nfoligno

After the 5th round though? That is sort of the thing, at least IMHO. If an owners keeps, for example, a guy he took in the 10th or 15th round the previous year, giving up the same round or one up really doesn't mean nearly so much. The effect is far more for those who want to keep players who were high picks the previous year. For me, the rule is more about keeping guys who were on the cusp of being a stud already, particularly in the 2nd round. If you took a player the prior year in the 2nd, he was already a near-stud, and at least for me, keeping such a player should cost a bit more. That is why the leagues I have always been part of made it a round higher. It doesn't really mean much for the owners who took fliers on picks later in the draft, but makes an owner have to think about keeping those players who were drafted high.

Just saw that, while maybe not official, Carroll may have just hired Alex Gibbs to run the OL in Wash. That disgusts me. I have wanted to add him for years, and he would have been a tremendous addition. He was a FA, so to speak, and it just sucks that we could not get one of the best OL coaches in the game.

I think this past season was Vasher's "prove it" season, and he failed miserably. No question we are not strong at CB, but I don't think Vasher helps our situation any. Having him as a body (insurance) is a pretty damn weak insurance policy. I think Angelo will believe he can draft a CB, even later in the draft, and find someone just as capable.

If there is no CBA, then I think we absolutely tender him an offer and keep him. If somehow a new CBA is reached, I think we still could retain him, but it would be far from certain. Another team could feel they can get more production out of him, and offer more than we are willing to spend, which will likely be minimal at best.

Not to sound too negative (I know I've been on a roll with that lately...), but I really have a hard time getting around to knowing what will happen with players right now. There is just too much in the air. 1. CBA 2. New coordinators Thos 2 elements make it a bit difficult to really speculate other than for sh*ts & giggles. The CBA is a big factor, no question, but I am not sure how big of a factor the new coaches will be. On defense, we know we will still by and large run a similar system. Who ever we get to be our new DC likely changes nothing in terms of what we will and will not do on that side of the ball. On offense, again, I am not sure how much it matters. I think Angelo is going to took at the roster, and believe we are fine at QB, WR and TE. He could see the need for a backup RB, and I pray for OL, but I just don't know that who we hire to coach will alter this perception much. But for sh*ts & giggles, I think the departures of note could very well be the following (I'm not accounting for any potential trades because that is virtually impossible to predict) 1. Mark Anderson - shown too little to date This one depends on the CBA, I think. If there is no new CBA, then we can retain Anderson very cheap, simply giving him a tender offer, which makes him restricted. 2. Adawale Ogunleye - good for his time here, but getting older and didn't do enough this year to warrant keeping him, unless at a bargain rate I think he is absolutely gone. Especially if there is not a new CBA deal in place, that will mean the talent pool in FA will be far more limited. That means a player like Wale could find himself in much higher demand than he would otherwise. 3. AP - Love him and his guttiness, but I think his days are numbered. We need a more legit RB in the mix. ST or not... Agreed. I think he is gone. He simply brings little to the table as a RB, and I don't think he really stood out on special teams this year, while some others looked great. Jones further injury woes, combined w/ Forte's (injury or other) lack of production, will mean RB could be viewed as a need. Not saying top pick, but I think we could add a RB later in the draft, or on the cheap in FA. Either way, it would spell the end of AP. I think we hold onto the LB crew...they all did OK last year. Roach, Williams and Pisa will probably be offered inexpensive deals. Any of those that don't take it will probably seek employment elsewhere. No CBA, and we keep Williams with a tender offer. If a CBA is reached, I think he could be gone, as another team could offer him an opportunity to compete for a starting job, which he simply doesn't have here. Didn't realize Roach was even a FA. And I think we re-sign Pisa, as he should be very cheap. I really don't see any more cuts. We simply don't have the picks, nor the FA availability to make for a lot of change. I think Vasher is gone. IMHO, the staff only played him this year when there were absolutely no other options, and that shows how the staff feels about him. And when he did play, he did not play well. Especially if this is an upcapped year, he is gone as we can cut him w/o worry about the salary cap implications.

I hope the owners step in and tell Angie he is not allowed to deal any future picks, or core players. DM may be different. If, as most believe, Angie is tied to Lovie, who is on a one year "prove it" deal right now, then it doesn't make sense to allow your GM to deal away future picks another GM may sorely need.

