jason

I don't care how it happens, but the packers deserve some negative karma for the two-QB streak to have lasted as long as it has. Meanwhile, the Bears have at 392 QBs during that same stretch.

80% truth 20% beer Cutler looked really sharp, had great command, awesome accuracy, good progression, good decision making. Basically, he showed he's able to be the QB most believe he can be.

Foster should be a starter. Acho should be a starter. Cutler looks really good ( DID Y'ALL SEE HIM ROLL OUT?!?!) RBs are real deep, which is why we really didn't need to draft Langford. Need RT help pretty badly. By the time we get a new one, we will probably need a LT. And so on. Hopefully Mills turns it around and doesn't destroy the offense, or Cutler.

Just stirring the pot. I didn't like the pick either. It was bad position-wise when considering that draft, and everyone knew it then as well as now. We needed FS and DT more, and the FS market disappeared after our pick. It would have made more sense to go FS then CB/DT.

http://www.talkbears.com/forums/index.php?...hl=Fuller+draft

Keep in mind I'm the guy who has CONSISTENTLY called for the Bears to add players at any cost. I don't care about image to be quite honest. I want studs. I called for TO, Moss, Burfict, etc. Nobody talks about all the negative guys on previous championship teams; they talk about the championships. On the field, Marshall was not a guy to be traded. He was a monster. That's what I want.

I understand. But he didn't have a negative impact while on the field.

I told you guys I wasn't thrilled with the pick more than once. I just didn't like him a lot. I was/am all aboard the bandwagon, hope he rebounds with a fury, but I just had a bad feeling. I obviously didn't predict this, but wish we didn't trade away a pro-bowler for the uncertainty of a rookie (who ends up with a leg fracture).

Bushrod Slauson Montgomery Long Mills Ola Grasu Ducasse

Something I've mentioned more than one time. The move to the 3-4 could be a costly one.

Maybe a combination of both? The D is probably a little weak since they are learning a new system, but I think just about everything is in place for Cutler to have a breakout year. 1. Great coaching staff 1a. Run-heavy offensive gameplan (likely helps the defense some) 1b. Likely exploiting Cutler's mobility 1c. Proven success/experience 1d. No chance of team mutiny 2. Solid OL who will be taught how to block (even if RT might be weak, AGAIN) 3. Finally have a blend of WRs 3a. No WR security blanket (I contend Marshall may have been a negative for Cutler) 3b. A stud slot WR (never had one) 3c. An absolute burner who is actually a WR (assuming White gets healthy) 4. Diversified RBs 4a. Forte is still a stud 4b. Langford has breakout speed 4c. Rogers is a great scat-back who actually has some power 5. Still has a mismatch at TE To me, all that says Cutler has an improved year. If he fails, it will most likely be due to bad OT play.

I like the idea as well, but the build from within philosophy doesn't work as frequently when the players being groomed are UDFA. And Ducasse is a journeymen who hasn't been able to break the starting lineup in 5 years (which is pretty much the opposite of building from within). IF those are the guys being groomed, I'm very skeptical. Either draft high enough and often enough that there are ample investments amongst the OL to actually build from within, or you need to go out and get guys like Mathis. You can't try the build from within philosophy with scrubs and cast-off journeymen.

Exactly. And, besides, for the Cutler-haters it would serve as the ultimate nail in Cutler's coffin if he were to fail behind a good/great OL.

It is not a simple matter of disagreement, and you know it. Those stats are overly simplified nuggets extracted from minor, simple details in a very complex game involving many moving parts and strategies. I could provide ten reasons that legitimately question each of those stats, and you could come up with ten more. Hate Cutler all you want.

You must not work in the data world. Just because a stat is compiled and true doesn't mean the desired or proposed conclusion is accurate. Correlation and causation are not necessarily linked. We do agree, however, with one thing. If the QB continually makes mistakes, something must be done. I believe that is accomplished by either: A ) Getting a new QB - Not feasible B ) Ensure Cutler sticks to the offense, something that aided in McCown looking so good - Unlikely given Cutler's past C ) Making the OL good enough for Cutler to be comfortable and find open WRs - Best, most feasible answer, which has the added benefit of improving the running game as well Hence, it makes sense to go after Mathis.

The answer to your question is that PFF stats are borderline worthless pieces or nuggets of data that do not tell even remotely close to a complete picture. But the biggest piece of this puzzle that simply can't be quantified is, how does the QB who constantly gets pressured react when there is no pressure, but he thinks there is, or will be? Cutler has been beaten and battered here, and it's pretty obvious over the past two or three years that he feels like there is going to be pressure on damn near every play. Is that a flaw? Sure. But you don't fix that flaw by doing anything other than protecting him, which, coincidentally, would improve if Evan Mathis were signed to play OG next to Kyle Long.

That's freaking comical. Looks at the article...yep...PFF "stats".

I guess it depends on whether this team thinks they can win, or if they think they can contend. If it's the former, then, sure, let some scrubs battle it out and try to develop some homegrown talent. But if it's the latter, then I don't care about player development at the sacrifice of the team, and also Cutler. The team, and Cutler, have sacrificed for far too long because of sub-par to atrocious OLs. If it means investing more money on the OL to protect the guy who is the focal point of the team, regardless of who that is, then you should do it. It's baffling to me how long this must go on for people to realize the OL is the one spot besides QB you don't want to have major issues. And if you have major issues at QB (hopefully it's a rookie and not just a scrub like Moses Moreno), then you sure as hell should have a dominant OL to protect. The Bears have had good offensive production only one year of the past several, and it's the one year where the OL played well. I don't care how many 1st round WRs the Bears get. If the QB is under pressure, it won't matter. Long story short...yes...bring Mathis in for a look. If it was all contract related like some of the reports are saying, then putting him at RG and Long at RT would create a monster OL for the Bears, and would virtually guarantee a top 10 offense this year.

This proposal is why I'm not elated with the defensive prospects yet. Houston? Young? Allen? Bostic? That's a lot of talent sitting in the back seat.

This thread is the reason why I didn't like the draft pick. Another RB isn't really necessary. It basically throws Carey into the back-burner. That's too bad for a guy who hasn't received a chance to show what he can do on the field.

NO. ABSOLUTELY NOT.

Anyone interested in an all-Long right side? Even diminished he has to be better than Mills.

Very weak competition he got those stats against. Pass.

An undersized back who was nasty elusive, but was used in the worst possible ways while on the team. As for the "2" backs, Benson was already smelling like a bust or head-case, and you're not actually counting Adrian Peterson, are you? They needed someone who could be a little more elusive out of the backfield when they got rid of Thomas Jones. Regarding Hester, the prevailing thought at the time was that it was better to kick out of bounds than kick to Hester. Or short kick it. Many thought Wolfe would be an up-back on free kicks, perfect for when the teams tried to avoid Hester. Also, keep in mind that this was the year they planned on the beginning of the Hester as WR transition. The Bears needed a dynamic playmaker on offense, and they may have drafted one, but we'll never know because the mental midgets running the offense at the time.