DABEARSDABOMB

I agree.

I am all for Cousins. I don't think he's great, but he is good and I'm okay with good at this point. That said, I presume it is unrealistic unless Washington intends to let him be a UFA. Presumably, Washington will franchise him which means not only will we have to pay him mega money, we will also have to trade for him. I can't justify trading multiple picks plus giving him as much money as he wants (and I really don't see Washington giving him up for anything less then our #1 pick plus at least a future 2nd, if not a future 1st). If it was purely giving him a contract (and no draft pick exchange), Cousins would probably be at the top of my list.

Along with the other professional sports teams in Illinois (White Sox, Bulls, Hawks, & Cubs). I presume the independent franchises (and minor league teams) are also on board.

Don't live in Illinois so I don't follow this, but If I remember, a few years back, there was a lot of issues with the Saints when their owner was pushing some legislation that was anti-player? I don't remember how it ended, but there was a lot of bad press at the time.

Do we have 3 3rd round picks? I thought we had one, plus 2 4th rounders?

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/here-are...fls-qb-shuffle/ We know I'd be all for this move. I didn't post the excerpt, but evidently reports are the Jets have a very high grade on Jimmy G as well, but don't view him as a realistic option as the expectation is Pats wouldn't trade him within the division and would prefer to trade him outside of the conference.

I'd be game for Hooker...but again, I keep saying, if we aren't taking QB @ 3, we should trade down. Nothing is worth grabbing at 3 (given our needs, etc). I fully expect us to trade down, which will either mean we draft a QB there or we have the ammunition to move back up in the draft to ensure we get the QB later in the 1st or in the 2nd round.

I agree with you, that would be a fantastic draft. I'm not even going to ask how you got so many 2nd and 3rd round picks. Just absurd.

Agree with stinger. That said, he seemed like a pretty darn good coach. Wonder who we will hire to replace him.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, I don't take dlineman that early in the draft who aren't projected to be pass rushing beasts.

This post is why I can't see any legitimate reason to let Alshon walk. I am okay trading him (for ideally a late 1st, but realistically, I'm open to a 2nd plus a future pick), but then we have a pick to help add other players. In terms of free agency, I am a fan of Terryl Prior. I saw enough to be okay with Meredith though, but we clearly can't rely on White. If it were me, if I had doubts on Alshon long term, I'd trade him...if I didn't have doubts, I'd sign him long-term. I can't let him walk because we are already in too much of a bind. Me personally, I'd keep him (because I tend to think he's a pretty damn good wideout) and in the context of our cap situation, we can afford to do it and thus focus on other things.

The more I think of it, if someone put a gun to my head and said we couldn't trade down and we weren't drafting a QB, I'm going safety. Hooker would be that guy for me. Heard an interesting interview from someone (not sure who it was) earlier today talking about Deshaun Watson and he basically said, if he were running the front office, Watson would be the first guy taken. Said you shouldn't get cute with QB. You can say everything you want about Watson, but in the biggest games in college football, he went against the closest thing to an NFL defense (in college) and dominated both games (only one was a victory). Said the guy is unphazed and just has a special knack for big stages, etc. Of course, I suppose people could have said that about Tim Tebow too...although Watson clearly can throw a football. Basically his thoughts were, you have all kind of film of him dominating top teams that you shouldn't get too cute or two worked up in the semantics of the film, where people tend to over analyze, etc.

I kind of do too...I just don't like the idea of taking guys who aren't projected to be disruptive that early. I want guys who get after the QB. Of course I said that about Floyd and had my doubts and look at how disruptive he was as a rookie (hopefully he takes another step forward next year).

What is interesting is how many more games Webb played in after he left the Bears. In fact, if it weren't for injuries, he would have been one of the Seahawks starters (not that they have a great line). My personal view is between Williams & Carimi, the Bears whiffed horrifically on the olinemen they took early as they both sucked. Colombo at least had a pretty good career once he got healthy with Dallas. But man, all three of the Bears 1st round olineman had all kinds of injuries and failed miserably with the franchise until we selected Kyle Long. I legitimately think our franchise history would look quite a bit different had we not utterly failed on those picks (of course you could say that about a lot of franchises), but if we had hit on those olineman, I think we'd be saying something different about Cutler. Of course had Williams been a hit, Carimi probably isn't drafted anyway.

So go to www.google.com and then in the search function, paste this link and hit "search". When the search results pull up, the article title should be the top link and just click on that and it will take you to the article on the trib's site (without having to pay for anything). You can apply this for any article / paper you want (just copy the direct article link from the main site and then paste it into google, run the search, and click the link). A little annoying, but once you get the hang of it, it takes less then 10 seconds.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/footb...0127-story.html Another good read on some tidbits on what is going on at the senior bowl. For those of you (like me) woh don't have access to tribune, just take the above link and copy and paste it into google and then open within the google search and you will be able to read for free.

Absolutely.

Great to hear.

I'm not interested in the ole miss combo, but I always think of Andrew Luck and the Colts who then drafted Luck's TE, who was okay, but never near as good or as much cohesion as I think everyone expected. That at least seemed like one of the more high profile QB / player tandems going to the same team. I figure the schemes are so different that any benefits from being on the same team previously are negated. I do like the idea of really investing in our secondary. Hell, I'd be okay drafting a safety in 1/2 and signing Eric Berry, mainly because I'm so sick of our lack of turnovers and just our pathetic secondary, especially safety play.

Agree. Just kind of curious if the reality is the consensus #1 pick would be a trade down, but we clearly can't predict that, so have a different expedient in process.

Not for the mock...but if we don't go with QB and Allen is there. Would you take Allen, draft a safety, or trade down? My choice would be to trade down and draft a safety.

Butt is a nice TE prospect, however, given White's status, I don't see Pace going for a guy coming off a serious injury (that early in the draft). Especially one whose injury came pretty late in the season, so you know he won't be available for training camp/mini camp, etc. You basically might as well call it a redshirt rookie season.

This is a really great post. I really agree with your stance on QB.

If Desmond King slips, I'd be all over him. Not really late round as I presume he goes in the 2nd, but it is a deep CB draft, so you never know.

I don't know how it fits in for me, but I don't like the dlineman and prefer the safeties (if we don't go QB). That said, given there are two safeties I'd love to have, I wouldn't be a big fan of taking the safety @ 3 and would prefer trading down to a team looking at those dlineman. Although I know the mock doesn't work that way. If we stay where we are at (and aren't taking QB), I think I go safety, but wouldn't be upset with Garrett / Allen.