nfoligno

I don't know that I would agree Dusty just stood there. I always felt he gave 100% effort, but simply lacked getting it done. He seemed to have no moves to get separation, nor the power to push. He gave the effort, but in the end, it didn't matter as the OL would lock on him and drive him out of the play. As for the staff, I think they simply get caught up in the "type" of DT they want, and Adams simply doesn't fit what they want. Its really too bad. Adams is no stud, but he has been one of our most consistent DL when on the field the last couple of seasons. He is solid vs the run. On passing downs, he doesn't get to the QB, but I would argue he does more to (a) keep our LBs free ( uses power well to help push/collapse the pocket and © does a better job of creating space for either the LBs to blitz through or Harris to use moves to get into. When Dusty was in the game, not only was he stood up, but he was often blocked into Harris, killing Harris' ability to detach from his blocker and attack the QB. Adams did a better job of taking on his block, and creating space, better allowing Harris space to work against his man, rather than having a 2nd blocker (Dusty's guy) move into his area. But again, it comes back to the staff. Adams simply does not fit the DT mold the staff wants, and thus only gets an opportunity when the staff is forced to go to him. It drives me nuts the way our staff can get so locked into a "type" of player, as they prefer to play a guy who is simply bad, but fits their scheme, rather than tweak the scheme and play a better player.

I would say the Cutler move is the desert, as it is just so damn "sweeeeeeeet"

As for giving Cutler a new deal, I think we need to remember that he still has THREE years left on his current deal. I don't think he's expecting a new deal this year. Players too are mindful of the upcoming CBA negotiations. If a player takes a market deal now, who's to say what a market deal will be 2 or 3 years from now? With everything up in the air, he could do himself a disservice by making a deal before he knows what the landscape looks like. Sure. No one knows what the future CBA will be like, and a great deal today may not be tomorrow. Then again, isn't that always the case? Players sign a deal today making them among the top 1%, and in a couple years, they are no longer even top 10%. But I would point this out. While Cutler takes some risk that he signs a deal today worth less than what he can get tomorrow, he also gains huge security by inking a long term deal today. If he were to blow out his knee this year, what is his future value? Here is my thing. (a) Usually, when a team making a trade for a key level player, do they not usually follow that up w/ a new contract? ( We have the cap space today. That is a huge element in my eyes. If we do not spend it on Cutler, what are we spending it on. If we do not use cap space this year, what exactly is our benefit? If paying Cutler is part of the future plan, I do not see the reason to wait when you have huge cap dollars available today. © If we wait a couple years, until he is closer to the end of his deal, we have no idea what sort of cap space we will have (yes, I know that assumes there is a cap). I guess I just don't see the reaason to put it off. We have the money. We have nothing else which will require that sort of money.

I don't know the exact date, but Halloween comes to mind. I think it is prior to the midway point of the season, but it is after the season begins. The player that always stands out to me is Walt Harris. I remember the team trying to re-sign him to allocate money against that years cap, but couldn't get it done, and ended up signing him about a week after the deadline. I railed against our staff for that one. I think the one problem w/ waiting is, you don't want a contract negotation hanging over a players head while he is playing. That is why you often hear players (and staff) talk about how if they can't get a deal done before camp breaks, they are going to put talks on hold until after the season. For me, the thing is, we have the space. There is little question we have tied our future to Cutler. Why not simply go ahead and extend him now. If we had only a tad amount of space, that would be one thing. You want to reserve money for needs which may arrise. But if we have something like $20m, then we have MORE than enough to extend Cutler now, and still have a ton of money ready to take care of any issues which may come up.

I would just like to point out something from dallas, as you mention Ware. It is often talked about here how Parcells was never super high on Ware, and it was actually Marcus Spears who he wanted w/ that top pick. Jerry Jones and his son Steven pushed and esentially forced Parcells to take Ware early, and then allowed him to take Spears later. Well, Spears has been nothing to write home about, and we all know about Ware. Wanted to point this out as Parcells always gets credit for Ware, but Ware was not his pick. He picked him, but only after he was pushed to do so. Ironically, many of the players who Parcells was highest on never panned out (here in Dallas). Spears was mentioned about, but also: Bobby Carpenter was his boy all the way, and Carpenter never developed. Fasano was also (same draft) a player Parcells was all over. No one understood adding Fasano when the team already had Witten, but Parcells simply loved him and had to have him. Nothing special and was traded to Miami, essentially sending him to Parcells. Spencer was another Parcells boy the following year. Here in Dallas, the stamp Parcells put on the team is often discussed. One of their top playmakers (Ware) was never a player Parcells was high on. Meanwhile, many (if not most) of the players who were considered his top boys, failed. Then there is the Romo issue, and he really doesn't even get credit there, as most question why it took so long to put Romo into the lineup. Parcells may still have the reputation, but it sure does seem like that reputation is built on a house of cards, which falls to the ground when more closely examined.

I realize the new CBA has a big time effect on all discussions. At the same time, Angelo has in the past front loaded deals, and that is something I think would be beneficial today. Both Boldin (if we were to trade for him) and Cutler are going to get, as you said, very large contracts. As we have cap space, to me, it would be very smart to sign them now to a deal w/ a big time front loaded piece. For example, say Cutler gets $30m bonus, but you set $10m as roster bonus to eat it today, and spread out the rest. His year one cap hit could be $12, 13 or more, but after that, his cap hit will be far more reasonable, allowing you far more cap flexibility down the road.

