nfoligno

You know I like it, but lets be honest for a moment. W/ Pace added (our 3rd vet OL) there is zero chance we draft Duke. Then again, I didn't think Angelo could pull off the Cutler trade. Honestly though, while you know how much I want OL, at the same time, w/ Cutler added, there is a greater thought about the "now". In the 2nd, I am thinkg Rashied Johnson, who I think is the sort of FS that not only would play well sooner rather than later, but is an Angelo style DB and fills a huge hole. Especially w/ all done on offense, I think FS in the 2nd is now VERY likely. A stud OL makes bad players average, average players good, good players great, and great players Hall of Famers. Draft: 1: MF CUTLER 2: Duke Robinson, OG, OU - Now is the time to support the FRANCHISE QB 3a: MF CUTLER 3b: Ramses Barden, WR, Cal Poly - Time to make this team an offensive powerhouse 4: David Bruton, S, ND - Destroyed the combine competition, very good player 5a: Willie VanDeSteeg, DE, Minnesota - High motor, gets to the QB. Good situational DE rookie year. 5b: Jason Williams, OLB, Western Illinois - Fast, fits the system 6: Javorskie Lane, FB, Texas A&M - This guy is a monster and plows holes. He's got soft hands. Losing draft stock because of weight. 7: McRib Sandwich

I just heard it too. Dang, now if we can just get a report on signing Holt.

Seriously, there is no debate. We all love the punky QB, and he won us a SB, but all anyone has to do is look at the stats. He was bigger than life, but statistically, Ortan was as good or better than Jimmy Mac.

About as happy as Forte, Hester and Bennett.

Most of the members? You would have to go all the way back to Luckman!

We now have three 3rd round picks this year. One from Denver. One thanks to Berrian. And our original.

I might bitch about this pick or that, but one thing I guarantee. It will be a long time before I say shit negative about my new BFF. If Cutler bombs in Chicago, I will speak no evil about Angelo. Now Lovie Smith? That's another matter all together

Come on. Did yall expect different from me? Angelo is my new BFF.

Angelo is a god

Your worried? Do you realize that last year I was actually VERY down on the idea of drafting Williams. We took him as the 3rd OL, but I think I viewed him closer to 6th or so. Long and Clady were well ahead of him. I felt Albert was in the tier of Long and Clady, though I was in the minority. I also liked Otah and Cherilus. One reason I didn't like Williams was the belief that he was a pure LT, which sounded good to a team in need of a LT, but also had greater boom/bust potential. Cherilus is different, as he was viewed as a RT/OG, but the rest were viewed as LT, w/ the ability to fairly easily slide to other, if not any other, position on the OL (aside from center). Thus, in the rest, there was a lesser chance of bust. If a player, like Albert, didn't workout at LT, we could play him at RT or inside, all of which I viewed as needs. But in Williams, the belief was he was a pure LT. He was a finesse OT in colleged, and viewed as needing to add strength just to play his finesse style in the NFL. He was way behind the curve in power to move to RT, and questionable to move inside. But we drafted him, and I think we need to do what we can to develop him. Lets take the draft out of the equation for a moment. I have less issue adding Pace if we are looking at him to play RT. Then, we can start Pace at RT, and we would have Shaffer (not to mention Omiyale) capable of moving outside if there is a need. Or, we pass on Pace but add an OT early in the draft. I agree there is need to add another OL, for depth if not to start. Where I disagree is in the idea of adding a veteran to simply replace Williams.

I would give up what you just mentioned. I am already on record giving up a 1st and 3rd this year, along w/ our 1st next year. I do not think it will be all those picks, plus a player, but if Harrison gets it done? Done. I like some of what i saw from Harrison last year too, but it isn't like the burst onto the scene and took a job there for the taking. Yea, I would throw him into the deal, though I honestly think I could then take the 3rd round pick out of the equation. Sure, there are limits on what I would give. Whether people believe it or not, there are limits on what Wash will give too.

Um, I assume you mean 18? We are at the top end of where I have seen him "slated" to go, but he may not even get to 25 as many think Minny could be seriously looking at him. Now that would make me sick. I would much prefer they took Troy Williamson, er, I mean Darrius Heyward-Bey.

