jason

Matt Jones is a perfect comparison. I'm not talking about on the field ability in the NFL. I'm talking about someone who was relatively average as far as the scouts were concerned, maybe considered good, and then they DESTROYED the combine, and all of the sudden they are the best thing since sliced bread.

I've been seeing everyone spooge all over the idea of Flacco for some time now. And, all of the sudden, this guy is flying up the depth chart at the combine like Matt Jones, going from a 4th to a late first. I can understand if you love the guy and want to draft him, but a late first rounder for someone widely considered a fourth rounder just a month or so ago is absolute lunacy. I'd be much happier passing of Flacco if it meant the Bears got to A) Keep their picks, and Draft non-reach picks with the first two rounds. If Flacco is there in the third, fine, grab him. But since he won't be there, why reach? I'd much rather see an OL, OL, QB draft sequence while keeping our picks, versus some of the other scenarios I've seen around here. Oh, and before you say it, I know that each pick is a risk. I know that he has "upside". However, that makes him the same as everyone else: we simply don't know. I'm still hoping that either Colt Brennan or Dennis Dixon fall into the fourth or fifth (maybe beyond), and the Bears wait to grab them there.

They only make "more than enough" because they are raping the fans. It's gotten completely ridiculous. The players do not deserve that much money. Period. The owners need to do something about it, or the fans will ultimately suffer. When an upper-deck seat for a Chicago game is upwards of $100, and it's nowhere near the front of the tier, then the fans are getting screwed. We pay because we love the game, but it's complete horseshit. Each and every owner could lower ticket prices if the players weren't getting paid so much. Would they? That's another discussion. All I know is that the rise in ticket prices over the last ten years is directly related to the crazy rise in players' salaries over the same period of time. It makes me hate the "$10M is an insult to me" players even more.

Just for the record, I think Flacco is a huge reach in the second round. He's slowly morphing into the QB version of Mandarich. I'd like it if the Bears went after another OLineman in the 2nd.

So, everyone is so down on the Bears' WRs. I happen to think the bunch isn't actually that bad, but they simply don't get much chance since the line has done so poorly, the running game blew this year, and the QB play has been as inconsistent as Bea Arthur's bladder. Nonetheless, there are two guys who are available for big money, but are pretty much sure to produce. 1. Randy Moss - I'm sure the Pats want to keep him, but what would it take to go after him? 2. Chad Johnson - He's clearly not happy in Cincy. Do you want them? If you don't, and it's for a reason other than financial, then I just don't buy it. You can't have everything. You either get great, prima-donna WRs, or you get the guys we have now. The great WRs who don't have big heads are few and far between.

Agreed. It's like shaking hands with someone's grandfather. Often times, the guy looks a little weaker, a little smaller; it's generational. But then you realize there is some sort of wirey strength in there, and he can really keep up. Not to mention the fact that he could have whooped your ass just a few short years ago. The 85 Bears were like that. They were fast, strong, smart, dedicated, and intense. If there is any sort of speed differential between that team and teams of today, it would be negated. That 40 track time doesn't mean jack when the pads are on and you realize that therre is a borderline insane man (Danimal) lining up across the line from you. Not to mention the fact that the 85 Bears D had multiple HOFers, and should probably have more. I'll take a bunch of quick HOF players over a bunch of quick good players.

I'm convinced by this post that you are a very young guy who has no idea about football in the mid-80s, and didn't actually see the 85 Bears. And after looking at your profile, the thought is confirmed. No disrespect intended, but there is no team in the history of football, and may never be, that would beat a fully healthy 85 Bears team by 2 or 3 touchdowns as a simple matter of fact. To say otherwise shows a serious lack of football knowledge, a lack of historical perspective, and just a bit of ignorance.

I think Willie Gault would like to have a word with you.

This is a good development. Hopefully it means the Bears won't reach and/or get a QB early. Hopefully they'll be patient and grab either Brennan or Dixon as a project with big upside.