Okay, as a new glass half-full guy, I have to come to the support of Angelo here when you break this team down by need at position, importance and most of all it's future young players stepping in to replace the aging quality or even the poor quality players on this squad we are extremely thin in my estimation with the exception of QB, TE, DL and possibly RB. 1. OL - we have one young drafted 'high quality' prospect, c. williams, for 5 positions over the next 2-5 years. the rest that are not limited by age are serious questionmark veterans from other teams who may or may not prove to be even starter quality let alone good+ quality starters. should we have drafted guard or tackle high this particular year? earlier this offseason i stated that i did not beleive so with the glut of FA linemen we aquired this offseason and include buenning also in this list. i still stand by that. but our lack of previously drafted linemen to fill in these positions, which are getting extremely expensive cap wise to find good + players in free agency, is obvious. if these 2nd tier FA's don't pan out we are in the same boat again next season. The first point I would make is, with the exception of LT, I think you would find that many teams create their OLs w/o top draft picks. The LT position is an obvious exception, and there we have a 1st round pick. Yes, I know he will move to RT today, but I think the play for tomorrow is still LT. The second point is, while the OL may not be loaded w/ "highly touted" talent (top draft picks or upper tier FAs) that does not mean it is w/o talent. They have questions, but (a) I think there is reason to believe the players do in fact have talent and ( especially on the OL, players drafted later, or even undrafted, can still prove to be very good. Many OL in the NFL are drafted day two and still go on to be very good players. While I think this is more an exception to the rule at many positions, I think it happens often enough on the OL to question the rule itself. Third point is, we have gotten considerably younger at the position. Sure, it still comes down to talent, and whether we added the right talent or not, but we have seriously infused the OL w/ youth. Gone are Miller, Brown, Tait and St.Clair, all of which were on the backend of their careers. Garza just turned 30, but we also have Beekman, Buenning, Omiyale and Shaffer all under 30, and all have starting experience, though Omiyale has the least. next - we certainly could have locked down our future center position this season by keeping our 2nd round pick and drafting unger who has very good size/weight and is projected to be an excellent center and could play as a quality guard if needed. our only depth at all to an aging kreutz is beekman who has shown little as someone who is going to excel in the nfl. although it would not have been a flashy pick it would have anchored one of the most important positions on the offensive line where there exists a player who touches the ball on offense every single play. i'm sure cutler would agree. I would not have been against that draft pick. At the same time, I do think you are a tad quite to dismiss Beekman. Beek was a 4th round draft pick, and while not a top tier pick, the 4th round is where many interior OL are found, including centers. He was considered our backup center, but won the starting OG last year, and while he wasn't great, he was not bad either. And it has to be factored that he was out of position. I think there is solid reason to believe he can be a solid replacement for Kreutz. Few have screamed to add to the OL like Jason and I for years now. At the same time, while I would have taken a different path, I also have to admit we have added talent and youth to the OL. Draft picks would have been nice, but are far from a guarantee. I think we have a nice mix of starting talent and youth right now on the OL. Short term, veterans like Kreutz and Pace aid the development of the youth, while we have the youth to step in when those players step down. 2. DB's - there is absolutely no depth OR quality in regards to our safeties and especially free safety which is an important position in the type of defense we run. nothing on the table now and nothing being groomed on the roster for our future. poor drafting by angelo at this position has been critical to where our defense now stands in pass protection. I would argue we have some young DBs who could be developed. Both Graham (who looked good last year at CB) and Bowman, and young, versatile and athleitc DBs who are moving to FS. Bullocks didn't live up to expectations in NO, but in a new system, could be a solid veteran. No question this is still among our weaker positions, but I disagree w/ the idea there is no hope for the future, as Graham may well provide stability. If he doesn't, this will be a position to be addressed, but there is not a team in the league w/o a single position in need of work. our corners are not able to play 'up' coverage and it shows as stated in another post about our poor short pass protection (defiantgiant - http://www.talkbears.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=4540). although we have a lot of reasonably young bodies on our squad the trend is still to play them 5-10 yards off the LOS which is due, >>IMO I agree we have a group of #2s, yet at the same time, continue to disagree adding a top tier, #1 CB is a prerequisite in our scheme. Further, I would add that we do have talent and youth here, mixed w/ experience. And we also drafted a CB who, while small for the position, was considered an upper tier talent. 3. LB's - we not only lack depth at this position but lack quality in our SLB. there is nobody to fill in the middle when url leaves or is injured, nobody to fill briggs slot if needed, and not a single strong side backer on this entire team that is even average. angelo has failed to draft any replacements at this position, with the only exception being in briggs, with how many picks? One, I think many teams who have such elite talent at a position tend to have lesser depth. I think you are a tad quick to dismiss the starter talent we do have. I agree we do not have a great looking SLB, yet at the same time, question if we need one in our scheme. The SLB in our scheme is no more than a 2 down player (part time), and few teams have 3 elite LBs. Further, I would argue we do in fact have depth. Williams, for example, is a player the staff we ready to insert in place of Briggs before Briggs returned at our price. You can say he isn't proven, but that is simply going to be true of most any team w/ a stud starter. When you have elite starters, your backups are going to get few chances to prove themselves. We have also just drafted another LB too. I just question the idea that a team w/ talent like ours (at LB) also has these great, proven depth chart players. When you have elite starters, you simply are not going to spend the high picks or FA dollars on backups who are most likely to see action only on special teams. 4. WR - we have 2 questionable #2 WR's drafted by angelo currently on this roster and one was a CB makeover. i don't think i need to extrapolate on angelo's draft results at this position more than it has been discussed on this board. But i would offer two counter-points. One, while I am not going to say the WR talent has been there, I would argue it has not been a good situation to develop WRs until now. We the garbage we have had at QB, you simply are not likely to develop great WRs. Now we have a QB in Cutler who simply makes WRs better. Two, while we do not have much by way or proven commodites, I would argue we have talent on youth on the roster, including 3 rookie Wrs we just added this past draft, combined w/ a 1st day (I still consider round 3 a 1st day pick) WR from last year and an explosive player in Hester. Our WRs may have a lot to prove, but I would argue we have youth, talent and potential like few times in the past, and finally a QB capable of helping move that development along. finally... the facts are you can't keep bringing in aging quality vets at high price tags like the boldin type receivers or the cheaper end-of-the-line pace/r. brown type linemen without serious damage to your team in the long run. these are stop-gap or over-the-top get me into the superbowl this season type players only. if you can't fill these positions in the draft for long term solutions you will be in trouble if your goal is to win multiple superbowls. I agree, but also think you are too quick to overlook what Angelo has done of late. He has been adding more FAs on the right side of 30. Also, I see a lot of potential in the draft picks, particularly this year. I agree w/ the general idea that a team is going to be in trouble if they don't hit on their earlier draft picks. At the same time, i would add that (a) that is somewhat offset when you hit on players drafted later - you still hurt by way of cap hit when a player like Benson busts, but then again, is that not offset when you find a cheap playmaker like Forte? ( if you look at the total history of Angelo, you can easily attack his drafts, but I also think his last two drafts offer a lot of increased hope. In 2008, Williams, Forte, Bennett and Harrison could all be starters, or see big roles. In 2009, Gilbert, Iglesias, Moore and Knox could all see a lot of playing time, and even see a starter or two in there. So while I agree Angelo has not draft well through the years, and further, I would question many of his moves (and road taken) throughout his time, I at the same time do think he has changed course somewhat, and think there is far greater reason for hope today. Today, I think we set up better overall, in terms of starters and depth, than at maybe anytime in the past. Oh yea, and did I mention we finally have a franchise QB?

