just not sure how realistic that is. Heck, I am not 100% we will add two. Two. While he has not served us well as a WR, he is still a very good special teams player, and that is an area we always try to lead the league. I do not want Davis near the starting lineup, but as a 5th WR, his only duty would be as a special teams specialist, and I have no issue w/ that. To me, the problem is not nearly as much Davis so much as our expecting Davis to be a starter. We need to focus more on who we add than simply who we cut.

Now I ask, who is worth keeping? We need a legitimate #1 & #2 IMO as I see no one on our roster at this point at WR who would be anymore than a #3 on any other team. Hester will obviously stick. Bennett too, despite not playing, will stick for next year. Davis may be kept, despite the drops, due to his special teams play. Though he will be kept, I am not sure he will factor much into the WR plans. As Connerbear mentions, he could be kept as a deep depth chart WR who specializes in special teams. Many will talk about Rideau, but I view him similar to Hass. Rideau is a bit of a fan favorite, and a player who looks good in camp, but the staff sure do not seem enamored w/ him, and he wasn't a high draft pick (Bradley/Bennett) to warrant a roster spot. Rideau will be in the mix to compete for depth, but I don't think he will be even pencilled in otherwise. Lloyd is gone. I agree w/ the idea he is likely our best WR right now, but he will be an UFA, and there is simply no way I see us keeping him. The staff sure do not seem high on him and I think the feeling is mutual. Booker too is gone. I agreed w/ picking him up on the cheap, but he simply has not panned out and is now simply a waste of roster space. So we enter next year w/ two locks (Hester/Bennett) and two more who will compete for deep depth (Davis/Rideau), but otherwise, I think we will basically looking to overhaul this unit. I think we will be adding a FA. My hope is TJ, but I have a feeling it will be more along the lines of Lloyd. A less expensive player w/ the potential to be a starter. I also think we will be adding a WR in the first 3 rounds. W/ those two additions (FA and draft), combined w/ the two locks (Hester and Bennet) and the final spot up for competition between Davis, Rideau and whoever else we bring in cheap, we will have our WR unit. How good that unit will be will depend on what FA and rookie we draft, but that is how I see it going down.

The list is simply not up to date, as it obviously doesn't reflect players who signed extensions with their teams (Garard/Orton/Colson). I have been using PFWs list, which also shows who is an UFA and who is a RFA. http://www.profootballweekly.com/PFW/Featu...istbypos.htm#wr Give me Collins (although I think Tennessee will give him a 1 or 2 year deal to stay behind Young). I can't believe I'm about to say this but I wouldn't mind giving Rex a 2 year deal but I know he'll go somewhere like KC. Not sure we are going to get Collins, or anyone for that matter. I have a hard time seeing Tenn letting him go. They have Vince Young, but after this year, I question how much confidence they will have in him going forward. So I think they are going to make a hard push to keep Collins, and so long as he believes he will have an opportunity to play in Tenn, I have a hard time seeing him coming here. No freaking way I want Rex. I think it is simply time to move on. I mean, the guy gets on the field and is boo'd. He may workout elsewhere, but I think he is simply done in Chicago. I'd love Housh but he's getting up there and I don't want another Moose. While some can point to that age being similar, I think that is about all that is similar. Moose was a very inconsistent WR who we signed coming off a career year, and one in which he hadn't put up similar numbers in years. In TJ, you have a WR who has been the model of consistency for some time, and done so w/o CJ opposite him this year. TJ will cost a boat load, but seems like our best option as any other #1 WR would cost a huge contract PLUS draft picks. Shane Olivea, San Diego's starting RT, was benched last year but he has a 6-20 contract on his back. I wouldn't mind giving up a 2nd and maybe a 4th. Many think of him as one of the best RT's in the game. I don't know. Many talked about him in the offseason, but he saw VERY little interest after being cut by SD. I am not even sure where he is, or what his status is. When you do a player search for him on ESPN, it shows him being part of the NYGs, but then when you look at the Giants roster and depth chart, he is not listed. I am not sure if that means he is injured, on IR, or what, but I am not sure he is thought of as highly as you think, and definitely do not believe his value warrants giving up draft picks, and especially not 1st day picks.