I too have read that about Saunders/Air Coryell. The playbook is bigger, but it is such that once you learn the basics, the rest is fairly simple. I think, and believe you mentioned this some as well, that his system relies less on "players being on the same page." In our current system, and in many WCO systems, there is a big emphasis on the QB and WR "seeing the same thing." If the D does X, then the WR is supposed to alter his route to Y. That means the QB and the WR both have to, w/o communication, read the defense the same. If that doesn't happen, then the QB is looking for the WR to run one route, while the WR is running another. As this system also relies on timing passes, this could be devastating. WR runs 10 yards upfield. QB expects him to break left, and throws the ball before the WR before the WR breaks, thus the DB can not defend the play. But the WR read the D different, and breaks right. Now you have a QB throwing the ball to a space not filled by a WR. Looks ugly, and often ends in a pick. I don't think Saunder's system relies so much on the QB/WR making reads and thus making route adjustments. So while it is a bigger playbook, it is not as complex in the end as the system we have been running. As for the OL, I would say that regardless what system we run. There is no system in football that runs well w/o good OL protection. We need to do a better job of both protecting the QB, as well as opening holes. Personally, while I think our OL was dreadful, I also think playcalling really hurt the OL. Later in the year, Turner finally began to call for Cutler to rollout. Once he did this, it was more difficult for defenders to simply tee off. It is a lot easier for a defender to pass rush when they know where the QB will be. By moving the pocket, not only did it free up Cutler, but it also put such a play in the minds of defenders, and you could simply see they were not attacking the same way after. On run downs, I think we were simply so predictable, it was a joke. Hell of a lot easier to stuff the run when you know it is going to be a run. OL should still be capable of getting a push, which is what you have to do on 3rd and short, but overall, I think better playcalling will improve the OL. I think our OL instantly improved when we moved Williams to LT. One, he was never a good RT and two, Pace was a horrible LT. Though Shaffer is nothing special, he was an upgrade to Williams at RT, and Williams was a big upgrade to Pace at LT. Further, as awful as Omiyale was, he did improve, especially after we got Pace out of there. I would still head into the draft w/ the plan of drafting the best OL available in the 3rd, but I believe the OL we finished the season w/ (a) is better than the one we started with and ( is one a better coach may be able to get more out of.

Funny thing is, while I do not want Martz, I do want another coach who does in fact run the Air Coryell system. I want Saunders. I realize that if we added Saunders, he would bring a very different offense and new terminology, but at the same time, I think he does it more effectively. Martz may run a version of the Air Coryell, but I think Saunders does it better. Martz doesn't know how to run that system in conjuction w/ a run game, but Saunders does. Priest Holmes and Larry Johnson were equally effective as runners and receivers under his system, and I think the same could hold true for Forte. He could put up great numbers in such a system, under Saunders, while I think he would be forgotten in Martz' system. Further, while both (Martz/Saunders) run versions of the Air Coryell, I think Saunders does more to tweak the system to the talent he has. I also think he does more to help the QB offset the pass rush, and doesn't get his QB killed in the process.