LT, One. Nothing precise, but do you have a general ballpark of where we stand. I know the players we have added were not cap killers, but at the same time, we have added quite a few pieces. I honestly do not know if we have $15m or $25m at this point in cap space. Any idea? Two. We have Waaaaaayyyyyyy more cap space than we could possibly spend on new players Where ever we stand in cap space, trade and sign for Boldin, then sign Culter to an extension, and I bet I could spend every dollar we have in cap space.

Can't say I go that far. While I want, in theory, our division to be solid, I just can not root for the other division teams. When they play Dallas, it is close, but still can't do it. Some around here have asked me who I root for when two teams like GB and Minny play. My response is Al-Quada.

IMHO, this was a good, and solid offseason, for Detroit. I would say they did well not to go after the big ticket difference makers. I don't care what they did this offseason. After going 0-16, and considered the number of changes at both staff and player levels, there is simply no way this was going to be a team that could compete this year. They should have, and did, look more toward the future. The list of players added may not make them a great defense, but it sure as heck upgrades the D, is something which may be built upon in the next few years. Ditto on the offense. Detroit is not a team I worry about this year, but if Stafford develops into a legit QB, they could become a "player" in the next few years. Frankly, that is fine w/ me. I am all for the division looking good, so long as we are on top

Make the team? Likely not. But I would say there is a pretty decent chance he can make the practice squad, and from there, may be no more than one injury away from the 53 man roster.

I thought all along we would be looking at him as a future OG. At the same time, I do still wonder if we might not also consider him at the blocking TE role, which the staff indicated was an area we wanted to upgrade. When they say he isn't athletic enough to play TE, I wonder if that includes "blocking TE". I would not expect him to be athletic enough to play the role of a TE and running routes, but a blocking TE is little more than an extra OL on the field, and if he is considered an "athletic OG" I wonder if he could not handle such a duty. Further, I wonder if working him in such a role would not also fit in his development as a OG, as the two roles would have similarities.

I don't know about that "boat load of cap space" at this point. Sure, we may technically have a big chunk of space on the books, but how much do you think is reserved for Cutler? He is going to get a very big payday. Also, not sure where we are (not counting Cutler) after all the FA signings. Not saying we signed any huge deals, but w/ the addition of 3 to the OL, and some other "extras" adding into the mix, I just do not know where we are in terms of cap anymore. But where ever we are, I think we are likely holding back a ton of space for Cutler. Back to Rice, i would just take a pass. One. Rice is a well known name, and the idea of adding such a player often gets big play for fans, but how often do players in such a situation actually do anything worth a jack? Most often, players who retire should just stay retired. Two. I personally have some fairly high hopes for Anderson, and while I have minimal hopes for Melton, I do think we need to let Marinelli have time to work with him. Three. As for Rice being better than Wale, I am just not seeing it. For one thing, Rice was a more pure RDE, and toward the end, I thought he was dreadful in run defense, making a move to LDE even more questionable. Second, while Wale didn't have a great season, I just think it a reach to think a player coming out of retirement will be better. If we want to look at veterans, consider WR, FS and even OL. I just don't see the value in looking at a player like Rice.

Iglesias is not a speed guy. In fact, that was probably the top knock on him. While he does have quickness, he lacks speed. He is very much a chain mover. Think Bobby Engram w/ a bit more size.