The Giants of New York versus the Packers of Green Bay I'd say the game was most exhilirating

Things I know about the Bears this offseason... 1) OL is the most important position to be addressed. Without the OL, like this year, the skill positions can't do their job effectively. 2) Drafting a RB in the first round is insanity. 3) The skill positions on the Bears are not as bad as many are saying. The WR corp, if ever given a chance to play with a good OL and a semi-consistent QB, is capable of incredibly much more than what they have shown. Berrian (if he stays), Bradley, Hester, Davis, MuhMuh, and the TEs are a very talented group that should give opponents trouble each game. 3a) The skill positions also need a competent OC to maximize ability. 4) Many may like Grossman, Griese, or Orton, but QB has to be one of the picks. To pass up on potential like Flacco or Brennan with what is essentially a freebie pick in the 3rd round, would be ridiculous. 5) Drafting BPA is great in theory, but anyone calling for strict BPA is not thinking clearly. Should the Rams draft McFadden if he falls to them? BPA has to be balanced by need. Last but not least, at the end of the draft and FA, the Bears should have a combination of players that resemble the following very closely: -3 new OL -1 new QB -1 new S -1 new WR (if Berrian leaves) Aside from that, add depth as needed.

Agreed. I tried telling people all year long that the packers were highly overrated. I watched every game I could when the Bears weren't playing, and I saw a good but extremely lucky team. They had at least 5 or 6 games in which the exact break needed got them over the hump. Whether it be a wet ball causing an opponent to drop a snap, two vikings DBs running into each other allowing a GB TD, a phantom-call that kept a GB drive alive (happened multiple times this year)...they managed to squeak through. They had all the luck in the world on their side this year, and there is no way they can repeat that luck.

duplicate post

Just giving credit here....I like this idea for a draft. And if Phillips ends up being as athletic as Taylor was, then the draft is wonderful.

And I'll puke if JA takes a RB in the first round. The Phillips, OL, OL, Flacco (or Brennan) draft idea posted earlier would be great.

I'd much rather hear about the NY/NE matchup, and historical significance that spans multiple sports, than hear announcers across the country slobbing Farv's knob like they have been for the past few weeks. Announcers were all but openly cheering for green bay, showing their bias on every questionable call. Thank goodness Madden didn't announce the playoffs. Brett Farv is, and always has been, a very good, if not great QB, who is highly overrated, and throws too many boneheaded crucial picks to be considered the best of all time. This year was no different - gotta love that late INT that was just a horrible throw, and the fact that a great deal of his success this year was due to I'm ecstatic about the packers losing, and I'm quite surprised the refs and the league let it happen (depsite the fact they tried otherwise).

Good story...but the kid just decided to stay in college. I read this, went to watch ESPN News, saw it on the ticker, and came back here to post.

Yep, still me. a) While you and I both realize that I nearly despise Benson, I want the Bears to be great...and I honestly feel they are not that far from being great. I don't think there are NEARLY as many holes as most think (I actually only see major holes at OL and QB right now). It's just that the OL & RB combo did crap this year. Since Benson is under contract still, and has shown glimpses in the past, it's best to overhaul the OL. That way, not only does the running game improve, the passing game improves in two ways (the affect of a positive running game & more time for a QB to throw). I NEVER wanted to draft a RB in the first. I absolutely hated when the Bears drafted Benson, and told everyone on the board it was a horrible move. I was right. Michael Turner would be nice, but I'm not keen on giving big money to someone who hasn't proven his abilities over a longer period of time, and while starting. Besides, with a good OL, even average RBs in the NFL look good (see Jamal Lewis in Cleveland). And a great OL makes can make average to good RBs look incredible (see Emmitt Smith and his semi truck holes to run through). And I don't think I've ever called for the outright release of Benson, despite how much I dislike his blase attitude, apparently poor work ethic, and lack of production. As a final thought, I'd lile to mention that I would love to see Wolfe get the ball more. He has something that can't be taught: shiftiness. Assuming he can deal with another 5-10 hits per game, there is a good chance he'll produce plays like Darren Sproles did for the Chargers the other day. Just give him the ball, give him room, and watch what he can do. Just, for goodness sakes, don't run him up the pipe like he's damn Earl Campbell.