I am not sure I would agree Lovie is a good politician, or shepard of players. Regarding politician, the media blast him as it is like he wants to be Parcells. He shows arrogance and treats the media as if they (and the public) are simply ignorant. If votes decided whether he would keep his job (politician) he was be long gone. As for sheppard, even Hough who tried to defend Lovie says players tend to tune him out. As for how this team has done compared to expectations, I think it is a bit laughable. 99% of those who said we would flat out suck this year did so mainly due to our QB situation. Orton has done better than expected, and thus we have won more than expected. Before anyone mentions Forte, I would argue there were greater expectations for Forte than our QB. But how much credit does Lovie truly deserve for Orton playing between decent and well? I don't think much at all. Orton is a far greater reason why this team has surpassed expectations than Lovie.

I don't get the pre-game v in-game comment. I mean, what does Lovie do pre-game that is good? The writer says himself that players tend to tune Lovie out. Further, I would point out how many question our scheming. Is that not part of pre-game? So what is it that he does pre-game that rates the positive comment?

One. As was mentioned, Lloyd is an UFA after this season, and I so no chance he returns. Seems like our staff is not his biggest fan, and I would be the feeling is mutual. Say bye bye to Lloyd after this season. Two. I am not a fan of adding CJ, but especially opposite Hester. CJ is a deep threat, and this year especially, it appears that is about all he is. W/o a QB and Ol that allows him to work the deep part of the field, he simply doesn't add much. I just can't see pairing CJ w/ Hester. IMHO, Orton would get killed holding the ball, waiting for one of the two to get open downfield. Three. It will cost us to get CJ. Despite the year he is having, I can't see Cincy giving him away. They turned down two 1st round picks (Wash offered) and regardless what his value is, I can't see them eating all pride and taking a massively reduced trade. Also, they likely to lose TJ, so if they trade CJ too, they will be left w/ virtually nothing.

Few comments, One. I personally think the OL is little upgraded from last year. I would agree that Benson could look decent if behind a good OL, but the same can be said for most NFL RBs. I personally believe Forte has helped make our OL look better than it is. There are things Forte does, which Benson simply didn't, that make our OL look better than it is. Forte has better vision. When a hole, however small, is opened, he more quickly see's it. Forte has greater bust to and through the hole. When a hole is opened by our OL, it is not there for long. Forte quickly see's the hole, and gets through it. By the time Benson would hit the hole, it would close. Final point. I have seen Forte, like TJ, often hit the OL, no hole, then totally change direction and get positive yards. Benson didn't have the cut ability or bust to do this. So the point of all this is, I am not sure our OL is that much better, but simply believe Forte does things which makes the OL look better than it is. Benson didn't have the game to do this. Two. Furthering the first point, I think Orton helps make the OL look better than it is. W/ Rex under center, defenses stacked the box and attacked, knowing Rex didn't have the vision to beat the pressure. Orton is simply better in this regard, which prevents teams from loading the box as much. And when they do load the box, they are sitting back more than attacking. Three. Forte has an all around game Benson simply lacked. I could not believe how many easy passes Benson would drop. Forte not only has shown solid hands, but has become our most used receiver. And in terms of pass blocking, it is not even close. I agree w/ Benson that if he had a better OL and holes to run through, he would have good rushing yardage totals. But I disagree that our OL is really that much better, if at all, and would argue that Forte has simply been better able to make our OL look better. If we had Benson this year, we would continue to see him getting stuffed at the LOS, as he would simply make our OL look worse than it is. The only good thing about that is, if we had Benson at RB, I think there would be a greater demand to over-haul our OL.

