jason

Yep. Which is BS for the die-hard fan who can only get to Chicago once per year. Because some asshole PSL holder is going to get a handful of tickets, sell all but three or four games, make a massive profit on the games he doesn't attend, and screw over another fan for profit. Meanwhile, the single-game tickets are sold out in about 5 minutes every year because we're like 10,000 starving people at a small family picnic, and some other group of assholes have computer businesses set up to auto-dial and log into Ticketbastard when the time is right and scavenge thousands of tickets faster than any of us could hope to log in a second time. That's where captcha comes in, you have to have a person sitting at the keyboard so the programs don't work. No worries, those same assholes set up a business in a 3rd world Asian country where they pay 50 people 10 cents a day to click the log in program, type in the captcha, and nab the tickets. Then the worst assholes, the scalpers. How these guys get the tickets they get I'll never fully understand, but I suspect it has to do with inside connections of some sort. They circle around the stadium because they "need" tickets, but have a back pocket full of ways to screw over the average fan who just wants to watch a game. The whole system is BS and will never change. Raising the price only screws the average fan.

You already know I hate it. Not addressing OL until the fourth overall pick is a bad idea, and the "we'll get OL at the end"-philosophy is the reason JA got the Bears in this situation to begin with. The last three rounds aren't good enough. And that's not even considering I think drafting a TE this year is nearly a complete waste. The Bears don't need a TE; they need to use the ones they have.

Green is sarcasm, so I think that's what you're going for. But if either of these guys fell to the third (I don't think they will), and the Bears didn't get them, I would be PISSED.

Agreed.

Not really. The Bears were, in fact, close until Cutler and Forte went down. If they are going to be back (hint: they are), and the same team is put on the field next year, they would once again have a good chance to get into the playoffs. So they're not that far away from contention. And that's what the article is talking about. A full team, the actual starters, for the year. OF course they're not talking about a team with the 3rd string QB playing significant time. I agree with you, however, that they would have been killed in the playoffs. But since they would have gotten there, it means they weren't three WRs away. Upgrade the position? Sure. Overhaul it with three new guys? IDK about that. It's certainly not obligatory.

At a certain point you have to start addressing the areas of biggest need. Picking up Jenkins in the first and Cam Johnson in the second round would certainly help, but OL and WR are obviously bigger needs. No matter what happens there are still going to be positions of need, and LB is nowhere near as needed at this point. Urlacher and Briggs are still all-pro, and Roach is serviceable. Hell, Roach is twice the OLB that Webb is LT.

I dislike that slideshow for two reasons. First, it's a slideshow inserted specifically for hits. Second, for the reason you've stated: they kept saying the Bears needed three new WRs (two FAs and one high draft pick) to be Super Bowl contenders. This is obviously false because they were damn near contenders this past year until Cutler and Forte went down. This "WR or bust"-mentality is flawed for many reasons. Balancing the OL and WR needs is a better recipe for success, and anyone who thinks otherwise simply didn't watch the Bears last year.

I agree with everything you said, but I still think defense has gotten the majority of attention for quite some time, and it's about time someone in the Bears' organization thought offense-offense-offense. I'd love to see: 1. Forte resigned 2. Grubbs signed 3. Jackson signed 4. LT 1st round 5. WR 2nd round And it's entirely possible.

I like how defense was fifth out of five. As it should be. I doubt that's how Lovie sees it.

If it's a first round LT then it's a better option than Webb.

If it's a back problem I'm sure the ink is already drying on the contract.

OMG! This guy can jump out of a pool, too!!! We better start talking big money, first rounder contract with him right away.

Completely agreed. Hell, if they thought WR was that big of an issue, they could get 2 or 3 players from FA, 2nd round, 3rd round.

Yeah, that's how I remember the leap-frogging as well.

True. The defensive rotations may make it more digestable in their (i.e. Lovie and his disciples) minds. Mine? No freaking way. Jay Cutlers? Highly doubtful. Since this is an O > D league, I think the OL and DL should get at least equal attention, if not more on the OL side of the equation.

I don't really think it smells like a Lovie pick. Dude is too big. And if he was that much of a beast, he would have shown himself much better at Memphis, not to mention before the combine. Smells more like a combine warrior to me. I agree with Stinger; a guy that looks like he does and has the combine numbers he does, should have been much more productive in college. I'd have to also ask, "What's wrong with him?"