Agreed. That is something I have always loved at draft time on this board. We have posters spread out across the country, and w/ many different college fans. I see a lot of Texas, Texas Tech and Oklahoma games, and watch a few other teams from the region, but do not see a ton of games from other conferences. Further, I would add that (as this would be true for most) living here, I also hear on the local sports talk quite a bit about prospects from the area. So if everyone chipped in, it could make for an interesting collection.

Supposedly in the Cover 2 the perfect trio would be 3 WLB type LB's according to Lovie. They are supposed to be interchangeable as is the safeties. Thats what I'm getting at. I once remember you saying that if Briggs wasn't playing next to Urlacher he wouldn't be that good. I guess you've changed that stance. One, I have said many times I was wrong on Briggs. Yes, I do still today believe his play is enhanced by Urlacher and our system, but that would be true of most players. As said so many times, I was wrong on Briggs. Two, Honestly I do not recall Lovie ever saying he likes 3 WLBs for our system. What I recall though is, Rivera, when running Lovie's scheme, talked about the role of the SLB. And honestly, in all our years w/ Lovie's scheme, that seems far more true. When have we ever tried to insert a very athletic playmaker on the strong side? We have passed on adding LBs would would have been seen as athletic upgrades at SLB. We have gone w/ lesser athletes at the position, but ones solid in run support. We have used the SLB very much as the grunt role player, and taken him off the field on passing downs. I just disagree that our role for the SLB is that of a playmaker, and believe a player as talented as Briggs would be wasted at SLB. I not trying to go contrary to your thoughts but agree with just a litlle different spin on things. For instance you tried to match up body types and 40 times I tried to take players from the same program or a similar draft position or the prototype for the Bears' scheme. Like Iglesias,Bradley and Clayton all former Sooners and Freeman and Diggs from Ohio State. Afalava to Lynch who along with Bob Sanders are both the Best safeties who have recently played in the cover 2 and Kinder and Colston who were both drafted late in the 7th round. I tried to do more than simply match height/weight/40 times. I tried to match style. Iglesias may come out of Oklahoma, just like Bradley and Clayton, but they are VERY different WRs. Just because two players went to the same school doesn't mean they are similar. Both Bradley and Iglesias may have both gone to Oklahoma, but they couldn't be more different. As for the round, I don't get the comparison value there either. Colston and Kinder may have been drafted in the same round, but they are very different players. Would you say Crabtree and Harvin are similar WRs, or comparable, just because they were both drafted in the 1st round? As for B-Robs athletic ability all I know is when the Bears went to Green Bay the weekend of Payton's death he was athletic enough to block a kick and preserve a rare win at Lambeau during those days. Being athletic at San Jose State or in a swimming pool doesn't translate to Richard Seymour IMO. I remember well that play from Brob, and also remember Brob saying no one was more surprised than himself. In fact, he said he thought Walter came down from heaven to lift him up. Despite that great jump, Brob was simply never considered a very athletic big guy. I realize jumping out of a swimming pool does not mean he is like Seymour. While I think it is cool as hell to watch, I don't think I have ever talked about his ability to jump out of a pool. I am talking about his style, and his style is very athletic. He mixed power w/ athleticism, and shows far more burst and explosion than a man his size should be capable of. Measurables were a factor for me, but not "the" factor. I was far more talking about their style of play, and that is what I was trying to use as a comparable. Barwin's sacks were in the Big East which to me had only a couple of good teams with Cinci being one of them. Maybe I should find out how he fared against OT prospect Beatty at UConn. I think both he and Melton should be interesting studies in the coming years. This doesn't mean that I think that was a good pick because I don't. If they are looking for insurance against losing one of the DEs on the roster then I think they should have gotten a more game ready player. I realize Barwin didn't play against elite competition, but I think the point is still valid. Simply put, he showed pass rush ability on the field, rather than looking good in shorts and everyone assuming he can pass rush because of that. Oh, and by the way, Texas may be a major school, but they have plenty of teams on their schedule no better than that which Cincy played. Lets also add Illinois' Will Davis to the list of guys that switched from offense to DE. This one started off at WR and TE and was awesome in their Rose Bowl year but slacked off in his senior year because teams knew more about him and schemed for him. Honestly, I do not know a lot about Davis. Hey, I never said my comparison are 100%, or close to it. I was looking at our rookies, and trying to think of players they reminded me of. I was not just using measurables, but how each play the game.

While I think there are overall similarities, yes, I am thinking of Brown "now" when factoring what I consider Melton to be. While Brown was thought to be more of a pass rusher, I just do not believe he has even been more than average in that regard. On the other hand, he has been surprisingly effective in terms of run defense. Melton is considered by so many a pass rusher, but IMHO. his future, if he develops, is more similar to Brown. Good in run defense, but never more than average in terms of pass rush.

