jason

I agree in some respects; however, isn't that essentially what all receiving tight ends are/do? He'd be a faster version with better hands. If the Bears had Hardy, it would force the opponents hands. They wouldn't be able to play zone, because there would be too many guys who can find the spaces. So they play man on man of some kind. That works to the Bears advantage because no defense in the NFL has the bodies to match up with the Bears' two tight ends AND a physical, 6'5" WR...and that's not even mentioning Marty Booker, who is the prototype for possession WRs IMHO.

If you really believe that nonsense, then there is no reason to even discuss this with you. That's the same tired garbage we hear all the time. Sorry, but that dog don't hunt. Urlacher does not have to worry about his future, his kids' futures, or their kids' futures. He has made more during his career than everyone on this board will make in their entire lives. Furthermore, by your logic every deal should be renegotiated every year. If the percentage is different from the year before, then a new deal is needed? Well, what about when a player is good enough to be kept around, but not nearly as good as the deal he signed? The team can't renegotiate in that case, can they? I just don't think you get it. It's not the raise people get frustrated with, it's the "secure future", "insulting offer", "it's not about the money" BS. Fine. Get a raise. Just don't attempt to stronarm the team when they could easily hold you to your contract. And when you ask for your raise, take into account that the end-goal is a championship, and if you want to get double your money, or some insane deal, there is a good chance the team is not going to get a championship. I think you have to ask yourself this question: At the end of the day, who do you think is happier? Player A: Got paid multi-millions, was a relatively good player, but not great, and has a fistfull of rings Player B: Got paid multi-millions, was a superstar, considered one of the best ever, and has no rings I'd rather be Player A, and any player in professional sports who says otherwise is just a greedy asswipe who is the definition of what angers average fans about professional sports. FYI: A: Scott Williams B: Karl Malone

What I know is this: -He doesn't appear to be fast, or get clocked fast, but he sure as hell runs away from and around people when returning punts. He's football fast. -He doesn't appear to be the biggest hitter, but he sure does jar the ball loose a lot. -He may not be the best in coverage, but he seems to be in an opportune spot a lot of the time. In all honesty, he reminds me of how I would describe Mike Brown. Not overly impressive in any way, just knows how to play football. The one obvious difference, however, is that Z seems to have problems with angles. He gets caught out of position at times, and it looks bad when he does. But the thing is, he always seems to be around the ball when it's important on fumbles and INTs. I would still love to see him in a Bears uniform. Many will say he dropped off, but I would say that his team just plain stunk. When you can't rely on your teammates to be in the right place, then your play is going to suffer, and you'll be put in odd situations.

The addition of Allen would make them virtually a lock for top 5 honors in defense. With the Williams brothers in the middle, nobody runs on them. And with Allen on the edge, the passing game would have to set up quickly and get rid of it quickly. At that point, all they need to have is warm bodies that can tackle. Scary. And, while their offense may have glaring holes at QB, WR, and TE...what do you really need with a defense like that? The Bears proved in 2001 that with a dominating offense with two buddhas in the middle supporting a strong defense, even a retard can be the offensive coordinator and the team can still get double-digit wins.

A bit over the top, but I smiled and laughed out loud while reading it. That would kick ass. I don't care who the Bears put in at RB with that type of OL. Actually, the first thing I thought of was Emmitt Smith. With that line, the Bears could have a average/good player who would, with any luck and health, turn into a 2,000 yd. per year player for several years. I honestly believe that. It would look like a 1990's Nebraska game as the Bears racked up 200+ yds. rushing every game, ate the clock up, and generally made it ugly. The fourth quarter would be completely ours. I'll have to think about this one...about what I would do with a blown up draft like that. But I have to admit, it wouldn't be too far off what you have. With that OL, and Hester as a FB, and two stud TEs, there would be GAPING holes to run through. A five yard gain would be a disappointment.

I happen to think your view of things is incredibly warped. The majority of fans want these guys to play for what they signed for, within reason. Keep in mind that they are getting paid MILLIONS, and that even one season on the field is enough to support their family for the rest of their lives (let alone future generations). The teams don't hesitate to cut them?! Are you serious? If anything, they constantly hesitate. Why...you may ask? Well, for one, the salary cap is a tool that not only players' ability to "get paid" - as you put it - but it also hinders the ability of the owners to make moves (because of the stupid cap hits). And where do these cap hits come from? Why is there such confusion of it all? Oh, that's right, because these guys get MULTI-MILLION DOLLAR GUARANTEES AT THE FRONT END OF THEIR CONTRACTS!!! Calling nearly every other fan who doesn't agree with you a selfish jerk is preposterous. I don't give a shit if they have ascended to the highest level of anything. The point is, they already get paid MILLIONS, and it pisses of regular guys like me who don't make anywhere near millions. The truth is, most fans would play for a small percentage of what these guys get paid, and they have gone beyond the point at which they take it for granted. Most probably don't disagree with raises or renegotiations. What we get pissed off about is the whining about being disrespected, the complaints of being underpaid, and the over-all callous nature with which these guys handle their financial affairs. What is the point of the contract if the reason the employer signs it is to get a player locked up long-term by giving a player big money up front, and then after the front-loaded money is gone the player starts bitching?

