nfoligno

Would it be a problem for you to actually have it Labor Day? I know it sounds bad, but most people I know are done w/ doing whatever before the point we would draft. And frankly, most I know do stuff labor day weekend, rather than that monday night as they have to work the following day. Just asking because I know my friend is out of town that previous weekend, and while I am not out of town, it isn't a great weekend for me either.

Personally, I have no issue w/ Labor Day, and neither does Papabear (my friend). In fact, I actually prefer it simply as I like to draft as late as possible. There is nothing worse than watching your top pick go down in the last meaningless pre-season game. I believe Papabear is out of town The previous weekend. The other thing I am curious about is, we seem to be talking mostly about weekends. Why not weekdays? If we are talking about hosting the draft in the evening, I would think weekdays would be just as good, or better, than weekends.

Drunkbomber, I voted for myself. If I can, I will add a proxie vote as well for my friend, who I believe has signed up. He would want max flex (he is a big fan) but I'll throw down his vote for 2, which he would be thrilled w/ (as opposed to less). He would absolutely vote for PPC and bonuses.

Actually, I am not happy about the body fat. It sounds impressive, but everyone I have spoken with tell me that is actually a dangerous level. At that level of body fat, conditioning may be awesome, but at the same time, there is more risk of injury as some level of body fat does help against injury.

I guess I still don't see it. As I recall, we brought in Griese, and there really was not much of a competition at any level for QB. Rex was handed the starting job. I recall this quite well as so many (including myself) felt he should have had to win the job, but it was handed to him. Similar, the backup job was basically handed to Griese. Orton was simply our #3. I am sure Orton was not thrilled with going from a winning season as a rookie starting QB to not even being considered for more than #3 on the depth chart, but I simply do not recall him making an issue of it. Not just when talking to the media, but I don't even recall tid bits in the media which implied he was showing poor character in dealing w/ the situation. In fact, I think I recall more comments from Griese indicating he felt he should have had more opportunity to challenge for the starting job. I also don't get questioning Orton based on his not winning higher than 3rd on the depth chart. One, I question whether he was ever given that opportunity. We brought in Griese for a reason. Two, even if there was a competition and Griese won, that doesn't mean Orton didn't take the offseason serious. Griese was a pretty accomplished veteran, and despite starting as a rookie, Orton was still raw in terms of development.

Got some tid bits from ESPN Chicago Blog - Due to some injuries, Bullocks started at FS and Afalava at SS. Per the reports, both played well, which may not mean a lot in terms of starting, but is a nice sign regardless. Also reading a lot of good about Afalava, who missed OTAs due to school, but is quickly learning and making an impression. - Jamar Williams got snaps at SLB, and may factor in the competition, which I don't think many expected. I have read Roach and Pisa have done well, but it could be that much more interesting if Williams is getting a legit look there. - Read this little tid bit about Beekman, which I have to say, is a surprise, This will be the last time I point out Beekman's playing with the first team, because he has far and away outperformed Frank Omiyale in camp. I freely admit to being one of those who felt Omiyale would start given his contract and the speed with which the Bears pursued him in free agency. It's not even close. To be fair, Omiyale is learning a new position in a new system, and he doesn't have much experience. I'm not writing him off, but he has a long way to go to unseat Beekman, who's had an excellent first week in Bourbonnais. I too thought Beekman starting camp w/ the 1st string was more respect than anything, but it seems like a combo of his playing very well, w/ Omiyale not, could make our starting front a tad different from expectations. - Mortensen was at Bears camp, and had some impressions. - While not really new, Mort raved about Marinelli. Not new, but good to hear from a national guy like Mort. One player in particular who has seemed to stand out under the guidence of Mort has been Anderson, who is showing the burst he displayed as a rookie. Anderson always had the raw tools, but for whatever reason (our change in DL coach IMHO), his play tanked. Under Marinelli, that appears on the verge of turning around. - Mort said, the bears staff says, Olsen is running a 4.52/40 in pads. That is incredible. Many can run fast at the combine, in shorts, on a track, but to run a 4.5/40 (at that size) in pads in incredible. Seems like every camp report I read mentions Olsen hauling in a deep pass. This could be an incredible thing to watch this year. - Kellen Davis gets a shout out from Mort as a name to remember. Mentions his size, and I have seen several reports mentioning Davis making a grab. 6'6 Olsen paired w/ 6'7 Davis in the red zone would be something to watch.

