jason

Did you watch the video? It's an MIT professor breaking down a ton of data, with some formulas in the background that are way over my head, and he's basically saying the entire process is BS science because of some esoteric gas laws. He basically says that the Patriot balls met the standard, and the other balls did not. I just thought it was interesting because he's a freaking MIT professor who probably knows a thing or two about science and what-not. I found the link when there was some other post that said a bunch of scientists have since disproven the study based on a variety of scientific issues.

Really? I watched all the Alabama games and didn't see that very often. His job as a MLB in the Alabama 3-4 is to plug the running hole, take on blockers, let the Will pursue, and then pursue the ball. For a guy who is getting downgraded a lot, he sure did fill up the stat sheet doing his job in a 3-4. The Alabama defense is full of future NFL players, and this is his stat line: 60 Solo Tackles (led team) 42 Assists (led team) 6.5 TFL (only beat by rush guys) 7 PBU (3rd on team, only beat by DBs) 2 FF (led team) Personally, I think he's pretty damn good, and he'd be a great fit for the Bears. Right now the Bears don't have a selfless thumper on defense, a guy willing to take on blockers and let the others make plays. If he were on the team, perhaps guys like SMC and Jones wouldn't be as bad?

Hey, remember this thread? I saw the following link today. It's an MIT professor calling BS on the whole thing.

Wo. Great link. Great info. That is pretty damning for Gould. Seeing his name completely isolated like that makes him look like a bad kicker. And $4M...tough to swallow if a GM sees that ROI. But I don't like any kicker earlier than 6th round.

I'm still shocked anyone thinks a first round QB is good for this Bears team. That is insane in my opinion.

I respect Erin's talent, but he is a major crybaby. He whines after every incompletion in which there is a defender within sniffing distance. And then he's complaining about a coin toss? Really!? Sure, the coin didn't flip the first time, but it's not like the official did it on purpose. On top of that, the coin when tossed up like that, is going to bounce and flip sides 99% of the time. It just so happened that this one time it was tossed, didn't flip, landed exactly flat, and didn't turn over. And THEN the official gave the packers a second chance, which is appropriate, and Rodgers complained because he didn't get to call it again based upon which side of the coin was up in the official's hands. As if he could predict the number of coin revolutions, FOH. I don't like him because he obviously gets advantage, the league favors him, and he whines like a baby. And on top of that, he's a packer.

The worst part is if you look at packer message boards, they think THEY got screwed! It's unreal. And then, in true packer fashion, they're whining like bitches. Rodgers is whining about the coin flip, and rapunzel is crying about overtime rules.

Oh, it's freakin ridiculous!! 1. The long bomb to Cobb, that got nullified, had a late hold. No call. 2. How in the hell is this not holding on the LT? He absolutely pulls the defender down. Luckily there were offsetting fouls. 2. The bomb out of the end zone and the LT absolutely hip-tossed his opponent to the ground. There is no way it was not a hold. No call. 3. The hail mary. What the hell has to be done to get a holding call? The LT sees he gets beat on the outside edge and pulls the defender to the ground, which just happens to be illegal. I get that the officials didn't want to be the deciding factor on that one play, but it's kind of ridiculous, and very important considering that's the side Rodgers escaped to. That game shouldn't even have made it to OT. They have no room to complain about any officiating whatsoever.

One of the most satisfying non-Bear games in a long time.

I know you're joking, but I hope the coaches are smart enough to realize he was dominant at OG, not dominant at OT, and that the PB replacement shouldn't really validate the move for Long, but, instead, validate that it was the best thing for the team at the time. If they're not smart enough to realize Long OG is way better than Long OT, then we have way too much faith in this staff.

:pray :pray :pray

I like the concept behind the draft. It's diverse. But I would like at least two ILBs in any Chicago Bears mock draft. Getting two OLBs and not two ILBs says that site didn't do their homework. I do like the Pocic pick, however, he's got great versatility.

I thought he was bigger, like 270ish. Yeah, not a great pick for 3-4 DE. Like you, I'm pretty content with OLB. I LOOOOVE the Ragland/Scooby combo. They aren't the best in coverage, but they're adequate. What I do like is the fact they're both tackling machines.

The bolded part is not being debated. He DID do well for someone with such limited experience/practice, but he didn't do "pro bowl RT" well. I wouldn't be upset with the smokescreen. I'd be happy because he WOULDN'T be getting screwed with; he'd be getting moved back to his actual position. The position where he dominated. The position where it was nearly irrefutable he was a pro bowler. Plain and simple, that's what it comes down to. Nearly everyone recognized his brilliance as an OG. Nearly nobody thought that at OT.