There are some, like Jason, who can come here and say they are not arguing w/ hindsight, as they (a) felt TJ could be a workhorse back, ( never felt Benson would be a stud and © simply didn't feel RB was a need, going back to the first point. With that said, I truly think it comes down to this. Was RB our top need? No. I think even the staff would have agreed w/ that. We had TJ, and at worst, he was a pretty good RB. But, at the same time, it was also believed that Benson had to potential to be "special", and you know how Angelo feels about having a "special" RB. I recall some years ago. We had Minter as our MLB. Was he a stud? Nope. But he was not bad either, and many would argue pretty solid. MLB was not our greatest need, or even a close 2nd. Yet, we felt Urlacher had the potential to be a stud, and went w/ the upgrade. turned out to be a pretty solid pick, I think most would agree. If Benson turned out to be the stud many felt he would develop into, I think few would look back and say we made a mistake. But, because Benson ended up being a worse pick than Curtis Enis, there is a lot of hindsight talk. We can argue whether we "needed" a RB day and night, but I think this pick was more about BPA than pure need, and is simply didn't pan out, not due to "need" but because the BPA simply sucked.

I have watched games on replay, but can't say I have "studied film". At the same time, I have listened to plenty on the radio who have "studied film", and they have all blasted Dusty. What I recall seeing myself is, initially, he was double teamed on run plays, but even that changed and he was single blocked then as well. At no time did I see him consistently double teamed on passing downs. As for Adams, I have seen him double teamed, like Dusty initially, on passing downs. The difference I would make between the two is, I think Adams has done a better job splitting the double team (again, on run downs) than Dusty did. Also, I think Adams does more to force teams to "hold" their extra block on him, which frees up the LBs more. W/ Dusty, he would get an initial double, but the 2nd guy would release and move on to our LBs. W/ Adams, I don't see this done. Adams forces teams to hold the block against him. No one is saying Adams is a stud. But I do simply believe our defense runs better w/ him in there. He is simply better against the run, and better keeping that extra blocker from getting to the next level.

But how often could this be said. For most teams, I think fans could say that a few breaks go their way and they win several more. Sorry, but the teams that go to the playoffs are often the ones who are best able to make their own breaks. Everyone suffers injuries, but some teams compensate better than others. Everyone, at some point or another, is in that "make or break" situation, and the teams who step up more often end up in the playoffs. We had our opportunities, but failed to step up.

I've been on record numerous times. I'm ok with a headcase at WR if the guy is a stud and produces. I'd love to see the Bears make a huge FA splash and pick up two big name WRs. Ocho Cinco TO Anquan Hushyamamma Pick two of the four, and the Bears are an automatic top-ten offense, maybe even top-five. Just for the record, your not calling all of the above "head cases", are you? Boldin has likely been trashed due to the contract situation, but I wouldn 't put him in the "cancer" category. Many/most good players at one point or another get into a spat w/ their team over money. And I have never heard anything particularly negative about TJ. I would not really want CJ, but not due to the headcase issues. I don't have a read problem w/ his sort of head case issues, compared to TO. TO is a player that is truly a locker room cancer. CJ is not so much a cancer so much as just a showboat. He is all about the antics. No, my problem w/ CJ is he is too much of a one-trick pony. He is a downfield playmaker. But this year, w/ his power armed QB out, his game has disappeared, and I mean disappeared on Bear WR levels. Also, you have to wonder about the injury issue. So the antics or headcase issues may be a small factor, there are other, more substantial reasons, why I would pass. Not to mention, it would cost us picks to get him, and I just can't agree w/ the price. I would love to get Boldin, but can we really afford to give up the picks? Wash offered two 1st round picks for Ocho Cinco. I am not sure if Boldin will get the same offer, but I think the minimum will be a 1st and 3rd in the same draft. I think that is too rich for my blood. There may be a couple positions I would be willing to give up that sort of loot for (LT, QB, stud DE) but not for a WR. I look and look, but I really see few options better than TJ. He offers the best value, IMHO. He is going to cost a ton, but no more (and maybe even less) than Boldin, who is going to demand a new deal w/ any new team. Plus, if we simply sign TJ, we keep our picks, which we sorely need.