I thing I think about w/ DM is the confidence factor. Someone pointed out last year that, as he began to do well as a return man, his play at nickel also went up. Many were quick to give Lovie the props for making DM is pet project, and I am not trying to take away from that. At the same time, I wonder how much was as simple as the confidence factor. He started to play well in the return game, and that confidence carried over to his nickel play. Think about it. He may have started before, at various positions, but I don't think he ever had reason to play w/ confidence. Last year, his return duties may well have carried that confidence over. But that goes back to the original point. Moving him all over the place, it is hard to gain confidence. I too wonder if we ever simply developed him at one position if he would have developed there.

Here is how I see it w/ Davis. One. His key asset has always been special teams, and that is where he again will have his greatest opportunity/contribution. Two. In the past, he helped the team in the slot. As a starter, he utterly failed, but that doesn't mean he can't help the team out of the slot again. But different from the past, he has to fight for even that level of playing time. If any of our young WRs look capable of playing the slot, Davis takes a back seat and becomes strictly a special teams player. But he is decent insurance if our young WRs are not ready to play. Simply put, Davis is in the position he should be. He is a special teams specialist, and WR depth. If our youth are not ready, Davis may have a temporary role on the offense, but only if they are not ready. That is the role of depth chart guys.

I agree we tend to see the dog house/penthouse mentality too often. At the same time, I am not sure that is really the case here. More and more, I am thinking the staff believes the best way for Graham to get on the field and have an impact this year is as a nickel. I think that if Graham looks good enough in camp at nickel, DM can play full time FS and we don't have to move players around when in nickel, as was previously planned (DM to nickel and Steltz to FS). If Graham plays well enough, he can simply play nickel and DM stays at FS. I have several problems w/ this line of thinking though: One. I do not believe our CB position is set. Vasher has a lot to prove, and is coming off two weak/injury seasons. Tillman also is coming off an injured season, and further, is out now and may be for a while, even into the season. Bowman has looked great in camp, but the key knock on him in the draft was injury, and that is what we have seen thus far as well. His NFL injuries may not be related to his college injuries that had everyone concerned, but his inability to stay healthy has to be a concern regardless. Thus, I think it very possible Graham, as a backup CB, could see time this year as a starting CB. Two. I fear the staff may believe, if the need arises, we can simply shift him back to CB. Problem I have w/ this is, while he did get starting experience last year, he is far from some seasoned veteran. I think we may be asking/expecting a bit much to spend an entire offseason working at other positions, only to move him back to CB when the needs comes up. Three. I believe our current strategy is very short sighted. He showed very solid starting caliber potential at CB last year. Further, the staff said they believe he could excel as a FS. Yet we are not working him (and thus not developing him) at either of those two positions, which I would consider a more long term outlook. Instead, he is working almost solely at nickel, which just doesn't feel like a long term developmental plan. I would rather we left him at FS, even if there was zero expectation he could start this year, as he would have a full year to develop into a potential long term position. Ditto at CB. If he spends this year working only at nickel, it just feels like this year would be near wasted in terms of development. If we envision him one day being a CB or FS, spending a year solely at nickel just seems very short sighted.

One more thing AZ, You imply Graham may not in fact be playing well due to (your logic) he is not getting interceptions against 2nd and 3rd string QBs and WRs. But let me ask you this. It seems he has been playing nickel and not CB, whether against 1st or 3rd string. The staff is now developing him at nickel, rather than CB. Anyway, while he may not have the picks to his credit, have you been reading about receivers making catches against him? I haven't. Is it not possible that his coverage has been to the point that our QBs have simply not been throwing to the receiver he is covering? And if that is the case, how can he be blamed for not getting picks when he is not being thrown against?

