jason

But that's COMPLETELY different. The NFL wants the rookies to attend the event that is held every year (i.e. the draft and all that comes along with it). The NFLPA is attempting to create a rival product to persuade the rookies away from the draft.

First, I'm glad we don't have the #1 pick, and these aren't the selections. I saw where this was going before voting. CB - Not as big of a need, and won't impact the game like a #1 should. Would be underutilized in the cover-2 anyway. WR - Not as big of a need, and won't dominate like a #1 should. Would have to fight through a WR log-jam and produce for coaches who aren't fond of rookie WRs. DT - Need, AND has a better chance of dominating like a #1 should. He'd start Day 1 and produce immediate results. This is a no doubt slamdunk.

Now THIS, I disagree with. Is DT help needed? Yes. Clearly. Is DT help needed more than OG or OT? No. Period. Unless there is a massive, unforseen run on OGs and OTs, the Bears should grab whichever OL guy is there at the end of the first. There should be more than one to choose from.

Yes...the three-technique DT is absolutely essential for Lovie's version of the cover-2. Either that or get two 2-gap guys built like Ted Washington and Keith Traylor, and move shift one of them closer to a double-team in the B gap. The former collapses the pocket and forces the QB into the DEs going wide, the latter shuts down internal running and allows a LB to get on the QB Autobahn. The problem the Bears have right now is that they're going with the former, and none of their guys can really attack the B gap with enough force to make the DE's path to the QB worthwhile.

Good stuff, Tom, and I happen to agree. While Martz may employ the deep drops more than others, if the interior of the line holds up, there would have been countless opportunities last year for Cutler to step into a comfortable pocket to make a throw. At that point all the OTs have to do is protect against the interior spin while they ride the DE out wide. I know this because the way the Bears run their defense creates a picture perfect example of how a QB can step into a pocket where the DTs haven't gotten through. I mean, how often have we seen the the Bears' DE's go around wide, see the DT's get nearly no pressure, and see a QB step forward calmly for a completion? All too often unfortunately. Hell, it seems that every time the Bears' play a journeyman type QB the guy has a great day and the announcers fall in love with how "well" the guy is playing (while ignoring the Bears' lack of interior pressure). If a high rated OG or OT is available in RD 1, the Bears need to draft him.

I've been saying it all along. We do not need a big WR. The WR position is not the problem. I think it's just a lot easier to be enamored with the idea of a stud WR than it is a stud player on the OL. No matter which WR the Bears add, if the OL is not addressed, the WR will not be a stud. This is nearly unequivocal. When Cutler was given ample time last year he carved secondaries apart. Unfortunately, he didn't get ample time all too often. Again, WR is not a big need. Maybe 4th or 5th in the pecking order.

I'd be happy with the trade down if we got two #2s. I'd be unhappy with the draft. WR is the third or fourth position of need, and I wouldn't like a WR that early...despite how much potential Baldwin has.

It's possible. I have seen more than a few sources that say teams are scared of his light weight and frame. Is it likely? Maybe not. You're probably right that someone will take a chance on him in the late 2nd. Which I think would be a reach.

It seems to me that if the players wanted to negotiate, and actually find a middle ground, they would have just asked for an extension to evaluate the proposal made by the owners. At the 11th hour or not, the offer from the owners is consequential and should have been evaluated. Don't you think? I don't think it would make it impossible for them to turn the offer down. The NFLPA could evaluate and then put out in the media the various reasons why the offer wasn't good enough. To me, regardless of whether or not the NFL's offer was poorly timed or premeditated as a bargaining chip, the NFLPA just doesn't really seem like they want to negotiate. They'd rather attempt a hard line, play games in the media, and roll the dice in the courts.

Balta - Where are you getting your version of the timeline with the "down to the hour" breakdown? I haven't seen this anywhere. From what I've seen, the $1Billion went to $600+ million, and then to $300+ million...the owners are willing to give back 2/3rd of their original bargaining request. Here is one article that shows the NFL is willing to negotiate. Here is an article with the $137 million dollar slap in the face from the NFLPA.

I actually wouldn't be upset with this draft. It focuses on the Bears' real needs (OL & DL), while appropriately minimizing those positions I don't think are as big of a concern as some here feel they are (WR). Considering a 5th round WR and a 6th round FS probably won't make the team anyway, I think it would be better to see a Center at one of those positions. Centers are underrated in this year's draft, and underrated in general, and some of the best guys are projected as 5th-7th rounders. Aside from Wisnewski and Kirkpatrick, any of the Centers could fall to the 5th or beyond. I'd like this modification: 1. Sherrod, OT, Mississippi State; Solder, OT, Colorado; Carmini, OT, Wisconsin (At least one will be there; take him. I hope it's Sherrod; he's a freaking monster who is probably still holding a block from his last game.) 2. Marcus Cannon, G, TCU; or Rodney Hudson, G, FSU (Hope for Cannon) 3. Drake Nevis, DT, LSU (Other teams are scared of his lack of size. Lovie Smith loves his DL to look just like Nevis. He looks like a perfect 3 technique to me.) 4. (Beast, 4.39 in the 40, stud tackler, great instincts. What else do you need?) 5. (Good instincts, good tackler, great athlete, bad hands, questionable character. Sounds good to me.) 6. Alex Linnenkohl, C, Oregon State; or Zane Taylor, C, Utah (I'd be happy with either.)

