jason

I like it. And Oakman...yikes (Walter Football has him 3-5 rd)

In one of the other threads I mentioned something similar to the old-school Washington+Traylor combo. The reason that worked so well is that they basically set up a wall and said, "You either have to run around wide, or pass." It was pretty effective in that regard. What if the Bears did something similar in the near future? The way I see it, you need 2-3 components with this idea: 1) The stout DL, obviously 2) Athletic LBs, to chase outside, cover gaps, and go into pass coverage 3) A decent secondary So here is my challenge: Choose a combination of 3-4 ILB, and/or 3-4 OLB, and/or 3-4 DE that realistically could fall into the Bears draft position. Could be DE, DE, ILB. Or maybe ILB, DE, OLB. Whatever. Give the reason for your picks and the players being replaced.

Yeah, for the most part I agree. I've long said LBs, particularly ILBs, can be complimentary and be successful as long as they're smart players. In a 3-4 they're a bit more important in my mind, because they have to be playmakers as the DL is holding things up, but in general the playmakers in a 3-4 are OLBs. Honestly, I hope the Bears try to beef things up on the DL like they did with Washington and Traylor. Get huge, immovable, fairly athletic guys at both DEs, and then get multiple playmakers at LB. THAT would be where ILBs become more important than normal.

I think the fade is pure lack of talent mixed with new scheme and injuries. No matter how hard you try, if the hill is big enough you can't keep running. And when you stop to take a breath, walk it out, whatever, the hill whoops your ass. The Bears, for the most part, ran hard up the hill. Eventually they had to catch a breather, and the other, deeper, better teams, did not.

No surprises from me. OL is a bigger issue because without OL, the rest of the offense fails. Without ILB talent, it is still possible the secondary makes a tackle.

Dammit! I knew I shouldn't have tried to do that with two kids screaming at me and running wild.

I was sorta replying to the comment above about LT. Read the article. They're thinking that move more than our move.

MNF Lions vs. Saints: The Lions started off 0-5. They haven't looked horrible lately. I think the Lions win. Week 16 games of interest: 1. Jaguars (5-9) @ Saints (5-9) - Both teams have wretched defenses, and the Jags get hammered by good offenses. Saints win in a shootout. 2. 49ers (4-10) @ Lions (5-9) - The 49ers have sucked. I'm saying Lions go two in a row. 3. Colts (6-8) @ Dolphins (5-9) - The Colts are in a freefall. 4. Cowboys (4-10) @ Bills (6-8) - Bills win; they have been competitive with everyone, and Dallas has issues. 5. Chargers (4-10) @ Raiders (6-8) - Oakland is really not that bad. They win. 6. Steelers (9-5) @ Ravens (4-10) - The Steelers are on fire. 7. Bears (5-9) @ Buccaneers (6-8) - I hate to say this, but Jamies Winston and Doug Martin are going to torch the Bears. 1. Titans 2. Browns ----- 3. Chargers - 4-11 4. Ravens - 4-11 5. Cowboys - 5-10 6. Bears - 5-10 7. Jags - 5-10 ----- Saints - 6-9 Colts - 6-9 Dolphins - 6-9 Bills - 7-8 Raiders - 7-8 Buccaneers - 7-8 So after next week the Bears jump to #6?!

Looks like the team is thinking similarly. I don't like it. He was a monster at RG. Move him back inside.

Timu looked damn good today!! Better than SMC for sure.

With Tennessee and Baltimore losing, and Cleveland almost certainly losing later, I'm looking at the SD vs MIA matchup. If SD wins, going to 4-10, and MIA loses, going to 5-9, would that cause Miami to leapfrog Chicago in any way? Maybe we should cheer for Miami just to be sure? Same goes for the Detroit vs New Orleans game. If Detroit beats New Orleans, does Chicago jump Detroit? Right now we need to be rooting for Jacksonville to beat Atlanta. We already stepped firmly ahead of St. Louis after their win vs TB, but JAX getting a W would be very good for the Bears.