QB: It'll be Cutler and Hanie, but am I the only one who would kind of like to see a veteran QB on this team? At the very least, I feel like it would be nice to have someone like that on the sideline Cutler can talk to after a bad play who has actually played QB in the NFL. It's not like Hanie is going to impart much wisdom. I'm thinking someone like Jon Kitna. Not a need by any stretch, but something I wouldn't mind seeing them look into. I don't think we will do a thing. Teams w/ stable, stud QBs often enter the season w/ a very iffy backup. Even though there are questions about Cutler, health is not really one of them. I think we simply roll the dice w/ him. RB: I’d love to believe that if we upgrade the O-line, Forte will be back to what he was last year, but I’m not sure I believe that. Kevin Jones and Garrett Wolfe are still under contract, and Adrian Peterson is probably gone. Would I like to have Chester Taylor or Jerious Norwood? Sure. I’m just not sure this team can afford the investment. My guess is the Bears just hope Jones and Forte stay healthy, use Wolfe more, and focus on O-line. I also wonder if McKie gets any blame for the running woes, which might lead the team to look seriously at a more established FB. I would actually not be surprised to see us add a RB. The past couple years, we have seen numerous decent talent RBs sign for cheap. I think AP is gone. I think we sign/draft a RB (not too high) while Jones and Wolfe battle for the final spot. I think McKie is safe. i think he is awful, but for some reason, the staff feels different. WR: I have no idea. None. I’m not sure we know what we have with any of them. If it were up to me, I would keep Aromashodu, Knox, and Bennett. I would hope Iglesias is ready to contribute next year. If anyone will give you a 2nd or 3rd round pick for Hester you take it (Manning can approximate his return abilities, as we saw). You can’t get a big money WR because you have nothing to trade, but I think a guy like Malcolm Floyd from San Diego is realistic in terms of availability and fit (the big receiver we don’t really have). I’d also consider a 5th-6th round pick on a productive college player like Freddie Barnes from Bowling Green, who might be slow, but can at least get open. I don't think we do a thing here, and agree with such an approach. I like the group we have. I think we would be better if Hester were not starting, but we have some good looking young WRs. DA's emergence late in the year, combined w/ how much Cutler likes him, will prevent us from going after a FA like Floyd, IMHO. Bennett looked good in his first year playing, and I think Iglesias could emerge this year. I think about the only change we might see is Davis getting cut. He didn't excel on special teams this year like he has in the past, and w/ others stepping up, I think his value had dropped. TE: No changes likely here, unless someone wants to trade for Clark. Agreed, no changes. OL: I think Williams is a keeper at LT. Kreutz is a shell of what he used to be, but he probably needs to stay for at least another year. Other than that, no one’s spot is safe. If you want to spend, this is the place to do it, though I’m not sure there’s much out there that will actually be available. I say you draft the best available guard with your 3rd round pick (where you can still find legit, early starters) and sign a potential starter at RT (maybe former Illini Tony Pashos, who was a starter for Baltimore, but had a broken shoulder last year). Hire someone to kill Frank Omiyale. I think we use our 3rd to draft the best OL available. If that means OT, fine. Then we let Omiyale (who improved through the year) and Beekman battle for the OG spot. If an OG is best, we draft him and move Omiyale to RT to compete w/ Schaffer. While I disagree, I doubt we do much in FA. As nice as it was to see our OL improve toward the end of the year, I think it may have also hurt us going forward. I think the staff looks at the OL and convinces themselves that we have talent, but it simply took longer for that talent to develop and come together, but that they are going to be better in 2010. DE: I’m fine letting both Ogun and Anderson go. I assume the Bears traded a second round pick with the intent to start Gaines Adams, but he hasn’t shown much yet. Idonije and Melton are OK for depth, but you probably need at least one more rotation/starter at DE. I would go big after Aaron Kampman, who doesn’t fit the Packers new scheme and is coming off an injury, but does nothing but make plays in the backfield (as opposed to our DEs, who just do nothing). I think Anderson returns, as w/o a new CBA, we can keep him cheap w/ a restricted tender. Wale is gone, but we traded a 2nd for Adams and get Metlon who was on IR, even though I expect little from him. DT: You probably need another body here to go with Harris, Harrison, and (hopefully) Gilbert, though I would be OK with keeping Anthony Adams. I don’t love this group, but I’m not sure it’s high on my priority list either. Nothing. We will bank on Harris playing a full season like he finished 2009, as well as banking on the development of Gilbert and Harrison. LB: Pisa can come back if he’ll sign cheap. If not, resign Williams and see what he can do. Some may want to trade Urlacher, but I think we saw this year what happens to this team without him. Not a need position. Agreed Pisa will be back. He looked to be a solid SLB for us, but his season was killed by injury. He will be cheap, and thus return. CB: Cut Vasher or move him to FS. Send a search party out for DJ Moore. I actually like Bowman and Graham more than Tillman at this point, who has developed such a reputation for causing fumbles he’s forgotten how to tackle. And cover. Bring back Manning to play nickel and handle returns. This might be the quietest huge need for this team, I’m just not sure where the help comes from. Vasher is gone, agreed. I think, whether through draft (likely) or FA (less likely) we look to add a CB. I like Graham, but do not believe the staff does. No clue what happened to Moore this year. Despite the young talent on the team, I think CB is a need we will likely address. S: We NEED a playmaking safety. Bullocks was an experiment that (unsurprisingly) failed. Payne would be fine if he can just fly around and hit someone. When he’s better at coverage than the other safety, we have a problem. He’s probably a bit overrated, but it might be best for the Bears to overpay for a guy like OJ Atogwe. No question this is a big need, and the one area on defense I could see us trying to add a legit player. Unfortunately, our history trying to fix the FS position is not a good one. In the end, I really just do not see much. FA will not be a good one. W/o a new CBA, the pool of talent will be minimal, and I do not expect us to spend big w/ the potential of a lockout. And w/o any day one picks, it isn't like we should expect much from the draft. I think Angelo will put Lovie in a position of having to make the best of what he has.