MadLith...that is exactly the timeline. I suppose there could be other details thrown in there, debating points and what-not, heresay that is unsubstantiated. Unfortunately there isn't one single website that both sides are willing to get behind and verify, so the best we have is a paint by numbers with a few missing numbers. But the numbers we have lead to the timeline.

For the life of me I really can't understand how someone could side with the players on this. It's a simple timeline: 1. Players get great CBA that doesn't end until 2013 (2006-2012). I believe all but two teams (Bills and someone) agreed. 2. Economics change; they always do. Owners realize the players will be content with the current model until 2013. 3. Owners vote to opt out of CBA in 2008 (takes effect in 2010). Owners unanimously agree on this. 4. Two long years pass without negotiations. This doesn't help the owners at all, and serves to help the players because they were so happy with the current CBA. 5. Owners and players meet for negotiations. 6. Owners come down from $1B stance to $320M. Even as a kid I knew that meeting on my side of the middle in a negotiation was a good thing. 7. Players counteroffer with $137M, which is borderline ridiculous, and a sign they don't want to really negotiate. 8. Owners offer to let a third party auditor view the complete books. 9. Players refuse the auditor offer because the NFLPA wants to see the complete financial information. Apparently a trusted third party - something used in businesses, security, computers, etc. world-wide - is not sufficient. 10. NFLPA Union decertifies. This stops collective bargaining. This stops negotiation. This ensures litigation. 11. Owners lock-out That's a simplified timeline, but accurate. Numbers 7 & 8 should be damning evidence that the NFLPA doesn't really want to strike a fair deal.

Excellent overall post. The bolded part is the key to this entire debate.

What if your boss told you that he was personally losing money from the business venture through which you are paid? Would that be sufficient? Or would you demand that your boss opens his books?

1. It is none of the players' business what is in the owners' books. I'm sure the owners have provided basic numbers that spell out their side of the case. 1a. It only takes a second of consideration to realize that the owners' books contain a considerable variety of financial information that could potentially cause strife not only between the owners and the NFLPA, but also between the owners themselves. 2. Is it more likely that a group of billionaire businessmen with significant business acumen understand the financial impact or a group of millionaire players, many (if not most) who are considered to be slightly less than average intelligence. The deal will get done because not every player in the NFL is a megamillionaire, and eventually the cost of their 8 cars, 3 houses, leech family members, exotic pets, and 12 man posse will catch up to them.

I don't know if it's necessarily about TDs. It's about field position. I believe Hester had the best KO return average in the NFL. The other guys weren't bad either. It was definitely an advantage the Bears had. Now that advantage is lessened.

There is a difference now, however. The touchbacks are happening more frequently. Moving the line to where it was before will cause quite a few more touchbacks. Janikowski will be kicking them out of the endzone. The kickers are getting bigger and stronger now. Hell, Janikowski probably would have been Nagurski-esque if he played back in the day.

There is a huge difference between a mid-rounder (i.e. 3rd/4th) and a 7th round guy who almost never makes the team. The 7th round draft pick has such a ridiculously low possibility of making the team and contributing that it's not really a risk. It's just picking up a guy who lasted until the later rounds.

I share the same concerns about Webb. Let's hope he's Big Cat 2.0. As for one of the two (Martz or Tice) having to leave for success, I think it's one of those things I don't want to think about. I hope for success, but it's tough not to be a bit pessimistic as a Bears fan. Maybe they can compromise and find a great middle ground, or one of them will acquiese.

I'm cool with draft smoke-screens, but if they are wasting too much time on scouting a mid-round RB, then it's a waste of resources. At a certain point they should be devoting their time to improving what's wrong, not trying to deceive opponents about a 3rd or 4th round RB who the Bears probably won't draft. The bad part is, most teams probably realize the Bears shouldn't draft a midround RB, but past draft choices have been iffy enough that they have to worry about it, smokescreen or not.

This shows me that Rashard Mendenhall is just as stupid as Adrian Peterson. The analogy is utterly ridiculous.

Thanks for the post! For the most part I like the list. But the fact that they're even looking at a RB who could go in the mid-rounds is disgusting to me. Horrible, horrible direction if they're even thinking about it.

Agreed. I was already on the side of the owners, but this cements it. It strikes of nothing but childishness. It's the equivalent of taking your ball and going home because people won't play by your rules.

Pay no attention to az. His elitism is supposed to be proof of his vast experience and knowledge. You should feel lucky he even participates on this board. Besides, the board is pointless since we don't work in the NFL. They know better than anyone on this board, despite the fact that everyone on the board - and everyone who has seen the Bears play - has been in agreement for multiple years that the OL is probably the weakest aspect of the team. He is still trying to wrap his head around the fact that the Martz' awesome offense actually made drastic changes during the season, completely morphing from a traditional Martz offense to a more run-oriented attack, improved after the by week, and somehow still managed to be 21st in scoring despite the utter failures at OL that couldn't protect a pocket passer with great mobility for more than 2 seconds.