Wanna here something funny? Hester and Bennett had the same wonderlic score (18). Honestly, I would not credit Hester too much. He wasn't handed the playbook to learn. More like he was given a couple plays to get down, and even then..... Don't you recall the game where, on I think 3 different downs, Moose literally was pushing Hester into position as Hester came out of the huddle totally clueless where to line up? Now, saying that, I have to wonder why at some point we couldn't focus on a certain group of plays w/ Bennett to get him on the field sooner. While he may take time to learn the entire playbook, if he could focus on and sooner learn a handful of plays (like w/ Hester) we could have at least gotten him on the field, and he may have helped.

The Bennett/playbook situation really is beyond me. While I can't say I ever recall reading about Bennett's ability in the film room or in terms of picking up plays, he was at Vanderbilt and did well enough on his own wonderlic (something like 18 to 20). I could have understood many things having held him back, or limiting him his rookie year. Learning the playbook is not among them. Two ways to look at it. One. If Bennett can't learn the playbook, how can a low wonderlic boy like Nicks. Two. Wonderlic may simply not be the best key in a football players ability to learn football. Did you ever see the movie "The Program". I remember a scene where this big talent DL could barely read in a class room, but then in a team study session, he was the first to answer questions about assignments, plays, whatever. Now, I am not comparing Nicks to him in the classroom, nor am I pretending to believe that move was realistic. The point I do think worth noting is the idea that some are book smart, while others are football smart.

I think you don't give enough credence to the position. The public outcry to get Haynesworth was non-existant..compared to Cutler. We have good DT's...the team has a history of getting them. But QB is our Achilles heal... Trust me. I get the importance of the QB position. For me, I just think it will (at least to some degree) depend on who gets him and for what. If Minny were to get him, then I just do not think it would matter what was given up. The double wammy of losing out on Cutler and his going to a division rival would throw out all logic for fans. On the other hand, there are a couple teams who simply have bigger guns that we. If Det uses their 1st pick in the draft (assuming Denver even wants it) that pick alone is worth more than both our 2009 and 2010 1st rounders. Point of the Haynesworth mention was, I think it is possible Cutler gets traded for a package as ridiculous as Fat Albert got in his contract, and at that point, I think fewer fans than you expect go balistic. If however the package is not as great as I expect, then all bets are off. I stand by my statement that if we do not get Cutler, and we miss the playoffs the calls for JA's head will be at an all time high. Um, I would say this would be true regardless of Cutler. Way too many failed 1st round picks and overall weak talent assembled over the years. I think many are calling for his head today, and if the team fails again, Angelo, Lovie and everyone else will feel an all time high in hate.

Just personal opinion, but I think that "the ESPN poll" is based more on Angelo's history. While few question the bear's need, I think most all (both local and national) media questions whether Angelo would make such a big move. Snyder is someone who has a history of trying to be involved in every big move happening. Angelo? While not equal, one incident I would point to that gives me a small amount of hope. Wale was a 15 sack stud for Miami. I do not think there were many Bear fans who felt (a) Angelo would have the guts to pull the trigger or ( the owners would pony up the money for the new deal he wanted. Well, surprise surprise surprise.