Nfo I can pretty much agree with your assessments I might tweek just a couple by comparing Iglesias to Mark Bradley by saying he is not is fast but may be tougher and a better route runner maybe even simlar to another former Sooner Mark Clayton. Bradley? Honestly, I don't get that comparison. Hell, I would argue the only good point for comparison may be how opposite they are/were. Bradley never started in college, and was VERY raw. Iglesias is a long term starter, and considered among the most polished and NFL ready WRs in the draft. Bradley was all about athleticism and speed. Igleasias dropped in the draft due, more than any other single thing, to his lack of speed. Bradley had questionable hands, at least as a prospect. Iglesias has sticky fingers. These two WRs are, IMHO, near opposites. When I think of Freeman I think of N'all Diggs another former Buckeye.Btw this pick seemed oddly similar to Lance Briggs also.I hear a lot of talk about moving other players but do they think Briggs can play the SLB? I do. While I have seen Diggs play, and remember him, I don't recall him well enough to comment on the comparison. Briggs at SLB? That would seem like a waste of talent IMHO. Not saying he can't play there, but I just think he would be wasted. Unless we change our scheme, the SLB is simply not a premier position. Rivera used to talk about how the SLB in our system is the grunt player who gets no respect. He has to eat up block to free up the other LBs, cover TEs, basically, the dirty work. The WLB is going to be more of a free lancer rolling to the ball, usually w/ fewer blocks in front of him. Briggs excels in this regard. Maybe Briggs could play SLB, but I just think it would be a waste. He is a pro bowl WLB. Why play him at a position which just doesn't have great upside in our system? Melton still has me wanting to compare him to Texans 2nd round pick Conner Barwin who has about the same amount of experience at the position Barwin represents a perfect example of why I am down on Melton. Correct me if I am wrong, but Barwin too was moved late in his college career to DE. In fact, he wasn't moved until his find year, right? Melton was at DE for two years (staring one). But the point is, in that one season at DE for Barwin, he had like 12 sacks and a ton of tackles. Melton? 4 sacks, none of which were that impressive. Johnny Knox reminds me of a prospect that came out a couple of years ago out of Hampton named Jerome Mathis who the Texans took in the mid rounds an he made an impact as a rookie in the return game. I think Knox has more upside than Mathis, who did contribute as a return man, but I don't think ever did jack as a WR. I can only hope that the Bears have found a John Lynch in Afalava. Not sure if he has Lynch's pure power, which is why I mentioned Aruchuleta, who had more athleticism (which I do think Alfalfa has) combined nice power, but simply lacking coverage skills. If Kinder can duplicate Marcus Colston numbers I'll be happy. If any of our WRs could match Colston's numbers, I'd be happy, but I don't think Colston is similar to Kinder. Small difference in size. Colston is a legit 6'4 225-230 and plays even bigger than that. I had to think about this a bit but Gilbert reminds me of B-Rob. I always thought he should have played inside and never at DE because he wasn't quick enough and he seemed to take plays off at times which seems to be one of the knocks on Gilbert(He doesn't bring it on every play) Thats kind of a similar comment to what was said about Alex Brown coming out. BRob? BRob was never considered ultra athletic. He had decent athleticism for a man his size, but was never considered "that" athletic.

