BearFan2000

and his game isn't built around speed, he uses good body control and sure hands, with the strength and agility to get run after the catch. The thing great athletes do as they age they learn to play smarter. Maximize what the can do and not try to be like their 20 something selves who just got drafted. I don't see any reason Marshall can't be highly productive for 3-4 more years. As also pointed out the fact that we aren't playing OC musical chairs like we had been under Lovie. Stability of the system will help everyone in our offense gain confidence and grow. Congrats to Brandon, I remember the trade and soon after hearing about a club incident allegation that seemed consistent for a player with a troubled past. But I couldn't be more happy, and more proud of how far he's come as a person and a player, and I'm glad he's a Bear!

After the historically atrocious defensive display we put on last season, I think 12 is fairly fair for us. That puts us a bit below the middle of the top half of the league. We made a lot of changes in both FA and the Draft that should positively impact and improve our D. The Bears look like a vastly improved team on paper till we consistently show it on the field I wouldn't expect us to be ranked super high. You can add a lot of talent but if it doesn't gel and work together in real life all you did is throw money and bodies at the problems. I think we will vastly improved and if our D can be average or above look out because our offense will be able to build on last years success hopefully taking the next steps. I'm drinking the kook-aid but at the same time want to see results on the field.

lots of milage but back on topic it does get old how Forte doesn't get the props he deserves, the Dude has been the rock in our offense since he got here. I still remember his first TD run as a Bear vs the Colts in Indy he just exploded through the line for a long TD run. His cutback ability and vision, soft hands, and versatility has been so valuable to our offense. His stats are right up there with the some of the best Bears RB's second only to Walter in total yards. He's been one of my favorite Bears, great guy on and off the field. Forte does his talking on the field.

That's probably what I'll end up doing, while I'd love to have Matt again this year, Charles has no real competition for carries other than to spell him from time to time. He's a dual threat. They did pick up De'Anthony Thomas in the draft who might play the role that McCluster did previously. Not many true feature backs out there so hard to pass up on Jamaal. Could even see taking McCoy even with sproles there, the amount of plays they run per game with that uptempo offense I can see another solid year for Shady.

Stein is the man. A true contract genius. Love how quickly he gets things done. And how creative he is in getting contracts worked out!

That will be tough. The tricky part is the guy who has the second overall pick, is the same dude that kept wanting trade for Forte no matter how many times I said I wasn't trading him period and they weren't even good offers like crap players for him. If it wasn't for him trading down might be easier, considering if I trade down to #3 he very well might take him at #2 after whoever I trade takes Charles at #1. He really wouldn't be more of a reach than taking Rice a few years back. My best choice may be to stand pat and take Charles, as I could see Carey eating into some of Forte's load, Same thing with McCoy potentially being effected by Sproles. Charles is the main man in KC but lots of miles on those tires.

so as far as Fantasy goes, would you: a. Stay at #1 and take Charles b. Stay at #1 and slightly reach for Forte c. trade down a few spots and take Forte there d. try to trade for a 2nd first rounder somewhere in the middle of the round and hope Forte falls and if not I'd still have a shot at another good RB. I know in our league there are several owners who always seem to go QB first. Which is partly why I got Lynch and Forte last year. Hard to pass on Charles but I like having Forte. Last year I was spoiled and had Forte and Lynch as my 1 & 2 because Forte dropped to me in the second.

plus year two in the new offense should also help Forte and the rest of our skill players. In my PPR league I have the #1 pick, and logic would dictate I take charles... but I would love to have Forte again this year. Too bad it's not a keeper league. I've actually thought about reaching a little to grab Matt, I think he's in for a bigger year than last year. We are going to introduce draft pick trading (it's a redraft league) Maybe I'll trade down a couple spots. But a few years back when i had the first overall and everyone assumed I'd take Peterson or Foster, I took Rice and he had a monster year.