One, I think few would argue Brown's leadership did little w/ him on the sideline, or that we could no longer depend on him. At the same time, the point was the lack of leadership when he was not on the field seemed obvious (at least IMHO), when he was not on the field. Two, I don't know how you can place the blame for that Atlanta game on Brown. Even the staff flat out said the breakdown was on the new CB. His key assignment on that play was to take away the outside. The safety is expected to help on the inside. The CB did not take away the outside, and thus didn't set up the coverage in a way to allow the safety to help. That was solely on the CB. He had a specific area he was supposed to take away, and failed to do so. If he covered the outside, he would have had Brown help on the inside, but he did not do that. I am not pretending Brown was perfect. There were plenty of times he did blow the play, but I just don't see how you can blame him for that play. Even the staff were outspoken on exactly how that play broke down, and the CB was very much called out for his mistake.

I do not recall Orton "spending a whole year pouting". In fact, I thought he dealt w/ his 2nd season w/ class. Even in his rookie year, when he was replaced by Rex after leading the team to a winning record, I don't recall him complaining about the benching. I thought he took the high road, both that year and after. He may have made comments about feeling like he should have been given an opportunity the following season to compete, but I just do not recall him spending the following season pouting.

- Totally agree w/ 1 point per reception. 2 points per minimalizes the value of RBs too much, as well as making it ridiculous how much more valuable a possession receiver can be vs a playmaking WR. - I do not care for roster change fees. One of the most fun aspects (for me) in FF is in-season roster changes, but having to pay for each change really takes away a big chunk of the fun. Also, IMHO, when you charge for roster fees, you end up w/ problems late in the season. If a team is basically out of it later in the year, and has a player (or multiple) go down w/ injury, they are less likely to replace that injured player if they have to pay a fee to do so, knowing they are out of the running already. If they do not have to pay a fee, most "decent" owers will still continue to play FF and replace their injured player. So, IMHO, fee based roster moves only create problems as it lessens the chances of owners w/ weaker teams staying it in till the end, and for me, there is little worse than a player that just quits.

Four - I think the players may be more forward thinking than LT is giving them credit for. A league with a few Stienbrenner type owners in it, driving up salaries, would be a bonanza for the players in the long run. Of course it would make for a much less interesting and competitive league but the players would benefit at least for a while. I think they'd LOVE to see a cap free season and they might hope it never came back. Here is something to think about though. How many players in the league make the league minimum? The "big boys" always get the hype, and those are the players who would benefit if the salary cap went away. However, I think the majority of the players would suffer. If you no longer have the a ceiling cap, you no longer have a floor either. Further, the many, many players who get the league minimum might find themselves playing for $50,000, rather than $850,000, or whatever the minimum is today. At the end of the day, I just believe a deal gets done. It can be debated whether the owner or the players have the best argument or whatever, but the simple reality is, both owners and players have benefited big time though the recent CBAs. Football is at an all time high in popularity, and I just am not sure either side really wants to mess with that, as to do so would only threaten future payouts, for both sides. I think, at the end of negotiations, owners will cave to their % cut of the players, while the players end up caving on most everything else. The owners will use the % cut as a bargaining tool to force more strict ethics/punishments, rookie pay structure/cap, and maybe a longer season. Players will say they won by maintaining their % of the pie, while owners say they won by winning most everything else.