I never said they were equal. In fact, players DO develope in practice. Its really surprising that you are arguing otherwise. If you have a chance to get a player like Pace, it can only help Williams. Working with and learning from a 7 time probowler will only help Williams. And get out of here with your condescending "Aren't you a coach?" crap. Go do it and then come back and tell me that you dont develop players in practice. So basically you are saying that we shouldn't sign Holt because that would take away from Bennetts development which was already severly hindered because we didn't toss him out there before he was ready last year. Astounding. I honestly did not mean to be condescending. Just making sure my memory was right, and that it was you who is a coach. I never said a player does not develop at all in practice. I do however believe the ability of a player to develop in practice is limited. As for Holt, I have actually pointed out the very large difference already. Most positions on the team, your non-starters can still get significant playing time. Depth DBs can be used in nickel, dime and other packages. Other times you have a package where you like 4 LBs. DL rotates a ton, and your 3rd DE or DT may play nearly as many snaps as your starters. On offense, you often use 3 and 4 WR sets, and thus just because you are not a starter, does not mean you can see the field a significant amount of snaps. The OL is different. You do not rotate your OL. You do not go w/ 4 on some downs and 6 on others. You have 5 set starters, and backups simply do not get in, except special teams. So no, I do not think adding Holt would prevent Bennett from developing. Come on is right. So you would play a someone who is worse. Really? If Pace beats him out then Pace deserves to start. Williams can get game experience at other spots then shift over when he can beat Pace out. And if you seriously think that StC would beat Williams out, then Williams has no business touching the field at all. Obviously I disagree that StC is better than Williams. You dont put Williams as the starting LT, the most important position on the line, unless you have noone better. Yes, sometimes you go w/ the lesser because his future is greater, but that future will never be realized until he develops, which is not going to happen sitting on the bench. Sorry, but if you look around the league, I think you will find that more often than not, your 1st round picks start, and they do not always earn that job. A 1st round pick is a significant investment. If we go w/ what some of you are talking about, we would not get a chance to see that investment until maybe year 4, and even then, he would be an unknown. Sorry, but this is no way to run an orginization. You just do not draft a player who you think is a franchise LT, only to replace him before giving him a chance. But according to you, all Omi needs is a little game time to "develop". Little different talking about a 1st round draft pick and a guy (where was he drafted) who has been in the NFL for 4 years, on two different teams. His problem was he was on the "practice" squad can't couldn't develop properly. I do not believe he was always on the practice squad, but simply wasn't good enough to stay off it long term. Back to reality. These OL that we have signed this off season are not a roadblock. Omi and Shaf are signed to deals that are easy to get out of should a better player emerge. Pace would do nothing but help our line with his experience and leadership. I agree Omi and Shaffer are not roadblocks. Neither are such a level that there is an issue if they do not start. Pace is another story. Pace does not join Chicago to be a backup. This is the only part of this whole deal I agree with. I believe we still need to use a 2nd or 3rd on a OL and let him develop in practice. Hey, we found something we agree on Honestly, to me there is a much greater argument for adding Pace to play RT. I still have the argument there against adding Pace as I want to build for the future on the OL, and see no chance of that if we add Pace (Angelo factor here), but the argument against Pace is significantly less at RT. Pace at RT allows Williams to still develop at LT, while you also now have Shaffer as depth. Heck, maybe Shaffer takes Garza's spot. This is a much better looking OL to me than if you put Williams on the bench. I still have issue w/ the draft aspect, but feel Pace at RT is a much more sound argument in general.

lol. You just nitpicked my joke. Crap. Stepped into that one.

Weight. He is actually considered to be among the elite WRs in the draft in terms of hands. Nicks is elite in the categories of: getting clean release off the LOS, running routes, catching the ball. Knocks on Nicks: Speed. He lacks pure straight line speed. He ran the 40 in 4.48 or 4.49, but numbers aside, he is not considered a WR who will run a go route and simply burn the DB. He is considered however to have very good quickness and acceleration. He is also physical, and can use that attribute fighting against DBs. Compared often to WRs like Boldin and Keyshawn Johnson as examples of WRs who lacked pure speed, but were still playmakers who could work downfield. Weight. He weighed in around 214 at the combine, but then was more like 226 or something at his schools pro day. Red flags went up that he had weight issues. Thing is, he suffered a minor (quad?) injury at the combine which prevented him from working out. More recent, now healthy, his weight is back down and he again (physically) looks good. IQ - He actually had a bad wonderlic too. This raised flags. Me? I just point back to his career. Before the wonderlic thing was ever seen, his coaches talked about how he was the type that immediately picked up the playbook and took no time to near new plays. Talked about how he was the sort that would not only quickly learn a play (memory) but would quickly understand it, allowing him to play w/ instinct on the field rather than spending all his time "thinking" about the plays. Wonderlic raised a flag, but at the same time, seems to counter all previous evidence. To me, there is no better WR to pair w/ Hester. Some would call Nicks a possession WR, but I would say he is a possession WR the same way others like Boldin or K.Johnson are/were. He isn't the sort who will wow scouts in shorts (like DHB) but on the field, few can stop him. He is the type QBs simply love because he is always where he is supposed to be, able to get open and best of all, catches the damn ball. Further, despite his lack of pure speed, he is actually solid after the catch.