Without that pesky salary cap, and the RICOCKULOUS contracts first rounders get, this is a great idea. I'd hate to see the stars go, but it would be interesting to see what could be done with that kind of first round firepower. On the other hand... SCREW THAT! If the Bears had the 9th and the 10th, then they might as well trade Tait away for something, and pick up Otah AND Clady! And we STILL pickup Rachal in the third!!! Hell, Benson could turn into the league MVP with an OL like that!!! NFO FOR BEARS GENERAL MANAGER!!!

That's what I thought. I hate reporters. I hate reporters (aka columnists, aka WTF ever) almost as much as I hate greedy athletes. The way I figure it, it goes something like this: Pro Athlete > Snake > Reporter > Greedy Pro Athlete > Keanu Reeves

Easy for me. I like Z. He's tough, and could fit in well. I think his measurables are not the same as his football measurables. I don't know much about Barrett. But for a guy to have that much going for him, and still be considered a mid to late rounder, that makes me think of the old saying: Look like Tarzan, play like Jane.

This garbage has gotten out of hand in the NFL. I think there needs to be much more severe punishments available to owners for these greedy ass, insubordinate players. Miss a practice? 10K Miss two? 100K Miss three 500K And so on... Since they are so damn worried about the money, maybe if they started to take a hit in the wallet they would start showing up and shutting their mouths. Speaking of that... Bad mouth the organization or anyone in it? 10K Twice: 100K Etc. And don't give me this freedom of speech nonsense...if anyone in any other job constantly made public the fact that they were unhappy with their salary, intimating that the employers have underpaid them and/or are cheap, that person would get a pink slip.

Given Urlacher's history, and the fact that he seems to shy away from the media in absolutely every way similar to this, something doesn't seem right. I agree with barnesat; there is just simply wrong with this article. It's too forward. -Threatening to retire? Highly unlikely for someone who seems to love it so much and hasn't made a fuss up to this point. -Demanding more money? This is possible, but I doubt Urlacher would take the media route given his track-record and loyalty. He knows he's the face of the team right now. -Threatening the hold out? If anything, it will be to rest up and save a battered body. We'll see when all the offseason stuff roles around, but I doubt it. -NFL "insider" who says what Urlacher is "doing" is a joke? How often do the NFL "insiders" make statements this harsh? Almost never. How often does the "insider" turn out to be some guy's cousin who works as a janitor? Quite a bit of the time. -The speculation of a players' revolt if he doesn't get paid? Come on...that's the straw that broke the camel's back. The verbage is wrong. The wording is too strong, tense, hostile. I think this is a test piece to see if the fans would react the same way as they have with the Briggs and Hester situations. I think this is a fabrication to see the reaction. Urlacher may be negotiating a new contract, but I don't think this is even remotely close to the truth. It's basically Jemele Hill from ESPN ghost-writing for the Sun.

My sentiments exactly. Smith in the 3rd, no thanks. I'd rather see the Bears fill up the OL depth with a stud OG that is sure to be there. Like you, I think it's very possible that Rachal or Schuening will be there.

I don't hate them for their contracts. Like you, I'm just jealous. What I do hate them for, is their greed. They get these multi-million dollar contracts, and they don't honor them. They get all their money up front, and then cry and whine about being underpaid. They turn down millions and say that they are offended by the offers. It's as if they all forgot what it was like to be un-rich. I feel that the honoring of contracts is just like a contract you or I would sign. That's why it's a contract. Sure, money goes up, and people get raises. But it's just that all too often, these guys want extraordinary raises, whereas we get a small percentage. If they do well, they should get a raise, but what they typically ask for is ridiculous.

I believe that a lot of the time, if you want to get the true superstars, you have to take more chances than the Bears do with high-risk/high-reward guys. I'm willing to overlook all the problems a guy has (as long as they are relatively minor), when the guy is destroying other teams on the field. It hasn't been too long ago that I mentioned on the other board that it was a distinct possibility to get both Randy Moss and Terrell Owens. I was roundly criticized for even the thought. I guess that's how many fans feel. I, however, am willing to sacrifice all for a Super Bowl and a great team. I could care less years from now if someone said, "Yeah, but you guys had a team full of thugs and douche-bags." Just like Cowboy fans of today, and their multiple championships to celebrate, I am pretty sure I wouldn't care.

Deserves to be paid amongst the league best what?! Return men? WRs? I admit that I absolutely love Hester as a player. He's possibly the most dangerous guy in the game. HOWEVER, he still doesn't know where to line up on offense when he's in there. So, other than a return man, what can the Bears judge him as? What can they pay him as? To me, this screams of a pampered athlete with an asshole agent renigging on a contract yet again. It's funny that they always want to renegotiate halfway through the contract for some obscene difference, but the team's can't dump them without losing out. It's also funny to me that the majority of the contracts are front-loaded so that the guys get the majority of the "X million per year" contract, but want to renegotiate after the big years are behind. This is the kind of stuff that makes average joes like me hate athletes. Honor your contract. If you want a raise, fine...here's your 3% a year.