Draft Site 1. Deforest Buckner, DE, Oregon 2. Shilique Calhoun, DE, Mich. St. 3. William Jackson, CB, Houston 4. Cardale Jones, QB, Ohio St. 5. Nelson Spruce, WR, Colorado 6. Brandon Shell, OT, S. Carolina 6. Jonathan Jones, CB, Auburn 6. Tajae Sharpe, WR, Mass. 7. Matt Judon, OLB, Grand Valley St. Talk about a draft I hate. No ILB help? Doubling-up on DE? A QB I despise? This is close to as bad as it could be in my eyes. Given the layout of when players are picked, this is possible: 1. Reggie Ragland, ILB, Alabama (He had a mediocre championship game, but stats don't lie) 2. Shilique Calhoun, DE, Mich. St. (I'm fine with one) 3. Scooby Wright, ILB/OLB, Arizona (Love me some Scooby, a steal in the 3rd, great pass rush potential as a rotation guy) 4. Tyler Johnstone, OT, Oregon (He always seems to fit right here really well. Sits for a year or ) 5. Kevin Hogan, QB, Stanford (I like him. He's got just enough swagger to remind me of Phillip Rivers.) 6. Tyler Higbee, TE, WKU (Good size and production) 6. Cole Croston, OT/OG, Iowa (Underrated, good pedigree, probably an OG in the pros) 6. , ILB, WVU (It's unfathomable to me he's a 6-7 round guy, and late 7 in this one. He's a tackling machine with great pursuit.) 7. Ryan Switzer, WR-PR, UNC (Given that he's not even listed, he'd be an absolutely monstrous steal at this point.)

It just shows that there is compromise...like leaving Affleck on the asteroid. This weekend, in my mind anyway, they are the Chicago Cardinals. GO CARDINALS!!

Prepare for Ben Affleck and Bruce Willis to go drilling on an asteroid, because something is really out of whack in the universe...we agree AGAIN. I just told a SF friend of mine that it would be best to pair Kelly with Kaepernick, and that made Gabbert expendable in a system into which he doesn't fit.

I don't really think that's legit. This validates the coaches move because there is nobody else on the rest of the roster who can even sniff the probowl at their current abilities. Just because he got selected to a popularity contest doesn't mean the move to OT was a great move, just that Long is popular and has name recognition. The move may stay as is, or it could be a draft smokescreen, but it doesn't validate him as some kind of stud at the position. And it's not just my eyes...most don't think he played pro bowl caliber this year.

I appreciate the analogy rebuttal. Funny. But in this analogy, selling is not a real option since there the team is already upside down on the mortgage and, as already mentioned, there aren't comparable houses available. Without all the BS: -No good/comparable FAs -Too many holes to spend big on a Rookie QB -Not feasible to simply cut Cutler because of salary implications

What do you mean? Surely you agree this was a name recognition award. Surely you saw the fact that he wasn't great this year. He was average as a RT. I think if either of the top two OTs are available at 11, Long should go back to RG where he was a legit pro bowl player.

Agree, but I didn't include it because I didn't think it was realistic. Would someone give up a late round pick for a potential head-case TE who was hurt last year, outperformed by a backup, on a $6M contract, and likely to be asking for a newer/bigger contract? I don't think so, but getting a 6th or 7th would be great.

Why is this different than any other position? All I ever hear is "let so and so compete" for the starting spot on the OL. So many scrubs have passed through those positions that I can't remember. It seems every year there is a 7th rounder or UDFA competing for a spot. But if Bennett is gone, suddenly the Bears have to go high draft pick? Seems to me a mid-round guy could compete with Miller work just fine.

1. A'Shawn Robinson, DE/DT, Alabama 2. Hunter Henry, TE, Arkansas 3. Cardale Jones, QB, Ohio State 4. Tyler Johnstone, OT, Oregon I am not a fan.

There are many reasons why the Bears could go either way on the TE issue, but I believe getting rid of Bennett makes the most sense for a few reasons. 1. He has a $6M+ cap hit next year. He'll want a contract extension/raise, again, and Miller will require much less money. That $6M+ is way more than Bennett's worth, especially considering the following: 2. He appears to be a character concern. He's one of those odd players who wants to do way more stuff than just football, similar to one of the main anti-Marshall comments. The fact that he skipped the entire voluntary offseason program doesn't gain support from the coaching staff either. 3. Statistically, Miller did better this year. In weeks 1-9, Bennett was the primary focus TE. In weeks 10, 11, & 13 they shared focus. In weeks 12 & 14-16 it was Miller time. Comparing Bennett's weeks and Miller's weeks head-to-head, Miller rises above in reception percentage as well as yards. And in the weeks they shared time, Miller wins both categories again. **Bennett Wks - TGT 8.38, Catch 5.63, Yds 47.63 **Shared Wks - Bennett (TGT 4.33, Catch 2.67, Yds 19.33)/Miller (TGT 4, Catch 3, Yds 53.33) **Miller Wks - TGT 6.75, Catch 5, Yds 55.25 4. Miller was healthier this year. 5. Cutler has less INTs when Miller is the TE. This is something that has been discussed before, about the 50/50 balls that always seem to happen when Cutler throws the Bennett, but the INTs support that concept (at least on a per game average basis). In Bennett games (1-9) Cutler averaged 0.71 INTs per game. In the shared games (10,11,13) Cutler averaged 0.67 INTs per game. But in the other games, the Miller games, Cutler's INTs per game dropped to 0.25. Not to mention the fact that Miller is simply a more reliable receiver, catching 74% of the balls thrown his way to Bennett's 66%. All things considered, it makes sense to cut Bennett, save the cap hit, use the money on free agents the Bears actually need, and draft a backup to Miller in the middle rounds. A few good looking prospects that fit the mold are Austin Hooper from Stanford, Tyler Higbee from Western Kentucky, and Jake McGee from Florida.

Partially agree. I'd argue Miller was a more comfortable target than Bennett.