One. I disagree it is as simple as you make it out when talking about leaving the money in the bank for a year. Just because the money isn't spent on Cutler, or players, or whatever, doesn't mean the money will simply sit there in the bank and be saved for the following year. For example. We have a family ownership, some of which may get paid (or have a bonus) which is a percentage based on profit or whatever. Anyway, that $20m (or whatever) may not simply sit there for a year. Maybe there is a new statue the team wants to build, and hey, they have $20m on the book. Point is, I am not sure it is as simple as that, either in personal or business accounting. I can guarantee you this much. If my wife decides not to spend $100 on a pair of shoes, that does not mean the money is simply going to sit in our bank and collect interest. It very well could simply mean she decides the next week to use that money on a purse. I work for a corporation, and I can say that isn't always so different in the business world. You may come in under budget in 2008, but that does not always mean you have that much more to spend in 2009. Two. Lets say we do save the money and ear mark it for Cutler next year, and thus it truly was saved. Sure, we would then have the real cash, but I would argue it may not go as far. The longer we wait, the higher the contract demand is going to be. If we signed him a week ago, I don't think we would be talking about the sort of deal Eli just got, but wanna bet his agent is now looking at that? Rivers is likely next, and you can bet his agent will be looking to best Eli's deal. The longer we wait, the higher the contract demand will be. Thus $20 today may not go as far next year. Three. I still have a hard time believing we will have an uncapped season. I think the odds are greater the owners pull a lockout before they allow an uncapped season. I get the future is not certain, but i think there is greater reason to expect a deal gets done, and thus we should assume we will still have to deal w/ a salary cap. W/ that assumption, I would rather spend and eat the cap money today when we can afford it. W/ regard to your final point, I know about that, and agree w/ the logic. At the same time, I am not sure how much that will matter. The power structure of the players association is going to play hardball, and X number of players who may not get their FA period may not have a loud enough voice.

I have cut, pasted and saved this post. I will refer back to it often when you begin to stray from the path of reason and need a reminder of the time you saw the light.

With each passing day, I can't help but wonder what the hell is going on w/ Graham. Most recently, we read about Bowman going down in practice. After that happens, two things are seen/heard that stand out. One, McBride is called on to fill in for Graham. Two, when Lovie is asked about Bowman going down, he talks about how we have other players ready to step in, mentioning Moore and McBride, but no mention of Graham. I really do not understand what is going on here. We read early on that Graham is being moved to FS. I thought he looked solid at CB last year, but w/ Vasher looking healthy and FS being such a dire need, I said, Okay, and went along. Then in the final OTA, I read about how DM is hurt, and Graham is practicing at nickel, rather than FS. That made zero sense to me, but hey, its just an OTA, so I went along. Then news of Tillman's injury breaks, and some serious shuffling takes place. Steltz is moved to backup SS and DM to FS? Huh? Further, Graham moved back to CB, but is behind Bowman. Now I am confused. If the staff does not believe Stelz is a FS (finally) that would seem like a more pressing reason to work Graham in at FS, but instead we move him to CB as he has experience and we may well have the need there. Okay, fine. But we put him at CB behind Bowman? So he is still a backup, only deeper. And again, the most recent. Bowman goes down, and Graham is not even the player we insert, instead going w/ McBride who Graham beat out last year. I really just do not understand what role the staff envisions for Graham at this point, nor do I understand the developmental path. This would seem like a great opportunity to work him at FS, yet we are not. W/ Tillman down, and especially w/ Bowman hurting, again, a great opportunity to insert Graham. Yet the snaps seem to be more going to McBride and Moore. I don't get it. The only thing I can reach to come up w/ is the staff feels they know what they have in Graham, as he started last year, and thus they are trying to get more work in for the players who are less developed or who they don't know what they have. If this is the case, and that is a big if, I think it is a huge mistake. While Graham did start last year, he is far from developed or polished, and not getting him as many reps as possible in camp seems like a total waste in terms of development. It seems like we say this for a player ever year, but did Graham piss off Lovie and get in his dog house?

ESPN Chicago had a nice article on Kreutz, talking about how he seems to look and act like he was a young player again. Talked about how much extra time he has been spending at practice, working w/ Cutler and the other OL. He gets blasted for his declining play, but (a) I have always wondered how much of that was his playing on a weak OL and trying to do too much and ( I just do not believe you can always realize the value of leadership. Mike Brown was not always the best safety on the field, but when he was off the field, the overall play really went down as players were left w/o a leader in the secondary. I think the same is true for Kreutz. He may not always be the best on the field, but I wonder how bad it might be if he were not out there.