BTW... Forte still has it. That cut-back run in the first drive that got called back was there with or without the hold. And it was almost entirely because of a nasty jump-cut by Forte. A few other times this game he's shown burst, vision, and power.

It doesn't happen very often, but when the entire Chicago Bears message board agrees on something, it's a 99.9% certainty. This is one of those issues. Hopefully the staff realizes this, moves him back to RG, and signs/drafts accordingly.

You're pissed? I've wanted to upgrade the Bears OL for as long as I can remember, and in that draft the Bears selected SMC over: Riley Reiff - Damn good LT for the Lions David Decastro - Stud OG for the Steelers Kevin Zeitler - Stud OG for the Bengals That pissed me off. Especially since Decastro was viewed as an absolute day one start no-doubter at OG.

WK1 - GB - 3 plays, 7 yards, punt WK2 - ARI - 6 plays, 33 yards, punt (opening KO return for TD) WK3 - SEA - 3 plays, 6 yards, punt WK4 - OAK - 3 plays, 0 yards, punt WK5 - KC - 3 plays, 9 yards, punt WK6 - DET - 10 plays, 80 yards, TD WK7 - BYE WK8 - MIN - 3 plays, 6 yards, punt WK9 - SD - 8 plays, 63 yards, TD WK10 - STL - 7 plays, 80 yards, TD WK11 - DEN - 4 plays, 74 yards, TD WK12 - GB - 6 plays, 37 yards, turnover on downs WK13 - SF - 3 plays, 3 yards, punt WK14 - WAS - 15 plays, 80 yards, TD WK15 - MIN - 13 plays, 93 yards, TD So, 6 out of 14? That might be the worst in the NFL. I bet someone is worse. But the Bears' odds would increase if going on just the last handful of weeks.

I actually didn't mind that by Cutler. He was looking for a guy to break open and the pressure was minimal. He was trying to make a play on a drive that was already doomed.

Wow. I sure hope the draft doesn't play out like that. To be three picks away and see two of the guys I really want get picked the two picks before ours would really hurt. And I'm still not a Buckner fan. If the draft plays out that way, I'd rather get Vernon Hargreaves III, CB, Florida.

Guys, I've been watching/officiating Reggie Ragland since middle school. He is a stud. Period. He has all the athleticism and size needed. He can cover as well. In fact, his coverage skills are often surprising to opponents because his size doesn't usually allow for that type of movement. The only thing that ever held him back was effort on some plays, and that was drastically corrected at Alabama under Nick Saban. Ragland would be superb for us. If we could trade down 5-10 spots, pick up a 3rd or so, and STILL get Ragland? That would be huge.

Pretty much. Except I'd much rather have Reggie Ragland than Myles Jack. Problem is, I think there will be much better players available where the Bears will be picking than either Ragland or Jack. Jaylon Smith might be worth the pick.

Funny that you like him, because PFF says he is great. And we know now that PFF grades are hot garbage thrown into a statistical blender. I watched the game vs Mich.St earlier this year and he looked slow. He had virtually no burst off the line. His pursuit was average. He just didn't really make an impact. If you want him as a pure place-holder, edge setting, 5T DE in a 3-4, fine. He will do. But he won't get much pass rush for you. And, to be quite honest, huge dudes who solely set the edge can be had for much cheaper than a high 1st.

LOOOOOVE the Timu promotion! He is the type of no-nonsense, not flashy, tackling machine the Bears need.

I knew you would like the proposal. I just wish we could get ten years out of a OLineman rather than post-FA five.

I would HATE that pick.

Out of that list, the Bears should focus on the following: Alshon Jeffery - Lock up our guy with a healthy contract. Glenn/Okung - If they don't get franchised, get one. Period. Eric Berry - I'd love to have Berry on the Bears. A guy who is not top ten that I'd like to get is Andre Smith. He's a pretty soid RT and is an URFA. An OL of Glenn/Okung-Slausson-Grasu-Long-Smith would be pretty damn good, and would allow the Bears to truly go all-in with the defense.

Don't sell yourself short. You'd probably have gotten 3YPC.