Okay, a friend and I were talking about our picks, and what NFL players we might compare them too. Understand, I am not saying our picks will become, are as good, or will end up like those they are compared to. I might see similar traits, or actually feel the upside is comparable. Anyway, here are some thoughts. Jarron Gilbert The player that comes to mind for me is Richard Seymour. Gilbert is 6'5 290. Seymour is 6'6 310, but as I recall, Saymour was lighter coming out of college, and gained weight to play in a 3-4, which Gilbert could easily do. Seymour was always considered very athletic and very versatile. I remember the belief that he could play as a true 4-3 DT, 4-3 LDE or a 3-4 DE. I have read the same about Gilbert, who has experience playing all over the DL, and moving to the NFL, could play just about anywhere. He has the frame to easily add some weight to play a position that stresses power, or maintain/reduce weight to play outside. In our system, which stresses ligher/quicker DTs, he likely doesn't need to do much w/ his weight. Seymour shows excellent combination of burst and strength, and I think Gilbert does the same. While the two will play different roles in the NFL, I see similarities in they athleticism/power/versatility. Juaquin Iglesias I had been thinking Iglesias somewhere between Booker and Boldin. He has the traits of booker (booker of old) in that he is a great route runner w/ sticky glue hands who always seems to find space, but I think he has better YAC ability than Booker, though not as much as Boldin. Then my friend threw out the name TJ Housyourmama, and it sounds about right. TJ is 6'1 200, while Iglesias is 6'1 210. Both are considered very good possession or possession plus WRs who lack elite speed. TJ is incredible in route running and hands, and tracks the ball very well. Also, while he is not a threat to to every pass to the house, he does well running after the catch, using both power and field awareness to find space. This is just how I would evaluate Iglesias. Henry Melton While I think Melton has a LONG way to go, the player I think about is actually already on the Bears. Alex Brown. Melton is considered very athletic, but due to being so raw and the lack of production, he fell to the 4th round. Brown too was considered very athletic, but due to questions of motivation and committment, as well as attitude, he fell to the 4th round as well. I have never felt Brown was all that in terms of pass rush. He ends up with 5 or 6 sacks, but often those sacks seem to come in bunches. He will have a game here and there where he does well attacking the QB, but is not what I would consider a consistent pass rusher. Despite his size, Brown is actually solid against the run though. Brown's athleticism translates far better in run defense than in pass rush. I think the same is true for Melton. Melton has a very strong lower base. Just think about a RB. Usually have a solid and strong lower body, especially power runners like Melton was. That can translate to the run defense, where you are using leverage and lower body power to fight off your block and make a play against the ball carrier. His athleticism does not translate however to the pass rush. Despite what he does in shorts, on a track surface, that explosion just wasn't there when the pads went on. Against the run, Melton did pretty well, and was part of a very good Texas run defense. In terms of pass rush though, rarely could he beat his man. He just didn't have the burst to beat his man on the edge, nor the ability to get inside. Solid when the play comes to him (run defense) but just not much when he has to move to the ball (pass rush). If Melton became Alex Brown, I think everyone would be thrilled. I simply (a) do not see him being the pass rusher many try to make him out to be and ( think he will take considerable time to develop (if at all) due to just how raw he is. DJ Moore This comparison was from my friend, but I like it. Cortland Finnegan (Tenn). Finnigan is listed at 5'10 190, but most say that is a generous 5'10, and more likely in the 5'9 and change range. So while he may be a hair taller, the difference is minimal, and the overall body for the two are very similar. Finnigan plays a very physical game, despite his size. He plays strong against receivers, and is strong in run support. While short, he plays bigger than he is. All of these are traits I have read about for Moore. Finnigan is a playmaker, as Moore is considered as well. While i am still not 100% on Moore's wagon, I like the comparison, see similarities, and would be absolutely thrilled if this is the sort of player Moore could become for us. Johnney Knox The comparison I would make is Devery Henderson. Both are 5'11, and while Henderson is a bit heavier, I believe he too was in the 185-190 range coming out of college. Both are elite speed threats who lacked route running refinement entering the NFL. Henderson has never developed his route running very well, and is still today simply a deep threat WR, but what a threat. This past season, for example, he had only 32 catches, but for nearly 800 yards and nearly a 25 ypc average. Henderson may never be a consistent WR, but as a deep threat, he is tremenous. I think Knox is similar. He has played at a JUCO, and then a DII school, and was able to beat DBs w/ his pure speed, but in the NFL, will have to develop his route running better. Right out of college, he can add a deep dimension to our team, but will likely be a role player, at least initially. One major difference between the two is, Knox is considered to have solid hands, while Henderson drops a lot of balls. Further, while Henderson never really developed his game, Knox I think does have the potential to do so. Right now, I think Henderson is a good comparison. Deep threat WR who is not consistent. If Knox can develop better as a route runner, the comparison I might throw out there is Joey Galloway, also 5'11 and similar weight/speed. Knox must develop to be like Galloway, which is why I compare him now to Henderson, but whether he turns out to be Henderson or Galloway, either way, I think he could make an impact for us. Marcus Freeman Honestly, don't know. Freeman has tremendous athleticism. In fact, he was originally a SLB, but was moved to WLB because (a) he struggled to shed blocks and ( the team wanted to better utilize his speed and athleticism. I just am not sure who to compare him too, as frankly, many LBs seem to fit such a description. Al Afalava Archuleta? Both are nearly idential in height/weight. Both are considered box safeties who lack coverage skills. Arch was essentially a 4th LB on the field. I don't know if Afalava has that sort of upside, but I think their size and playing style are similar. Lance Louis No idea. It really depends on what we intend to use him as. Will he be a FB? A blocking TE? An OG? Derek Kinder Hines Ward? I guess it depends on whether or not he can return to pre-injury form, but prior to the injury, this is the WR I think he would have compared to. Both 6' 205-215 range. Both lack elite speed, but play a physical style. Solid route running and great hands. While Kinder is coming off a less than stellar season, I love the mental makeup of a kid trying to play coming off an injury. He wasn't 100%, but gave 100%. If he gets back to pre-injury form, this is a comparison I would make (though he would be Ward light). If he can't revert back to pre-injury form, he won't be on the roster, and it doesn't matter.

2. If he does, I relish the thought! I'd love 2 more chances to send him into permanant retirement! He proved last year he can no longer be effective for a full season. While he may light things up for 8 weeks, he'll falter down the stretch. While I am not going to say he would be great, I would say this. While he didn't look that great in NYJ, I think he did show he can still play. Further, put him on Minny, and that could be a tad worrisome. He would be behind potentially the best OL in the NFL. W/ the ability to hand off to AP, few teams will be able to focus on Farve, either blitzing him or helping in coverage. And I don't even want to think was Favre could do for Berrian, not to mention Harvin. Favre may no longer have "it" but in Minny, he may come as close as possible to finding "it" again.

First, on Melton, I just do not understand why everything thinks of him, and compares him to, pass rushers. If anyone wants a player to compare or think about, how about Alex Brown. Did you know the two are identical in size? Both were considered elite in terms of athletic talent leading up to the draft. Brown fell due, in large part, to questions of desire and committment, not to mention attitude. Melton fell due to being raw and a lack of production. But in terms of style, I personally see similarities. For all the perception, Brown really isn't much in tems of pass rush. He has a couple good games a year where he ups his sack totals, but those players are not the standard. Brown is actually, despite his size, a pretty dang good run defender. His athleticism does not seem to translate to the pass rush, but he does use his athleticism well to stop the run. I would say that is similar to Melton, who was actually pretty decent against the run (Texas as a whole was very good against the run) but against the pass, he was dang near absent. He has a solid lower base and power in his lower body, which helps in levelege and run defense, but the athleticism simply does not translate to pass rush. If Melton developed in Alex Brown, I think everyone here would be happy. I personally don't think that will happen, but just saying. My thing is, I just don't understand why everything thinks of him as a pass rusher. Michael Johnson was considered a raw talent, but when on the field, the one area he looked great was rushing the passer. Melton? He just never looked good rushing the passer. Agreed many on the staff should be on notice. IMHO, Drake should already be gone, but agreed that w/ 3 rookie WRs, as well as still young and developing WRs in Hester and Bennett, Drake has a lot of colors to work w/, but needs to prove he can paint the picture, rather than continue w/ the finger paint job he has been doing. Lets see. Turner now has a franchise QB, much improved OL, upper tier RB, loads of young talent at WR, and an upper tier TE duo. I am not going to say he has to get our offense into the top 10 instantly, as it may take some time w/ so many new pieces, but our offense needs to be pretty damn good, or we need to find an OC who can make the offense look good. Marinelli - Not sure he is as on the spotlight. But agree Lovie sure is.