Just wanted to throw out an update I read about Nicks. Parcells and Sporano went to NC to hold a private workout w/ Nicks. That alone is somewhat newsworthy as Parcells rarely travels for such visits. Thus, if you believe Parcells is a good talent evaluator, this may mean something. At the workout, Nicks weight 216, which is 10 lbs less than what he weighed at the schools pro day and w/ in 2 lbs of his combine weight. It was said all along that his injury caused his weight increase, and once healthy, hit again hit the weight room and got his weight back to expectation. Further, it was said he caught everything thrown his way and simply looked great in the workout. I believed all along that, once healthy, he would get his weight back down and his stock would once again rise. We see the temporary rises and falls this time of year. Smith dumped his stock after the combine, but once again appears a top 10 selection. I think 18 is the top end area of Nicks value, but w/ his weight back to expectation, I think Nicks is again a player to very much consider w/ the 1st pick. IMHO, he is our best option. I believe there is no other player in the draft, minus Crabtree, who fits our needs at WR more than Nicks. Most all consider Maclin a superior talent, but I believe Nicks is still the better fit for the team, and considerably a greater fit than DHB, Harvin or Britt.

I am 100% on board w/ the idea of trading two 1st round picks. At the same time, I think you have to know what you are potentially giving up. Consider NO trading up to get Ricky Williams as an example. They made the trade w/ the belief the future 1st would be a late round pick, which is what you are assuming, but the season didn't go as planned and their pick ended up being a top 5 selection. So I do not believe you can simply "assume" both picks given up would be late 1st round selections. It is quite possible we suck and the pick ends up high. What may be more applicable would be to simply look at Angelo's history in the 1st round. Columbo - Haynes - Grossman - Tommie Harris - Benson - DManning - Olsen - Williams IMHO, if you took the two best players from this list, Culter would still be viewed as the better value.

Funny zing, but exactly how is it true? Honestly asking here. What are the players who you believe I nit-pic. You and I have been talking at length about OL, so you could be talking about the veterans we have added and are still looking at. You believe my arguments about them are nitpicking? Pace - Major decline issue. Only two teams reported to have interest in him, which IMHO is significant for a player of his status. Injuries the last 4 consecutive season is not nit-picking either IMHO. Omiyale - Um, 4 years/ 2 teams and one start due to injury. Further, we are looking at him at a position different from what he has been working at for the last 4 seasons. Nitpicking? Shaffer - I actually have never said much negative about Shaffer. My only issue w/ his addition is the believe that Angelo will pass on OL early in the draft due to having him. That is a criticism of Angelo, not Shaffer specifically. I know you tossed in the "LOL", but at the same time, for the joke to stick there needs to be a level of truth in there. I am not saying I have never nitpicked, but just curious who it is you might be thinking of.

Holy Crap Jason. Your killing me. I am holding the "draft OL" argument basically by myself at this point. You want Pace, but let me ask you this. Do you think there is ANY CHANCE Angelo still lookes at the OL relatively early in the draft if we add Pace. I am not talking 1st round. I frankly think that is already out w/ Omiyale and Shaffer added. But lets say Loadholt falls to us in the 2nd. Or maybe Duke is there in the 2nd. Hell, what if Duke falls to us in the 3rd. I would put money on the line that Angelo would pass on Duke in the 3rd if we add Pace. IMHO, there is simply no way Angelo goes OL early if we have added 3 OL in FA, giving out guaranteed dollars to each one of them. Have you just writting off drafting OL? Or do you honestly believe there is a chance Angelo would still draft OL if we added yet another veteran OL? IMHO, if we add Pace, we can write off OL in the draft until the 6th, and more likely the 7th round. To me, that is just more of the same. That is what Angelo has done every year he has been here, and why OL remains a high need every off season.