I think the majority of the recent 1st round OTs are proof that taking an OT in the first round is not a stupid move. With the exception of a few, most are great, and the rest are still very good. Sure, you can pursue OLinemen in FA, but that doesn't mean the Bears will get them. Drafting them ensures that you have that guy. If Berrian leaves, then the Bears have to address WR a little sooner, but if he stays, I'm fairly confident that Berrian, Bradley, Hester, Davis, and MuhMuh can produce big time numbers if the OL and the QB improve. Of course, if the OL improves, then the QB automatically improves. So, basically, improve the OL = improved QB because he has more time = more time for WRs to get open. I guess it comes down to whether or not one thinks the WRs are good. I happen to think that this group of WRs is good, but just not given much of a chance with inconsistent QB play behind a weak OL that doesn't allow for many 5 or 7 step drops for the patterns that take a bit longer to develop.

To be honest, I would neither like nor dislike this draft. I don't like the RB pick at 2. That's my biggest grief. The first two rounds make or break this draft for me. Also, I'm not a big fan of Hardy. There should be much better talent in the third round. Last but not least, I don't think Schuening will last until the Bears' 4th. Most of the stuff I've seen says he'll go early to mid third...could be wrong. Mine: Round 1: Miller has to leave. ASAP. Move Tait back to RT, let the rook learn on the job at LT. There is little chance that Long or Clady will be there; however, if either are, then the Bears' pick should not actually be a Chicago Bear Jeff Otah Round 2: I'd love to see Sam Baker or Chris Williams fall to the Bears here. Maybe they sit for a year, and the Bears have bookends on their line for years to come. But, I think that might be too risky having two young OTs and Tait, who is still very good. So, I think the best bet is to go with the best OG on the board: Duke Robinson...he's a road-grader. Round 3: BPA. There are just so many ways to go with this pick. There is a ton of OLB talent, a few promising FBs, a few nice looking Safeties, and maybe even another offensive lineman. This is a tossup pick for me, but I can't say that I would be upset with anything here. Maybe even Chris Johnson, the lightning-quick RB out of ECU? Chris Johnson Round 4: I want a QB with potential here. I would like Brennan, Dixon, Flacco...in that order Colt Brennan - Rocket arm, accurate, quick reads...is he a system QB? I don't think so. Round 5: The Bears need a quick, tough, big hitting, big play making, smart, strong against the run safety. Tom Zbikowski - Also, he's played both safety positions. Weakness: Kind of like Archuleta, not as great in coverage. Round 6-8: BPA. However, I wouldn't mind seeing a WR (maybe North Dakota WR Weston Dressler - game-breaking speed), another OL prospect, and finally a bruising FB. These three can be in any order.

Jones, Romo, Snyder...I could care less. What I care about is the fact that Farv is winless at Dallas, and they posed the best chance at stopping the packers from making it to the Superbowl. I cheer for the Bears first, and for any team that will hinder the packers second. I'm slightly upset that the Cowboys lost, because I really think that they would have handled the packers. Now, with the Giants playing well, there is still a chance that the packers lose (the snow doesn't matter to a team from NY). However, it would have made me feel much better to watch the packers lose early, and ugly. Each game closer to the Super Bowl they get, is one more gut punch to me as a Bears fan.

Well, that we can agree upon. However, he probably sucked much less than most of the OCs the Bears have had over the last two decades. if Crowton were given a few more years, and a little more talent, I feel he would have turned into the next Mike Martz, Bill Bellichek type. He would have been thought of as an offensive genius. Give Shoop more time and more talent, and he'd still call for the bubble-screen on 3rd and 14.

Wolfe may have been caught from behind, but the fact remains that he made the huge play, a play that Benson and AP probably don't make. Wolfe is fast enough, definitely shifty enough, and strong enough to play RB splitting carries. If anything, he showed more potential than either Benson or AP this past year. He's not going to plow through guys, so the runs up the middle with a weak OL were a mistake. But it sure does seem like when he was given the ball in space, he made big moves and big plays.

Game. Set. Match.

I'd love to get Otah in the first. He should be a solid tackle for years to come. And, with any luck, he can play the left side. I'd also like the Bears to use two more draft picks on OL, unless otherwise addressed in FA.