I'll say this. I would actually like the Melton pick more if we moved him back to RB. I just do not think his athleticism translates to the field at DE, but I always loved watching him play RB.

Ehh.. I just wrote too long of a response and deleted it before I added it. Unfortunately this is still long. I'll never be able to be on that wagon, because it's too hard for me to forget the past. Think of all the mistakes over many years. Hey, its not like this has been easy for me. Few have been as critical of Angelo more than I. But I have always said, when he does right, I'll give him full credit for it. I really think it hard to attack him for this past offseason. I really don't feel the Bears truely pursued a number 1 WR hard this year, especially Boldin. Given that like 6 teams chose a WR in the first round, I imagine half the teams in the league offered equal to or as much as the Bears. This is a year that Coles, Howz, Holt, TO, Boldin, Burress, Edwards, and others were available. Some still are, but it hasn't happened yet. Curently the team have only like 2 WR's who have caught a pass, and have trouble catching passes. First, on Boldin. If you believe the draft day reports, no team went after Boldin more than us. At the end of the day, Az simply wanted more than we, or ANY TEAM was willing to give. Second, I too wanted a stud WR. At the same time, I can't say I wanted all the WRs on your list. Coles? No thanks. TJ? Yes, I wanted him, but understood not giving him the elite WR money. TO/Burruss. Hell no. Edwards. Heck, he is still available, and after Cle drafted all the WRs, may take less. But for both Edwards and Boldin, that no one has traded for either should say something. I don't see the big push to upgrade the offensive line. Pace was an awesome pick up, and should be a very welcome addition to what was a pitiful line last year. However, I didn't see any new youth infused on the line. The only other additions were a guy who couldn't get on the field and a cast off from what was a bad line in Cleveland last year. You don't see the big push to upgrade the OL? Are you sure you don't simply disagree w/ the manner in which we are trying to upgrade the OL? We added 3 players, inlcuding one future HOF. Also, while not draft picks of ours, the other two offer still young player w/ potential further in development than a rookie we could have brought in. Then you add in getting our top 15 pick from last year, and I think it hard to argue (a) we didn't make a big push to upgrade the OL or ( we have not in fact upgraded the OL. I wanted to draft OL also, especially as Duke and Merideth continued to fall. But while I wanted to draft OL, I can not take away from what was done prior to the draft. Angelo did in fact make a big push to upgrade the OL. I think you disagree w/ the route taken to accomplish this more than disagreeing a route was taken at all. I'm also not a fan of bringing in 2 Free Safeties from 2 of the worst secondaries in the league and hoping that either one of them or one of the CB's will stick at the position. While i agree, lets not pretend this was a good position in either FA or the draft. We got a couple players in FA as a safety net in case we came out of the draft w/o a FS. Personally, this is one area I would agree Angelo has failed, and have said as much. At the same time, is there ever a year a GM can "fix" every position and you can head into the next season w/o a single position of concern? The draft I won't hate on. Each player either has potential or was a value pick. I never expect much out of 3rd round players or less. Hopefully a few good back ups will pop up, maybe a starter, but I wouldn't bank on a superstar. It is what it is. "it is what it is" What is that? Honestly do not know what you mean. No 1st or 2nd round picks, and thus we should not expect a star, and only slightly hope for a starter? Or is it more about Angelo than the round? Honestly do not know what you mean. I think Gilbert has upper tier potential. Iglesias, a better than solid starter. DJ Moore a nickel and Knox is solid contributor (in a couple years) at WR. Rest are special teams and depth. But if that happened, that would work for me. I'm not as big on the Cutler trade. I didn't see it as a Orton plus 2 firsts and a third type of need. It seemed more of a save my own behind type of move. Which I do like that mood better then JA being JA. I couldn't see the Cutler trade or Pace being brought in in past years. Getting a franchise QB was not a Orton plus 2 first need? If you don't mind my asking, how old are you? NOT meant to insult. Just asking because I talk to a lot of old guys, and ask them, "have you ever seen a franchise QB don a bears jersey" Some say Billy Wade, but Wade only had about 4 seasons w/ the bears. A couple might try to mention McMahon, but frankly, that is a joke. I love Mac, but he was no franchise QB. Seriously, you have to go back to Sid F'ing Luckman to find a franchise QB, and he ended his career in the 40s. We are a charter franchise, and have not had a franchise QB in 60 years. And you don't think that is worth Orton and two 1sts? It undoubtabley inspired hope in a QB deprived fan base and will sell jerseys. In that alone it was a smart move. Even so, Orton was fine IMO. It may even be arguable that Orton is the better fit as the team has a solid D. I'm not saying he has more talent then Cutler. I just think cutler's gunslinger mantality may inhibit the team. I think Cutler was a better fit on a team like Denver who needs to score due to a bad D. Hey, I was in the minority who always supported Orton. While an Angelo basher, I actually applauded Angelo for drafting Orton in the 4th. I thought Orton could be a pretty dang good NFL QB. Struggled year one, but never understood why fans expected him to look good as a rookie. So few do. Anyway, I like him, but simply put, Orton is a nice QB. Surround him w/ talent, and he can look good. We have had plenty of Orton's on the roster over the years. In Cutler, we got something rarely seen. In Cutler, we got a player who simply makes those around him better. He didn't have to be surrounded by pro bowl WRs to make the offense go. I also disagree w/ your comments on system fit. Who will be running our defense this year? Lovie. When was the last time he ran the defense? St.L. What sort of offense did St.L have? Greatest show on turf. You argue that our defense doesn't need a high octane offense. I would argue that our defense has been held back by the low scoring offenses we have always put out there. Our scheme is simply not one that tries to punch the team in the mouth at the LOS and prevent them from moving the ball at all. Our defense is one that loves to take changes and risks, and go for big plays. Look at Lovie's defenses in St.L. They were not elite in terms of scoring, but due to their aggressive nature, were among the league leaders in turnovers, sacks, pressures, etc. When you have an offense able to put points on the board, that is when his defense can take off. When his defense has to win low scoring games, frankly, they are not at their best. So I would argue a QB like Cutler is far more a fit for us, w/ our defense, than a more conservative QB like Orton. I think with a line that wouldn't kill him, WR's that could catch, then the team would have had a very efficient offense. He will have all of that in Denver this year. Orton's nongunslinger mentality may kill Denver. But that is the point. W/ Orton, you need to surround him w/ great talent, because while a nice QB, he simply is not good enough to make those around him significantly better. Cutler is a QB who can take a rookie WR (Royal) and make him look great immediately. Cutler is a QB who can make OLs look better due to his ability to move and throw on the run. Cutler is a QB who, due to his ability to throw downfield, opens up the running lanes, and thus a big part of why Denver seemed to get production out of whatever RB they threw out there. For many player, they are nice player who can look good when surrounded by talent. That is Orton. But then there are those other player who simply make average players look good and good player look great. That's Cutler.