One. Columbo is a bogus example. His short tenure in Chicago was 100% due to injury, so I don't see how he is a good example for any side of the argument. Two. Do I want to play a 1st round pick and see if he can play? Um, yes. That is called player development. The only team I know of that doesn't believe in this is Washington. Every other team in the league follows the idea of player development. Exactly how does an OL develop if he can't get on the field? Its one thing when you are talking about maybe a WR, or a DB, as they can play other packages w/o being a starter. But you do not rotate OL, and thus if you want to develop a 1st round pick, you have to play him. You say we still don't know if Williams can play. Well, how can we know if we don't play him? Lets say we sign Pace, and he gives us one good season. Heck, lets say two. Meanwhile Williams is on the bench. When Pace is finished, what then. We STILL do not know if Williams can play. I'm sorry. But when you use a #1 pick on a player, you need to play them. You have to see what they can do. At many/most positions, you can do this w/o actually making the player a starter, but OL is one of the very few units on the team where you do not rotate, and you try to maintain chemistry. So if you draft an OT in the 1st, you play him. If you don't plan to play him, then frankly, you should have never drafted him. None of us know if Pace is still any good or if Williams will be good. Lets at least have options, if something doesnt work out. I do not mind options, but in Pace, you also create a problem. He is simply not a backup. He is not going to sign to be a backup. On the other side of it, you have your LT drafted in the 1st round and considered your franchise LT. I would argue he too can not sit on the bench. Thus lies your problem if you have both. It's one thing when you have a player like St Clair. He can be inserted if Williams bombs, but at the same time, is not too good to sit on the bench. I think we would create that problem w/ Pace. Now, if Pace is considered a RT for us, that is another story. Still not a fan as I think it precludes us from going OL in the draft, but that is totally a different argument.

So, in your mind, starting at left tackle is the only way we will know if C Will is the real deal and the only way to develop. I dont buy it, there are mini camps, preseason and practices to see development and to get better. Aren't you a coach. You seriously going to sit there and say practice time and real game experience are equal? How many players work only in practice and truly develop? Come on. While there is no question practice is part of the process, I have no idea how you can pretend players develop w/o playing in games. Also, you need to make up your mind on Pace. If he is in such a decline that he can't play LT any more, then Williams should be able to beat him out. If he hasn't declined that much, and perhaps it was injuries that have been the more the problem, and he is able to show he is much better than Williams, then sign him to play LT. If he can go at LT anymore, then put him at RT. But to just pass on him is crazy. Come on. Williams is essentially a rookie this year. Pace may be on the decline, but if you have a competion between the two, there really is little question Pace should beat him out. If St.C were here, and there was a legit competition, I think St.C would win the job. That is simply the experience factor vs the talent. Talent wins in the end, but experience gives the initial leg up. As for consistency, let me explain. If we bring in Pace, I believe his skills have decline, but not to the point he should not beat out a rookie OT. That does NOT mean it is in our best interests to have Pace start and our 1st round, franchise LT sit on the bench. And if Williams did beat out Pace, then I would say Pace has decline more than we realize, and is not even worth the roster spot. Oh, so really your point is if we sign Pace then there is no way to build the line for the future. I would argue having Williams, Beekman, Omi, Buenning, and whatever draft picks we make this year IS building the oline for the future. Yes, that is my argument. I think we have already hurt our chances to build for the future, and adding Pace would basically lock out OL in the draft. At the end of your statement, you mention "whatever draft picks we make this year". Understand, that is 100% my point. IMHO, if we add Pace, we will not draft OL this year. If we do, it will be in the 6th/7th rounds, and lets be honest, that is little better than not drafting at all. You can argue that we would still look at OL if we add Pace, but that is a different argument than our current. I view Pace as a roadblock to the future. As for the rest of your list, aside from Williams, come on. That is what you want to think of as our future? Beekman, fine, but the staff have felt all along he was a center and do not like him at OG, so lets consider him Kreutz' potential replacement. Omiyale as building for the future kills me. Why? Based on what. The guy has been in the league 4 years, playing on two teams, and spent half that time on the practice squad. Sorry, but as much hype as I read, it just does not seem like he is the shining star some make him out to be. He is far from a sure thing THIS YEAR, much less a player to build around. And Buenning? Come on. I swear if Metcalf were on the team still you would have listed him. Understand this. If I believed Angelo would still look at OL in the 2nd and/or 3rd round of the draft after signing Pace, I would be all for it, though I would look at Pace at RT. But my belief is we would not draft OL that high, and likely not until the end of the draft. To me, that is going along the same path Angelo has always followed w/ regard to the OL, and which has caused to us consider OL a top tier need basically every year under Angelo's tenure. I want to change that path. Simple as that.