I agree and I like what he's done as well. True the picks may not have been what I or others on this board would have taken, I think we got good players in the draft to add to the FA's we added earlier this offseason. I'm old school in that I feel you build a team starting with the front line and work back. Last offseason Emery focused on retooling the offensive line and it payed dividends by keeping our QB's upright, and opening holes in the run game. The offense was the best we've seen here in years and it will continue to improve. This offseason Emery focused on the front 7 and added some competition at the back end. I believe that improved D-Line play will go a long way to helping our secondary. A porous line like we fielded last season that couldn't stop the run, couldn't get to the QB, I think put a lot of pressure on the back end of our D to make up for the poor play in front of them. When your safeties have take on RB's with a head of steam, and pass defend forever because we aren't pressuring the QB, it makes it tough to do your job. Effectively. In general your safeties should be more focused on pass coverage than having to worry about everything since the front seven is stopping nothing. Doesn't mean our secondary is good as is and doesn't need improved, but I do think the situation had a negative impact on their play. This season we should see a marked improvement from the front 7, and that I think will provide a more realistic basis to evaluate our secondary. Last year it was really hard to properly evaluate any area on our D because it was just that awful all around. You have to start fixing somewhere, and I agree with Emery in fixing the line by adding players and getting healthy.

I agree with this too, and while like many of us who had our idea who the Bears should draft, I was frustrated with some of these picks at the time but having had a chance to go back and review footage of these guys, I'm liking our draft more than I did when the picks were taken. Watching Fuller play does remind me a lot of Peanut. He's a ball hawking cover corner, who appears to often know the route as well or better than the WR, but he also has that aggressiveness and nose for the ball in the run game. Let Peanut teach him the ball punch and we could have ourselves a solid corner to carry on when Tillman is gone.

Thank God they are in the AFC

would have rather had nix

ug… think I might throw up

our pick is in

we should take best punter available here

Maybe we should talk about the guys we don't want to draft seems whenever we throw a name out there someone takes them

not going to be much left when we pick

insult to injury the pukers take dix…...

meh…. I was not happy when Donald was off the board but then started hoping for HA HA

I don't necessarily think Emery is less inclined to listen to Trestman, I feel like there is more of a like-mindedness between them. I feel the whole organization seems to be on the same page rather than the chaos we've had in the past. I don't think Emery and Lovie saw eye to eye, and not sure how much give/take there was in that war room. But I do feel more confident in Emery and Trestman and his staff. Which is one big reason Lovie should have been canned a year earlier so Emery could start out with his guy.

Is there a reason our third preseason game always seems to be away??? If I were ever to go to one the third would be it but it seems it's never at Chicago. Maybe my memory is foggy past the few recent preseasons.

Not to defend Jerry, because I do think Emery seems thus far to be doing a better job. It's hard to compare Jerry's draft picks to Emery's at this point. Emery is getting set for his 3rd draft as Bears GM. While we have larger sample size for Jerry and we will now be 3 drafts removed from him being our GM. His first Draft as Bears GM was 2002 we are now 12 years removed from that class. The further removed a GM is from his time with a team the higher the percentage of players that he drafted are likely to no longer be in the league still. While Emery's first draft picks are still young players that are are still on their rookie deals. Only time will tell how Emery's drafting will hold up. If I remember right Jerry seemed pretty good early on, it was more the collective failures over his time here that made it necessary to replace him. I like what he's done so far, and we'll see what he does in the draft.

And with the offense likely taking another step forward, shoring up the D this offseason so far has been a success on paper and should be in reality. Even if the D only makes it back to average that will go a long way towards making a serious run for the prize in 2014. Emery is proving to be a very savy GM and I love it.

