jason

I was thinking, "Why wouldn't he get the lion's share of carries in NY?" But that was before I realized they resigned Powell and picked up someone else. So, basically, he's going to a place where he'll split carries three ways at best, four ways at worst. As for what he did and could do, I don't see why he wouldn't do well for another two years, at least. Forte has always kept himself in amazing shape. Langford was supposed to be amazing (and young), the main reason(s) why Forte was expendable, but Forte outperformed him in pretty much every way. The problem now is, there's no way to truly know what he would have done, because he likely won't get the carries in NY.

If you're saying a 1, 2, 3, Roby, and another promising player, then yes. Hell, I think it might be worth it even if you take out the promising young player to be named later. Roby seems like the kind of "good production in limited time"-guy that the current FO seems to like.

See, that's better. >$5M per year is not what the Bears wanted to do, nor should they have done. But if Forte were willing to do the same contract for $1M less per year, the Bears should have kept him. I hope he tears the AFC East a new asshole and shows how much he still has left in the tank.

Yes, I'd rather not pay a high dollar TE who has inside issues and doesn't jibe with Cutler perfectly. They were all on the new offense, but there didn't appear to be any issues between Cutler and Miller. As for the offseason fever, it hasn't caught me. I wanted to keep Forte. I just don't want to keep Bennett. I think he's replaceable for less money.

And yet Forte had a YPA half a yard better than Langford. Forte had roughy 1/3 more carries than Langford, had the better YPA, AND had a longer run on the year. Speed isn't anything. They should have at least negotiated with Forte to see if a hometown discount was possible.

:headbang :headbang :headbang

Yes, easily outperformed. See this thread for the specific data breakdown. Is it a small sample size? Sure. But he looked good enough that I think it makes Bennett expendable because of his price tag. If Bennett weren't going to demand top-5 TE money I'd say resign him, but he's definitely going to ask for big money. Further, I really believe he and Cutler aren't on the same page, and there have been multiple interceptions the last few years that are really Bennett's fault. We broke those types of passes down for the respective games when they happened, and I firmly think he just doesn't see what Cutler sees. My ideal situation is dropping his contract in a trade that would net the Bears a 4th round pick, making Miller the starter, and allowing the Bears to draft a rookie TE with great potential.

He appears to at least be a headache with the organization, and that probably related in some way to the team. The comparison to Urlacher is not even because Urlacher was a monster, and Bennett got easily outperformed by his injury-prone backup who obviously had better chemistry with the franchise QB.

Good news in my mind, because that means Martellus holds less power after the Bears lock up Miller.

If 3.5 per year, the Bears were stupid to make the move. The Bears should have at least tried to negotiate to see if Forte would provide a hometown discount.

Agreed. That would suck.

It's sort of odd, I agree, but the difference is potential. One, we pretty much know. The other, is a soon-to-be rookie who has his entire career in front of him. A career where he won't be the main guy on the team getting double-teamed every play.

For the most part I agree. I wouldn't say he was a shut down corner, but he was definitely a good cover corner.

I like his length, but dislike his production.

That's WAAAAAAAAAAAAAY overspending for a mid-tier DE who may have upside. Teams can get a "6-8 sack per year"-guy for much, much less.

I'm glad we got him because now we won't waste a draft pick on a RB. That's three guys. Sign a fourth guy as an UDFA with potential.

And that's more and more reason to trade his ass. A guy like Marty is not worth 6-7M per year. In terms of other TEs he might be, but that's too much for a guy who is a headache, has iffy hands, and doesn't jibe with Cutler perfectly.

YEEEEEEEEEEEEESSSSSSSSSSSSS!!! This is awesome for two reasons: 1) He's pretty damn good. 2) Long is moving back to the position where he kicks ass (like I said he should). The right side is going to give the Bears 5+ YPC. I'd love it if the Bears complimented this concept with a bruising FB.

I wish him the best...now that he's not going to the Packers. But if the contract details end up being less than 5M per year, I'll be upset Chicago didn't bring him back.

If we do get Trev, then Ragland is the perfect fit at the other spot. Draft him and the LBs are set for several years. Grab Scooby a little later as a guy who can fit inside or outside, and provides a dynamic pass rush from time to time.

The reverse-Ditka trade! I think this draft is seriously missing an ILB. Even with Trevathan, the ILB position needs attention.

Absolutely don't want to give up a 2nd round pick for a guy who is a slightly above average LB. The Bears would be better just drafting an ILB in the first few rounds to pair up with Trevathan, and pay him the rookie contract.

Damn!

A Seattle friend said it's been discussed in the area, local radio, and on some message boards.

Sure. He'd be a decent third back, a rotational guy. He's injury prone, and has pissed me off in fantasy so many ways, but I have always thought he had a nice burst and shiftiness to him.