jason

So, because of two WRs who have done fairly well recently, and two OLinemen who had injuries their rookie year, you think the concept of OL in the first is bad but WR in the first is good? That's a pretty small sample size. What about the slew of WRs drafted in the first round who put up pedestrian or underwhelming numbers their first year? And what about the ton of OLinemen who started their first year and did very well? And what about the fact that with the signing of Marshall, LT is now unequivocally the #1 area of need? When it comes down to it, now that Marshall has been acquired the hole at WR is not as glaring. Meanwhile there is a still a gaping hole at LT. What the Bears need at WR now is an upgrade over the following: Player A: 37 Rec, 727 Yds, 2 TDs Player B: 26 Rec, 369 Yds, 1 TD Player C: 37 Rec, 507 Yds, 2 TDs I would say the Bears need to focus on one or two players instead of trying to get all three receptions. Then you end up with a #3 WR who gets something like 50 Rec, 700 Yds, 5 TDs, while Marshall gets the lion's share and Bennett works as the solid possession WR. The result would be an upgrade because one player could excel with more focus, targets, etc.

For the life of me I just do not understand this rationale. Could you try to explain it to me? I seriously don't understand how an intelligent Bears fan who has seen the games the last few seasons could not consider the OL to be either the #1 priority or at least in consideration for the #1 priority. Any 1st round OT would start over Webb, and any 1st round OG would start at RG over Louis/E.Williams. This is especially true since you call for a first round WR, a position that traditionally takes a while to develop.

Beats the shit out of me. I hope it's just not more of the same ignoring the OL. If it's not addressed significantly in the draft, then we know which of JA and Lovie was the one behind nonchalant attitude about improving the OL.

Don't get me wrong, I think he put out the best five that he was given. Or at least he tried. But I think he probably has some influence in the backroom meetings, particuarly pertaining to the draft, and he is more likely to stick up for his hand-picked player (Webb) than not. And the result of that could be the potential for him to speak up for Webb, to preserve his reputation as an OL guru. I have seen very little to make this thought process seem unrealistic. All we've seen is one or two comments about how Webb is the guy "unless some miracle happens and an elite first-round draft pick that we couldn't pass up fell in our lap, which I doubt. Yeah, he's our guy moving forward."

Plain and simple, he should be an option. With Winston and Carimi, the Bears could move whichever one they think fits the left side the best - ideally Carimi for longevity issues - and keep the other guy at RT. I don't care if neither is perfectly suited for LT, because if each is a poorly shaped round peg in a perfectly circular hole, Webb is a square.

I don't want any OLineman on the Bears who does this. We already have Webb.

Getting a rookie DE who is known as a pass rush specialist helps the defense. At the very least it's another young, quick, high-motor body he can substitute into rotations and situational pass rush opportunities. Wooten and Idonije may stink, but they smell like roses compared to Webb, Spencer, and E. Williams.

Fixed that for you. There is only one reason the Bears have put so much faith in Webb, and it points directly at Tice's reputation being bruised if his hand-picked guy doesn't turn out. That hubris should be set aside for the betterment of the team, and for Cutler's health.

Nice analysis. But cut Williams and keep Spencer?! No way. Williams is easily better, and still has significant upside.

Bears OL Bears WRs Bears QB Please stop with the nonsensical comparisons to teams that are clearly more qualified, in mulitiple ways, to exploit defenses with 4 and 5 WR sets. Ideal world, we agree with you. It'd be great to throw out a ton of weapons and say, "I dare you to cover them!" But this is not an ideal world, and the Bears don't have the tools the other teams have.

Absolutely spot on post! Perfect logic from beginning to end. This is exactly how I feel about the OL. Unfortunately, the Bears are not in a position to follow the early part of your reasoning. Webb sucks at OT. E.Williams and C. Spencer are below average OG. Louis is average at best at OG, and sucks at OT. This kind of stuff should have been thought about for a long time.

I wouldn't be surprised either. Lovie has always, and always will, put his defense above his offense. His reputation as a defensive coach depends on it.

I actually hope the draft starts OL/OL. RD1: Adams, LT, Ohio State RD2: Osemele, OG, Iowa State --OR-- Zeitler, OG, Wisconsin That would be awesome.