Having read the article I think he makes good points as to why Urlacher is wrongly wallowing in his sour grapes. Where was his loyalty when he bitched about contracts he signed during the contract, even threatening to hold out if the Bears didn't rework his contract for more money. His words and attitude were often more like high grit sand paper than silk. Seemed like every contract after Brian's rookie deal was war for maximum cash from the Bears. Which to an extent we as fans understand but it seemed he was perpetually whining about money. In Brian's time with the Bears teammates came and went not a word of disloyalty from him about it, till he left by declining a the only contract he was offered, and ended up retiring. Now when the Bears let go of players, especially long term ones and ones he was close with, he throws out the loyalty card. Acting like the Bears should hamstring themselves for the sake of "loyalty." What Brian doesn't take into account is the last few years here were riddled with injuries. In fact that offseason before the contract offer he was posting youtube videos of him working out trying to prove he was back in football shape to play. His play had declined and what he conveniently forgot to realize was that aging vets who's skills have diminished tend to get lower offers commensurate with those declining skills. Brian's view of loyalty seems to be a one way street where he only see's what is done for him (but even then only at the moment forgetting about the millions the Bears overpaid him throughout his career). The thing is this is a business, and loyalty is rare and it's not because a player, team, or organization wouldn't love to show it by players staying with the team that drafted them, or teams/organizations allowing that player to play his whole career there till the player decides it's time to hang em up. Free agency has changed that forever, and with salaries continually rising as agents seek the highest contracts possible for their clients (and thus highest possible percentage cut for themselves). Loyalty has become a rare thing. We as fans have learned not to get too attached to players because quite often they chase the money and if your team can't afford to keep them they are gone. I believe that the onus of loyalty is is more on the players and their agents than the teams by demanding more and more cash. Team owners have to make the tough choices of who to pay to keep and who they have to let go, and their job is to try to field a solid team sometimes that means letting go of long time players. Brian should take a look around the league and realize how many "long time players" end up finishing their careers with other teams because the cost of keeping said player was more that that team could afford or because the team needed that money to improve the product on the field and keeping them would not allow that. One of the points he made that I agreed with was "That darn Emery, Rubik’s cubing the hell out of this team this offseason to shore up a defense the organization was so loyal to for so long that it withered into the worst in the NFL. And bringing back team leader Charles Tillman while he’s at it." Angelo and Lovie were extremely loyal to that defense till players were beyond useable. We stuck with players till it was clear they weren't helping or providing much of anything. Loyalty in this business can be good but it can also hurt your team in the long run. Granted age and attrition aren't' the only reasons the D fell off the map last year, but it was time to retool, and hanging on to aging vets wasn't going to help that effort. I absolutely love the way the leadership on this team has changed. Marshall who was brought in and many cried foul that he would be a cancer, and would destroy this team, has done more to unify, and lift, and inspire greatness out of his teammates, Marshall has by far become one of my absolute favorite Bears. His past issues and immaturity have given way to a troubled player who gets it and has greatly matured, and now want's create a positive, hardworking, unity within the team. The pictures at the end of the article are priceless, and shows a great deal of unity that they would get together and workout together, hang out together, creating a brotherhood atmosphere. It's an atmosphere that will go a long way to selling the Bears to potential free agents who want to be part of something special. The old school tough love of Kruetz/Urlacher is no longer there.

I have a couple questions for all the fantasy football experts and commissioners. I and the commish of a 10 team PPR league on NFL.com I have tossed around the idea of allowing the trading of individual draft picks prior to our draft. We redraft every year, it's non-keeper, and I am hesitant to change our league to a keeper league since this is our 4th year and we haven't had the same owners in any two or more consecutive seasons. First season was a 10 team, second season was a 12, last year was back to 10 and this year is so far looking to stay 10 and may be the first season we've had the same owners. I'm thinking that adding the ability to trade individual picks will add an interesting aspect to the draft. Obviously it would have to be balanced trading like 1 pick for 1 pick, or 2 for 2, etc. So everyone ends up with 15 picks. Do you think this is a good idea or am I setting myself up (as the commish) for a headache? How would you go about facilitating the trades (ie process of proposing, accepting, and approal/league vote/veto). The other question I have and I've googled and googled and have come up with little help online as far as setting up a value or point system to ensure draft pick trades are as fair as possible. As in if a team wants to trade up for a first rounder, it may take 2 or 3 good early-to mids for the first and a late pick or two. How do you establish a system to know if a trade is reasonable or not. We'll have a 15 team roster, starting 1 QB, 2 RB, 2 WR, 1 TE, 1 RB/WR/TE flex, 1 Def/st, 1 Kicker. So 9 starters 6 bench making the first 90 picks theoretically the most valuable assuming teams fill their starting spots first and bench last. Perhaps more realistic would be the top 80 are the most valuable since most people draft kicker last or near last. That makes the remaining 70 picks less valuable. How would you set up a value system for each pick? I'm thinking once I have a good point system, then I can set rules like the trade has to to be equal +/- x number of points. if it exceeds that +/- limit it is either void or is up for review.