But wouldn't it be glorious if they got Grubbs AND got a LT in the first round!? Win-win!! Then we'd know that: A - They don't really think Webb can play LT B - They don't really think Williams can play LT And we could potentially end up with a lineup like the following (either of which I'd like): Rookie - Grubbs - Garza - Williams - Carimi Rookie - Williams - Garza - Grubbs - Carimi

I think your second question is exactly right. Tice saw Webb as a very talented person who could fill holes, who could play multiple positions. Because of that, he plugged in Williams at G because there was a severe absence of talent there. And since JA gave him shit to work with, Tice figured he had to actually find a way to use the late round guys. The natural result? Put Webb in the only place he has even minimal potential, and put the versatile Williams at the gaping LG hole. In other words, Tice had 1 thumb to plug two holes. He put his thumb in the hole closest to the QB, and used whatever he had lying around to plug the other hole. Clearly the water has poured through. On top of that, however, is the fact that Tice sort of staked his reputation on Webb, gushing about how hard he hit the blocking sled and chipped his future coach's tooth. I really think Tice wants to follow through on Webb's initial praise, make his mark, and earn the reputation the announcers gave him this year by continually saying how well he had done with the OL despite it playing like shit. Turning a 7th rounder into a competent starter helps that cause.

Precisely. IF the tables were turned and the Bears had given that much attention at OL I would have been completely placated. At that point it would have been on the coaches to develop some of those picks/acquisitions into on-field results. Instead, it's been the following disparite between OL and DL: 2011: 1st------------------------------2nd 2010: 7th------------------------------4th 2009: 7th------------------------------3rd, 4th 2008: 1st, 7th, 7th-------------------3rd, 7th 2007: 4th, 7th------------------------2nd 2006: 6th-----------------------------3rd, 5th 2005: NA------------------------------NA 2004: NA------------------------------1st, 2nd, 5th 2003: 7th------------------------------1st, 4th, 5th 2002: 1st, 3rd-------------------------4th That's ridiciulous. 12 OL picks :: 16 DL picks 15% of all picks were OL :: 20% of all picks were DL 6 7th Round OL picks :: 1 7th Round DL pick Excluding 7th Rounders, 7% of all picks were OL :: 18% of all picks were DL ***Considering the OL and DL each make up approximately 20% of the starters (i.e. 22 on O/D + 2 Kickers, Holder, Long Snapper) the 18% is about right when you factor in FAs. Average 4.8 Round for OL picks :: Average 3.4 Round for DL picks JA got burned by Colombo and Metcalf in 2002 and decided to ignore the position for pretty much the rest of his tenure.

I'm not saying it will happen, but it should happen. You're probably right that Tice won't want to backtrack on his previous decision now that he has even more power in regards to who starts.

haha. Couldn't have said it better myself. Grubbs would be an improvement over an OG currently on the Bears roster.

I don't necessarily think he's great at LT, but he's a significant improvement over that scrub Webb. Also, he was drafted as a LT, and because of all the OL turmoil and his injury, I don't really believe he was given a clear look at the position. Meanwhile, Webb has been given WAY more of a look than he should have been given, based entirely on Tice jerking off every time someone mentions Webb's measurables. Unfortunately, I think your last statement is probably right. They're high on Webb, for whatever freaking reason, because his performance surely doesn't match up with their evaluation. Ideally, Webb is a backup OT, and the two guys highly drafted as OTs (Williams & Carimi) should be starting at both ends. But that's just too much common sense for Lovie and crew, they'd rather draft a first round OT, move him to OG, and put in a 7th rounder at the most important position on offense other than QB. Genius.

Exactly. When I saw the time I thought the same thing. Freaking Lovie.

I've been saying this for a little while now. Unless a LT is drafted in the first or the second, the OL should be on of the four: Williams - Rookie/FA - Garza - Louis - Carimi Williams - Garza - Rookie/FA - Louis - Carimi Carimi - Williams - Garza - Rookie/FA - Louis Carimi - Williams - Rookie/FA - Garza - Louis

I would hate that for at least two reasons: 1. Clifton is barely an upgrade because he's injury prone, old, and MAYBE has a year or two left. 2. It would give Lovie a reason to convince Emery to ignore the offense for yet another year. If they get Clifton and a WR in FA, they should still spend the first two picks on LT and WR. But that would never happen.