I saw him live in the Oakland game, and he terrorized the Bears OL. He was constantly getting double-teamed, chipped a few times, but generally pushed his side of the OL into the backfield on just about every play. On top of that he had the long INT return on the tipped ball...but got ran down by Lance Louis. From that one game, I'd say it's hard to tell, but that's only because the Bears OL sucked so bad. He did look fast on the rush though.

Sorry I didn't feel like writing a dissertation every time I posted on the forum. Sometimes you have read into posts. I'm not spinning, just using common sense. It's so common that everyone on the board other than you and maybe one other agrees with it. It's so common that even az agrees with me. That doesn't happen often. No matter how many times you reply, you're wrong and the idea is stupid. 1. Weems does not factor into the conversation. His position may as well be ST, and not WR. 1a. Marshall+Weems+Floyd/Hill Marshall+Robinson+Floyd/Hill. 1b. Put another way, WR+ST+1st round WR WR+ST+Later than 4th round WR 1c. Put another way, WR+ST+WR WR+WR+WR 1d. Put another way, #1 WR+ #7WR + #2 WR #1 WR + #2 WR + #2 WR 1e. Put another way, $$$$+¢¢¢+$$$ $$$$+$$$+$$$ And just so you know, if our fictitious teams played each other you'd lose something like 24-14, because my OL would road-grade your depleted DL (because you've spent 1/3 your salary cap on WRs), and your arsenal of tall WRs would barely be on the field because we'd control the TOP by an ample margin. And when your WRs were on the field, they'd see the ball infrequently because Webb is still protecting your QB's blindside, the interior OL would still be weak, your QB would be back-peddaling by the 3rd quarter, and he there's a decent chance he wouldn't be in the game in the 4th quarter because the weak OL and weakened running game (because you invested so much on WRs) would not keep the defense honest.

This was posted on JANUARY 13TH!!! Holy hell, what source does this Shields3L guy have?

The quote: What he had to say to the media. The comment about the draft: The truth, hopefully. The two comments are obviously contradictory, so we can only hope he's not just blowing smoke and he actually intends to put serious emphasis on the OL.

Dude, are you not reading the actual messages in their entirety? Are you just glaring over everything that doesn't jibe with your thougts? Seriously, reread the entire thread and actually grasp what is being discussed. I've highlighted the key point of each of the above comments for you. But feel free to read everything from beginning to end again. Parker, Ashkum, az, and I all said either a FA like Royal, or a high draft pick, makes sense. But not both. Nobody is arguining against another FA and a late round WR prospect. What you are saying: OMG BOTH! This doesn't make sense for a team that actually wants to have pro-level starters at every position.

The strategy is one I don't have a problem with. The timing of it, however, would be bad right now for the reasons you have listed. You just don't throw away the back end of the careers of all-stars, and two future HOFers, for a rebuilding project, when you're only a piece or two away from going back to the big dance and competing for the championship. Before Cutler's injury last year they were 7-2, yet had glaring needs on the OL and at WR. The latter has been addressed. If the OL gets addressed, then the rebuilding project is unwise, because this team can compete with anyone.

When az, Parker, and Ashkum all agree with me, then I know it's a rock solid case I'm arguing. Another mid/top tier FA WR + Draft early round WR = Stupid. Case closed.

Which is precisely why I hate Lovie and his "we should win those meaningless games at the end of the year" because it builds (whatever). This has happened more than one time on his watch. It's tough to pull off the GB strategy being mentioned in this thread when Lovie is so good at coaching a team teams towards mediocrity.

I agree, but that's the ideal situation. The Bears are not in the ideal situation. When you have glaring holes, you have to address glaring holes. If it's between BPA and the #4 or #5 guy in terms of BPA, but that #4/5 guy is at your position of glaring need, you go with the #4/5 guy.

I think you've seen a team have lots of WRs who are good, but you've ignored various other parts of the team that also help the team be good and maximize the opportunities for the WRs to be good. Weems doesn't even factor into the discussion.

And if that's your opinion, it's valid. I happen to disagree, and I'm pretty sure management disagrees considering his salary (7.5M+ cap hit this year), but it's understandable.

What if Briggs gets hurt?! What if Tillman gets hurt?! What if Peppers gets hurt?! We better get a backup for each of those guys who is just about as good and could start on other teams.