Hate it. For as many people think that there are so many holes, to trade up to get Mendenhall would not be that good of an idea in my opinion. Especially if we have to give up the depth picks that would be the core of our draft. I'd much rather get a RB in the 3rd or 4th, and keep the draft picks as is to fill up with depth and other holes.

I'd be shocked if we aren't at least 4-3.

What it should have been if the other picks played out relatively similar: 1) OT Chris Williams - or Branden Albert if someone is going for the upside pick. 2) WR Devin Thomas - This pick shapes the rest of the draft. There should be a ton of talent left, but it's possible a certain position is sucked dry. In this case, it appears that the top-end WR talent is still there. I don't like the way the draft played out for the Bears, but at this point I think Thomas is good. 3a) OG Chilo Rachal - Possibly the best OG in the draft 3b) RB Matt Forte - Solid RB pickup in case Benson drops further 4) OG Mackenzy Bernadeau - I don't mind this pick. Either that, or more OL depth with T Kirk Barton from Ohio State. 5) S Tom Zbikowski - Sure, he has his faults. But to get him in the fifth round is pretty good. He is a smart, tough player, and could very well start over most other guys on the team. At least he understands angles and tackling. 6) QB Dennis Dixon - This guy pretty much had the Heisman wrapped up, and was a slightly slower Vick, but with more accuracy before the injury. This is a HUGE upside pick. 7) This is purely for depth. DT, DE, WR, maybe another OL is what I'd go for. Whatever floats JA's boat. On a side note, I wouldn't mind it terribly if the Bears picked up Dennis Dixon in the 5th, and then grabbed Jacob Hester in the 6th.

Aside from pretty much the first round, I hate it. I will be upset with Felix Jones in the second when there is Forte in the late third. And I won't even mention the fact that Chris Johnson is better...and several other better values later. I will be upset with JD Booty in the third when there is Josh Johnson, Brennan, Ainge, and Dixon still out there. I would despise this draft.

I wouldn't mind seeing him in a Bears uniform. He's tough, has a good head, hits fairly well, and can be used on special teams - specifically as an up-man when teams try to pooch short to avoid Hester. The one down side, however, is that he's slow. He just doesn't seem to have the top-end speed to keep up with the WRs. If he bites the wrong way on a move, that's 6 for the other team.

Why is he obviously not going to be a starter or a change of pace back? I believe it's incredibly short-sighted, and possibly a bit on the hater side of things, to assume that he can't fill the change of pace back role...let alone the possibility of becoming an every down back. Surely isn't his blocking, receving, speed, or moves...because he rivals or exceeds the other RBs in each department. You pose a good question, however. IF the Bears draft a RB in the first 4 rounds, Wolfe may well be squeezed on carries. I happen to think that drafting a RB in the first 4 rounds is a mistake in most cases (considering the Bears' draft this year). Why do you think he is so ill-equipped to run up the middle? Is it his size? Or is it the limited action he saw last year that has shaped your opinion? IF it's the action last year, then surely you realize that nearly no RB could gain yards effectively between the tackles with a broke-down, ineffective OL. Give him an OL that actually blocks efficiently, and I believe Wolfe (and just about any RB who has the talent to make it to the NFL) can do well. So which is it? Do you dislike having Wolfe on the team because: 1) He's a little RB 2) He didn't produce last year to what you expect, and wouldn't with more action 3) He doesn't fit the system/coaching

Welcome back Grouchy. We are nearly all frustrated with how the coaching staff develops and uses players. Benson on a sweep! Wolfe up the middle! Muhsin Muhammed running deep! Where is Olsen in the red zone? Why is the screen so impossible to coach and execute? Etc., etc., etc.

Let's also not forget that they are things that the first round talent Cedric Benson greatly struggles with. Benson makes nearly nobody miss. Benson falls down with very little contact; he takes less for his size than Wolfe has shown. And he's not a real reliable blocker.

Which is just one more reason why I don't like the idea of drafting a RB in the first four rounds, let alone in the first. Fix the OL and the entire offense will look better. Cedric Benson will look stronger, AP will look like more of a workhorse, and Wolfe will look faster. The WRs will look more dynamic and the QB will look more accurate. Fix the OL.

Agreed. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. And every year someone makes a wild move that throws off the course of the draft. And it is my opinion, that if this move played out in real life, it would go down as one of the worst trades and then picks in draft history. I believe every single draft "expert" would criticize the move (not that I really respect them). As an experiment, I went to three different Broncos message boards. To be quite honest, I was shocked to see some people thinking of going the RB route in the first. It validated the pick, somewhat. However, many more Broncos' fans criticize the move, pointing to the same thing I have mentioned. To each his own, I guess.