chwtom

He can't have a 5 mil cap "hit" if his base salary is 5.95 mil. Has to be 5.95 PLUS 1/5 of his signing bonus. If signing bonus is 15 mil (not sure if all that guaranteed money is SB), then cap charge would be 8.95 mil.

Regarding Bush, it may not be a CAP savings to cut him, but it would be a cash savings. So if they truly believe he adds no value to the roster, they could still cut him and save some money, it just wouldn't free up any cap room.

Cook isn't a terrible blocker, particularly for an athletic, pass-catching TE. He's also the Titans 2012 Walter Payton Man of the Year award winner, so he's a quality guy. He's also never--even in college--played with a strong QB, so he's got lots of potentially untapped potential--he ran a 4.4 40 and benched 20+ times at the combine. I think he would be a tremendous add. As for Emery's plans for TE--he did say he expects his TE to be well-rounded and contribute as a blocker.

I'd be most disappointed if we take the 5th or 6th best OT in the first. It would mean that rather than going after the best player available, or spending money to fill the biggest hole, we used our first round pick on the biggest need. It's one of the reasons Angelo's first rounders failed so often. I think if you have a hole at a critical starting position (like OT, for example), you have to fill it in FA, or you are going to be playing catchup to the rest of the league every year, and you are going to miss out on impact players because you are reaching for need. I kind of felt like we did that last year with McClellin. We'll see if he pans out.

Not for nothing, but I think you two should just agree to disagree.

You do realize that most of the time the whining and crying has turned out to be justified, right? The Bears have hit on a few picks that fans weren't initially on board with, but most of the picks the fans have hated have turned out to be busts. There is a long history of ineptitude with this team, with their drafting of d-linemen and safeties being a recurrent problem. We seem to draft more safeties and defensive linemen than any other position, yet we have no difference-making home-drafted defensive players to show for it. I HOPE McClellan and Hardin turn out to be studs. I don't HATE the picks, and it's certainly conceivable they could succeed.. But I'm not confident in them. I hope McClellan is the next Kampman and Hardin is the next Bob Sanders. But I'd be more surprised if they were than if they weren't.

Right, but Mayock is supposed to be scouting the guys himself, not passing along the opinions of other people. It's just weird to have such a dramatic change of opinion about a guy based on no new information. Makes you wonder if some of these guys spread some money around to get someone influential like Mayock to publicly pimp them.

2 weeks ago he's Mayock's 4th ranked DE, and not on Mel's big board. 2 days before the draft he's suddenly Mayock's top defensive player in the draft and Mel thinks he goes around 10th. Something's fishy.

They want Richardson, so presumably they aren't happy with Blount.

How about instead of all that realistic stuff above, we trade Forte and our first to the Bucs for #5, and snag Kalil (assuming Claiborne goes 3 and Richardson 4). Then we trade our third to the Giants for Osi.

He can play the run and pass, but does not excel in either. He's brothers are both athletes, but Aurthur rides the bench in Baltimore, and had arguably a better college career. He could be great, I'm just a little skeptical when I guy was considered a second or third round pick for months and suddenly a week before the draft Mayock makes him a top 10 player.

I'm pretty sure this would be the list, based on what has been published in terms of Bear's interests: Coples Floyd Mercilus Glenn Perry Brockers Wright I doubt they think DeCastro or Kuchley will be there, so they aren't on the list. I'm betting they were more interested in Stephen Hill as a second rounder (which is unlikely now).

If the draft starts with Jonathan Martin (Chris Williams 2.0), an OG not named DeCastro, a LB not named Kuechly, or a DT, I will be pissed. I'd be ok with most of the DEs being discussed (with the exception of Perry-it seems a little early for him), any of the WRs being discussed, a CB, DeCastro, Kuechly (though that's a bit of a luxury pick imo), Reiff if he fell, I'm good. I'd be ok with a trade down or a trade up. Mostly I don't want Jonathan Martin. his scouting report sounds exactly like Chris Williams and every other soft finesse LT that hasn't worked in the NFL.

I think Forte is getting a bit of a bad rap here. He had one or two tweets expressing his frustration with the situaiton. Other than that, he's been remarkably professional about all this. If I'm the Bears, I don't sign him long term unless he'll take a below-market contract. Market value for contracts for running backs far exceeds their value on the football team. There aren't many examples of running backs who lived up to their big-mooney free agent deals, so most of the time you are paying for past performance. If he's willing to take a deal that pays him 6-8 per year and the Bears can get out of it after 3 years, then fine. Otherwise they might as well tag him twice and then bid him adieu. As for as trade value goes, I don't see him having much more than second round value. He may be one of the 5 or 10 best backs in the NFL, but two things significantly limit what we could expect to get back in a deal. First, running backs aren't highly valued anymore. RBs are getting pushed farther and farther down draft boards because people are seeing how short their careers are, and how easily replaceable they are. Second, he wants a lot of money. The list of teams willing to give up a premium pick AND give a big contract to a RB coming off a knee injury who had a TON of carries in college and the pros is likely pretty short. I'd think the Browns second round pick is the very best we could hope for. The Patriots second rounder and some later picks also sounds about right. Marshawn Lynch is the most recent comp I can think of, and Seattle got him for a 4th rounder. Forte carries more value, but still, there's no way we are getting a first rounder, let alone a first rounder plus additional picks. Just my opinion.

I wouldn't be opposed to trading Forte if the return was a high second round pick or better. I think we could function well offensively with Bush and a rookie with speed, and I think Forte is only going to become less productive from here out. He had a ton of carries at Tulane, so his body has taken a beating. The history of productivity of backs signing big-money contracts is pretty terrible. That said, take a look at the next rumor on the site. It states that the Rams are considering making a push for Mike Wallace. It isn't often that you can prove that a rumor is categorically false, but this is one of those times. If a team wants to sign a first-round tendered RFA, they would have to surrunder their ORIGINAL first round pick to do so. If they traded their first for someone else's first, they can't sign that RFA. This is to prevent teams from trading their first with the team at the end of the first round to give up as little as possible for the RFA. Since the Rams already traded their first rounder with the Skins (and wouldn't have given it up for Mike Wallace anyway) they absolutely cannot sign Mike Wallace. This rumor is 100% fabricated, and fabricated by someone without a lot of NFL knowledge. So take the Forte rumor with a grain of salt.