I like the draft but Nfol's love affair with JA is kinda making me nauseous. Is there no shame left in the world? Damn, a guy can't win. I am critical of Angelo, and viewed as being too mean. Now I am nice to him, make people nauseous. Would you prefer I went back on the attack? Sorry, but I just can't. I joke to some extent, but the truth is, Angelo really has gone a long way for me. Cutler was huge, but its more than that. While I am not totally sold on the specific players, he made a big push to upgrade the OL. While it didn't happen, he really went after Boldin hard, and while I believe you were against such a move, I liked it and liked that he went for it. Finally, I just loved the Iglesias pick. While I am really on his wagon right now, still not blind, and just have to call him out on some of the picks. I will never be a blind supporter, if that means anything A couple thoughts on Gilbert and Melton. I believe Marinelli had a ton of input on these picks, especially Melton. Neither guy performed consistently well enough for any of us to get real excited about them. However, they both have a ton of athleticism and that is intriguing. Read the posts in the various threads and it's clear that it's Marinelli's ability to work with these guys that is generating the excitement not the players themselves. I liken the Melton pick to the day the Colts traded way up to draft Freeney. Not saying Melton is anywhere near that level just saying that I think Marinelli really wanted this guy and JA made it happen even though we reached for him at a time we had biggers needs. First, wasn't Gilbert very productive in college? You said neither performed consistently well, but I thought Gilbert did perfrom pretty dang well. On Melton, I just can't see my way toward the Freeney comment. While I understand what you are saying, I still would say the similarities are minimal. If we drafted Michael Johnson or even Sidbury, I would better agree w/ your point. But Melton showed little to nothing in terms of pass rush at Texas. He is supposed to be so athletic, but I just didn't see it on the field. In fact, he was considered a better run defender than pass rusher. I get that everyone is high on Marinelli, and thus the hope is he can develop these players. I have no issue w/ that line of thinking for Gilbert, as there just seems to be so much to work with. For Melton though, I just don't get the excitement.

Nice bit of humor. I'd be happier with Dick Jarron Gilbert if it wasn't for Dusty & Tank. Not fair to generalize, but it is what it is. Ever heard of try and try again? Should we not have drafted Forte because we drafted Benson in the top 5? Hey, we drafted a 2nd and 3rd round WR, neither of which panned out for us long term. Pass on WR? I know the arguments you can make, but the point is, just because we drafted some others at the position, and yet they did not workout, doesn't mean we pass on a potential stud. Does it not help that Gilbert is the one pick most around the country are giving us huge props on? Julio's son seems to have a high floor and a low ceiling. That might be what the Dr. ordered with Cutler on board. Most would agree w/ your floor/ceiling comment. While I would agree his ceiling is limited some, I think it is higher than most would give credit. Early prediction: Melton gets placed on the IR early. I'm marking this page and I'll be happy to point it out September 1st. Not a bad prediction. DJ Moore was arguably the #1 CB when the college season ended . . . helluva a pick. We've got great depth at CB & no safeties. Interesting. Still just can't get too excited about a CB not quite 5'9, and lets not pretend 5'9 would be some great size. I predict the guy from MTV's jackass will join Melton on the IR. I know you disagree NFO. Time will tell. Disagree less than you think. I said he is on the raw side, and will need time to develop. I said he could become a good WR down the road, but not to expect too much early. Freeman: He could be the next Jamar Williams. Future special teams MVP. Agreed. Afalava: You make a good point about the safeties. Are we planning on doing something different with them? Make them interchangeable? I think we want to load up on SS' and plan to send them all at the QB. Don't need to cover if the QB is on his arce. Louis: Helluva a pick. Hopefully the next John Gilmore. Can we just remove the FB position from out playbook? Still hope we look at him at OL and not TE, but I just like the athleticism in the 7th round. And yes, please get rid of the FB position if we are not going to upgrade it. Kinder: I like his potential to be the next Mike Hass. LOL.