I think Vasher is gone. He has shown absolutely no ability when on the field. Especially if this is an uncapped season, the timing is right to cut him as the money you eat from his contract has no affect.

First, w/ regard to the idea of trading a player for picks or to move up in the draft (as mentioned in other posts) I wonder if ownership might not step in and prevent that. If you have lost faith in your men enough that they are essentially on a one year prove it or take a hike deal, do you really want to allow them the opportunity to trade away good players? If they tried, for example, to trade Briggs, I wonder if ownership would step in and block such a move. As for players, I think Vasher is cut. I didn't think AP was a FA, but I think he could be cut regardless. His value to this team has simply dropped too much. I don't think he was even a special teams standout, and w/ others really stepping up, his value has gone down that much more. Most players will be back. Angelo said himself he likes this roster. Take that for what it is worth, but I would not expect too many changes. On offense, OL is the biggest key, and I think we could add a player, but I don't have a ton of confidence. I think they will more likely look at how the OL finished the year, and believe we have the players, but simply needed this past season to develop them. I don't agree, but what I think the staff will believe. At WR, especially w/ the emergence of DA and numerous other young talents like Bennett, Knox and even Iglesias, I don't expect much of anything. I think we will look to add a RB for depth, but that is about it. On defense, we are most likely to lose Wale, but after trading for Adams, plus having drafted Gilbert and Melton, I don't expect much beyond a rookie to be added to the DL. I think Pisa likely returns w/ Lovie as the HC and his price likely very minimal. I think the secondary could see changes though. I don't expect any big ticket FAs, but could see us looking to add CB and FS. We don't have a 1st day draft pick, and this is not likely to be a good FA due to the CBA issues. Not only are 200 potential FAs off the market due to the lack of a new CBA, but w/ the potential of a lockout, I doubt our owners will want to spend big. Further, I think this is a year Angelo basically says the talent is there, and leaves it up to the coaches to develop and utilize that talent.

First, lackey is likely not the right term. What I think some fans have issue w/ is the idea that Lovie will only hire coahes who he has some sort of tie w/. The issue is not w/ Fewell, but w/ this attitude of Lovie. Second, as for his being a "yes" man, I think that again has more to do w/ Lovie than w/ Fewell. If during the press conference, Angelo seemed to take the lead w/ regard to hiring a new coach, and the discussion seemed to move toward considering any scheme, then there might be a belief that Angelo was taking over a bit more. But as Lovie was up there talking Cover two this and that, and seemed to be the key person w/ regard to new coaches, the belief is that Lovie will continue to force whoever we hire to be DC to run his scheme, and his way. Thus, whoever we hire will be deemed (to some extent) as a yes man, even if that is not totally accurate. Personally, I think the better the relationship w/ Lovie, the more potential to free lance a bit. If Lovie trusts the DC, he may allow the DC to call plays he doesn't totally agree with. Further, so long as the DC doesn't try to totally scrap the cover two, he may have more freedom to mix it up.

Personally, I hate the idea of keeping two players. That's a potential of 20 very good players off the board before the draft even begins, which means a very diluted draft. With that said, whether we get one or two keepers, I have to say, I am going to push very very hard for a 1 round up loss of pick to keep a player. There has to be some level of give up when you keep a player. Johnson is an awesome keeper (great call by the way) but any 2nd round pick kept IMHO should lose a 1st. A 3rd rounder you lose a 2nd. Key reason here is, these players were borderline stud draft picks already, and to keep on your roster for a 2nd year, you should have to give up a slight bit more than what you used on him previous. This rule also prevent teams from keeping 1st round picks, which I am also absolutely against. Johnson and Benson would look like great keepers. Johnson is likely the #1 pick next year, especially when you combine his rushing w/ receiving. Benson is a very good 2nd RB, and to get him for a 10th round pick is a steal, allowing you to focus more on WRs and such earlier.