I agree we don't just want to spend to spend. But I do think we need to look long and hard at a couple players, w/ Cutler at the top of the list. For me, extending Cutler sooner rather than later is a win/win situation, regardless of the salary cap situation. If we sign him now, and the salary cap goes way, we have not hurt ourselves as we need to re-sign Cutler regardless. Further, if there is no cap, his cost could go up considerably, to the point where we may not be capable of outbidding teams like Dallas, Washington, etc who could care less about the bottom line. If we sign him now, and there is a cap in place, we would likely have front loaded his deal and thus would be in a much better situation in future years.

When talking flex, are we talking starter or depth. If starter, I am totally cool w/ one flex spot. I do like having freedom though in terms of my depth chart. I have played in leagues were you draft a specific number of RBs, WRs, etc., and others were you have set positions you start, but fill your roster however you want. If you have confidence in, for example, your QB, you can go light on QB depth and add an extra RB or WR. So flexibility in our roster is a preferred way to go for me. Couple scoring ideas to chew on. - Bonus categories. I am a big fan of bonuses. I like giving extra credit to the receiver who hauls in 10 catches or 100 yards, or the RB who gets 100 yards. I like when we have a bonus for the QB not only getting 300 yards, but if their completion % is above whatever set mark. I like when we reward big plays. Bonus for the WR on 50+ yard passing plays. This is a good way to offset/reward big play WRs vs possession WRs, as a Hester like player is less likely to haul in 10 catches than a TJ Hous type, but more likely to have a game changing big play. Anyway, there are a ton of bonus options, and I love them. It really puts an extra twist when evaluating players. You start to factor more than just the main stats. - Further, I am big on negative plays. Make it painful to draft high interception QBs or RBs who have fumble issues. Admittedly, I am a big score guy. I much prefer when the top FF team in a week is getting around 200 points, rather than the top team getting like 50. - Final point. I know it was mentioned considering a "keeper" player. IMHO, we may want to wait a year for that to make sure we have a set league. It would be great to do, but can we count on keeping the same ten owners each year? If not, it may not be very fair to have keeper players for some teams but not all.

I don't know. I really don't recall Forte getting many handoffs when it was 3rd and 8 or 3rd and 10. A year before, I seem to recall AP getting plenty of those, and it felt every time like we were just giving up on the play. But last year, I didn't think we did that very often. What I am curious about, in terms of stats, is when we had Olsen and Clark on the field, but Olsen was lined up as a WR, would the stats reflect a 2 TE formation or would he have been viewed as a 3rd WR.

I am totally fine not having a FB back there. One. I think Forte is actually a better runner w/o a FB. Two. I think our FB sucks. Three. I think we have upgraded our OL, and thus will be more capable than in the past of picking up that ILB. Four. We actually now have a QB that (a) can actually see the blitzer coming at him ( can avoid said blitz and buy time and © still scan the field as he avoids the blitz. Let teams blitz Cutler. IMHO, he will eat them alive.

I know your just joking around, but I just sort of give him a bit of a pass here. I have a friend dealing w/ similar (sister w/ cancer, not mother) and she is driving her sister a couple times a week to the hospital for chemo and therapy. Also, as her sister has spent a lot of time in the hospital, so has my friend. It is a drain, mentally and physically. Point is, i can easily see where a person's routine gets hurt dealing w/ something like this. Anyway, I may be giving him a bit of a free pass for the last couple months, but he needs to double down now that he is in camp.

Part of the reason for weight gain. Just saw this on twitter, Serious note-marcus harrison's mom battled cancer. One reason for the weight gain. doesn't excuse it, but i think we can all relate to family issues. I knew Harrison had mentioned "family issues" a couple times, but honestly, that seems to have become a standard phrase for players these days, and I never know when to believe them. That is sad and skeptical, but the way it is. While hearing this may not totally excuse Harrison, is does go a long way in my book. It doesn't seem like he was just sitting around being lazy, or showing a character flaw. If he was having to help his mother deal w/ cancer, that is a heavy burden.

Drunkbomber, I didn't get the email. I just checked my email listed in my profile, and it should work fine. It's my work email, but that should not matter. Can you check and try again please. Thank you.