jason

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.

As if I posted the entire thing. Great post. 1. LT 2. WR 3. CB Since LT in FA is not likely, and there are plenty of FA WRs available, it makes most sense to pick up a WR before the draft then get a LT in the first round.

They don't need one in the first round. If they do, then it's exactly as rockren says: a black mark on Lovie's inability to develop a DE despite having invested far more in various ways into the position than other commonly neglected positions.

A-Freaking-Men

Which would fall right in line with the Lovie M.O. of paying more attention to the D than he does the O. Whenever there is a split, the advantage always goes to his defense. This is one of the most aggravating things about the Lovie Smith regime, and the few before him. They seem to think because they are defensive coaches it makes more sense for the team to be defensive oriented, and it's almost always at a detriment to the offense. Just once I'd love to see the Bears hire someone with an extensive record of offensive success as their HC. At the same time, I'd love to see that same coach just go full retard and draft the Bears an offensive machine we've been talking and hoping about for...well...over 20 years. This league is unmistakeably an offensive-oriented league, with most of the benefits going towards the side of the ball that scores and has skill positions. Teams in the playoffs and their offensive rank: New Orleans - 1 New England - 2 Green Bay - 3 Detroit - 5 New York Giants - 8 Atlanta - 10 Pittsburgh - 12 Houston - 13 Baltimore - 15 Cincinnati - 20 Denver - 23 San Fran - 26 Which two teams didn't have a chance in hell of winning it all? Cincy and Denver. San Fran had a chance, but mostly because they had the #4 defense. Other than that, each team had an offense in the top half of the league and were an offensive heavy team. The longer the Bears organization ignores or dismisses that, the longer the Bears will be an up-and-down or noncompetitive team.

It actually is amazing. I still can't believe they won. But when your team is solid is so many other areas, and has a group of DEs that rape opposing QBs, it makes things a little easier. As for the stats not reflecting truth, we all know they don't tell the whole picture. That's why I included so much from so many sites. The Forte total yards could have been more a product of the fact that the Bears couldn't pass block than anything else. Him being the #1 RB, without a true #2 taking carries (which is so popular today), means he's in the game for most of the snaps. So he gets a heaping portion of the rushing attempts, and since the OL was so bad at pass blocking, a ton of passes thrown to him as an outlet. It was/is no shock that he had so much impact on the Bears' offense. Regarding Cutler, it doesn't matter if the number got slightly better; it was still horrible. Going from really horrible to horrible doesn't help the team that much.

I welcome a similar, stat-based WR study that can paint a picture as bleak. Considering Knox was 2nd in YPC for starting WRs, and Roy Williams (a player most on this board hate) had nearly identical stats to Mario Manningham (a player many seem to want), Hester is still dynamic and capable of a TD on every play, and Bennett has some of the most reliable hands in the NFL, I just don't see the comparison to being equal. Is an upgrade needed? Absolutely. Would I rather see a WR in FA? You bet. But LT has got to be a bigger need in terms of which part of the team has an actual flaw. Interesting Stat: When Earl Bennett had more than one catch last year, the Bears were 5-0 When Earl Bennett had one catch or less last year, the Bears were 0-6.

I'm FAR from a cap guy, but the $40 mil number seems to be semi-possible on simple math alone. I'm sure there are a ton of clauses and loopholes in the argument I'm about to make - since I don't really care to understand all the nuances of the cap - but here's a rudimentary view. --120 Cap Ceiling --108 Cap Floor --91.3 Cap Hit for 2012 --120-91.3 = 28.7 --2011's cap number was 104.9, which leaves 15.1 as potential rollover money (again, I realize there may be flaws) --28.7+15.1=43.8 I don't see the 40 million view as completely unrealistic since there are countless ways to wiggle millions here and there with contracts manipulation, player movement, and various other tricks of the trade.

I've been hoping to see his input on the matter. Hell, I don't honestly trust anyone's numbers except his. So all the back and forth has been pointless to me since I haven't seen the LT2 numbers.