Coaches union has been screaming about this one. I think they finally got some stuff changed with regard to being allowed to interview during the playoffs, but this rule is still one that really hurts the upward mobility of a coach. Personally, I think it is a crock. If you allow for a coach to move out of a contract in order to become a HC, what is the difference with assistants? Would the same logic and rationale not apply?

Funny thing is, I actually have several players I would not mind keeping. Early part of my draft was not really memorable, and not much I would want to keep, but w/ keeper aspect in mind, I had some later picks that I would have to choose from. Mendenhall in the 13th round. Hakeem Nicks in the 14th round. Rothlisberger in the 16th round. Brent Celek in the 17th round. I would still prefer one keeper, as I just don't want to dilute the draft too much, but if we do go w/ 2 keepers, I like my choices Man, I look back at the earlier part of my draft, and just have to wonder. What the F was I thinking?

I googled it. Fridge, along w/ Covert and other NFL players, were appearantly part of a wrestle mania 2 around 1986. It was NFL players vs wrestlers.

Thank you. I had not realized that. Still no more than luke warm on him, but warmer than I was an hour ago.

Are you asking me? Let me first say that my comments are based on the reality of the situation. If we cleaned out, my choices me be different, but w/ Lovie as the HC.... DC - Fewell - Frankly, I like this pick quite a bit. He knows Lovie's system, which will bring some continuity, but at the same time, knows more than just the Lovie Two. He has a relationship w/ Lovie, and therefor Lovie may give a bit more leeway to him. I think he has done a good job in Buffalo. Frankly, while I often feel like we play below the level of our talent, I have often felt Buffalo's D has played above theirs. That is a credit to the coach. He seems to have done a good job developing some young players, and I think has done a better job of adjusting and compensating for injuries and losses. I especially like the reports of his personality. I have always said that if you have a mild mannered HC, you need an assistant w/ fire. Like having a calm captain but a drill sargent to get in the men's faces. He supposedly holds players accountable, and I like that. OC - Honestly, I have not heard many names that excite me. My top choice has been Saunders, though outside the Trib article, I have seen nothing that mentions our actually being interested. Saunders is a hell of an OC, IMHO. He didn't always have a loaded offenses in KC, but was able to develop players and fit players w/ a system. He has a pretty wide open system, and one that I think suits our players skills. He didn't do so well in Wash, or then in Stl, but if you take a moment to look at those teams, they were pretty dang bad. I know I have ripped Martz, who some may say saw a similar decline after great success w/ Stl, but I simply think the system Saunders runs is a better fit for our talent than Martz. Saunders would be my top choice. Beyond him, I really don't know. Starting to read about Clements, but haven't really formed an opinion there yet. I do not like Martz at all. I think he would be horrible for the team. I wasn't high on Bates as I fear he wouldn't be experienced enough to run the entire offense. The guy from Minny may make for a good QB coach, but I don't really like him for OC. Just say not to Zorn. I just don't know on offense. I like Saunders, but have not heard we are interested. I am luke warm on Clements at the moment, though I just don't know much about him. I am not in favor of most of the rest of the names I have read about.

All I know is, Zorn became the laughing stock of football coaches when he tried that trick play where everyone lined up far left. It was w/o question the worst playcall I have ever seen.

Don't forget the fridge

Why do you want Clements? It isn't that I am against him, but don't know why I should be for him. Yes, he seems to have done a great job developing Rodgers, and deserves credit for that. But he didn't actually run the offense, did he? Does he even have experience in that area? The reality is, whoever our OC is will essentially be a HC #2. We need someone who has broad experience running an offense. Not just developing a QB, but experience over all positions, game planning, playcalling, etc. Is that Clements?

Its a joke, but also an argument you so often make. I saw in another thread you do not want Martz, and agreed w/ me his playcalling would get Cutler killed. But I have to ask. Martz is an NFL level coach. By previous arguments, doesn't that mean you are not qualified to question his playcalling?

I vote 1 keeper. I vote (by proxy) for Papabear, 1 keeper.

I agree it is annoying, but at the same time, I think it is also basically the way it is done, Lovie or not. Whenever you hear about this coach or that being hired, you also hear about their looking at bringing along this guy or that who they know. Its pretty normal I think. While it is also normal to want a coach of similar scheme thinking, I think Lovie just goes a bit too far, and is a bit too narrow of mind in who he is willing to look at.

Trying to figure out why NY was looking at him? I think they fired their DC, and Fewell has ties w/ their HC.