DABEARSDABOMB

Real question is will we hire a QB coach and if so, who. I certainly hope we do.

The conundrum in this is, you are building to get better, so your pick will only get worse. It is rare to have these types of lower D1 talent available, who might truly be undervalued. I argue while the risk is their, the impacts make sense and now actually makes more sense than using a QB on a pick 2 years from now...at that point, you know you are in for some growing pains with the young QB and you just finished developing your team (while Jay is getting older). I say, if the right QB is their, you take him now and its even easier to do in a year where you get White back plus have massive cap room and luckily the FA market has a lot of available options at the critical positions. By the way, I think if you go with Wentz, it is likely a trade down and you are looking at late teens vs. 11. Lynch probably ends up moving all the way up to #1 overall.

I realize this is a total left field comment, but these are two QB's, who some top NFL people (Greg Gabriel being one of) have raved about. Lynch is probably off the board, but Wentz is another guy who gets high marks. Both of these guys have a ton of talent and would benefit from an organization who has a stability in the coaching ranks and ideally the ability to be patient (as they need to develop). Given that we are getting a 2nd 1st round pick this year (i.e., White's return) and have a ton of money available to make free agent signings (including the ability to poach two young players from Denver's top D where Fox has an existing connection), would this actually be the best time to pick the QB (when we don't really need it...this presumes that Pace, Fox & company all think highly of whomever the QB is)? Two good write-ups from Greg Gabriel (former Bear front office guy...and we can gripe about him, but he has a pretty long history of success). I'd rank him significantly higher than any of the other "draftnicks" including Kiper, etc. This guy lived and breathed it over a long, successful career. http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/breaki...b-carson-wentz/ http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/breaki...k-paxton-lynch/

It sounds like he has at least one offer already, possibly two. Last year I thought he interviewed quite a few places (wasn't just San Fran).

If you look at what the Bucs did, they put absolutely zero focus on their defense. The drafts were to build up their offense and it appeared their plan was to now focus on the defense this draft and off-season.

Cutler appears extremely comfortable with Loggains. It almost seems as if the Bears went into this situation knowing Gase was here to help groom Loggains for the successorship. I do wonder if we bring in a new QB coach though. It also sounds like whatever scheme we run, will be consistent, although Loggains does bring with him a bit more west coast style than Gase, that said, as Fox has alluded to a couple times, the system is not Gase's and it doesn't go with him. We have a system and we will continue to run it. Obviously Gase is sharp and he's a loss, but I have a lot of faith in Fox and if he and Jay are in on Loggains than I'm on board with that. Hard to evaluate him from his time with the Titans when he had garbage QB's.

Philly is a really good organization, so I see no reason why I wouldn't take that job. Stable ownership group, history of patience with its coaches (yes Chip was ousted but their were other circumstances there). Good place to be. That said, existing talent is low (especially lack of an impact QB). I thought Gase was also going to be interviewing for Giants. While I agree Miami ownership / front office has issues, they do have a QB who at least has talent (not sure if I buy into him but it is better than a lot of franchises). I had heard Miami was leaning towards Mora Jr but not sure if Mora would take it. Do agree with your points on the front office though and it worked in the Bears favor. I wonder if the Giants end up giving Lovie a call.

Fairly certain Lovie will get another job. He got royally screwed in Tampa.

Absurd move by the Bucs. I presume Gase would be extremely interested in the gig (although the fact that ownership canned Lovie, who didn't deserve it, that quickly, would make you nervous). That said, getting to work with Winston and building around him would be very attractive to any potential head coach. His players were pretty pissed off (based upon NFL network reports last night).

We will never agree on this or Forte. It makes zero sense to take Miller, who is coming off of his first ever non injury plagued season (and is older than Marty) and than use a pick on an actual starter when we have a million needs. TE is a strength and we have a ton of weaknesses. Why should the Bears end up moving Marty (for what will probably be a pick which would not allow us to draft a player as good as Marty, in most all scenarios) and than create a need now to use a 2nd rounder on a TE. It is an absolute no brainer to me that we need to find a way to mend the relationship and have Marty & Miller and actually have a strength. It also ensures we can focus our draft picks and FA signings on actual areas of need (and their are plenty of them on this roster). If the Bears dump Marty, our Te position is absolutely weak. You would be ignorant to ignore Miller's consistent history of injuries. All probabilities point to a scenario with Miller as our starter resulting in Khari Lee as our starting TE for the majority of the season, which would be a disaster (or we spend money on a FA or use an early pick on a TE and in this day and age, early picks are going to TE's, so that is what it would take if we are looking at a probable TE who has a shot at being a dynamic player).

Or Carey and Langford and invest Forte's money in the oline or defense? That is the reality of the question. We have a solid backup in Carey and a guy who did nothing but look like a starter in Langford (and a potential above average one in that) and both of whom are young and cost effective. Frank Gore was a stud...what good did that deal do for the Colts? I would like Forte back, but reality is, very unlikely the economics make sense for the Bears. If I'm a contending team, who struggles at RB, I can justify that price, but the Bears have a lot of other holes and they can actually have pieces who look like quality backs on the roster. I can't see how or why the Bears would pay him similarly than someone like the Pats. By the way, I agree that Forte isn't even in the same league as anyone on that list except Charles (who is way better than Forte). Gore is the only other one who was close, imo.

Also I think Pace knows that the more people think their is an issue, the lower his trade value gets (if he does intend to test his market). Personally, I know that Marty is one of the best TE's in the league and still young and capable. We have a lot of other needs and we don't have some young up and coming TE on the books. I would be very happy if we were able to give Marty a fair extension while also bringing Miller back to be the back-up (and than continuing to develop Lee or whomever else behind that for more depth). Gives you quality weapons at the TE spot.

Forte was a running back about to be a FA and the Bears had a guy who was at the top of their draft board, having limited perspective on Carey. Remember, at some point last year, people thought Carey was going to get cut. Between Forte being an impending free agent and very long in his tooth, I have absolutely no reason to see why the Bears would invest in back that they thought highly of. And I'm thrilled they did. Langford is going to be a very good football player and a total bargain given where he was picked. We have to look at the landscape of the league and history of the RB position...very few RB's are successful past 30. I hope Forte comes back at a fair price, but if he wants another big contract, I hope the Bears aren't the ones foolish to give it to him. This is the NFL and age matters a ton and guys drop off pretty quick (especially at RB).

Jacks is fantastic. I'd love him on the Bears, although I do have concerns over his injury. In fact, I'd be exstatic if we went Jacks / Smith in round 1 and 2. Address a huge weakness and than focus on the line and other parts of the team in FA (say Eric Berry, an olineman, and a pass rusher)

On a sidenote, could some of this talk be posturing by his agent to try and put more leverage on the Bears? I wouldn't put it past an agent.

I argue what the Spurs do is for the overall health of their players to ensure they are their for the post-season and when it matters. I could see an argument saying losing games intentionally is better for the health of the organization, but I don't really see that in football. One player, with the exception of a stud QB, will not turn a franchise around. Just not going to happen. In this draft, no one is worthy of that sort of potential, where I could argue that we would be better with 1 win and the #1 overall spot. I argue that we are better off ascending upwards with improving young players, etc, and getting an 11 pick, than we would have been as a 3 win team because Jay sucked and all of our young players sucked. I also think a lot of this season was about changing the culture. That doesn't happen if at week 14 Fox just pulls his vets. I also argue it is hard to evaluate players if most everyone on the field is crap. Can't evaluate a wideout very easy if the QB and oline suck...can't evaluate the RB if the oline is trash and the QB can't throw....can't evaluate a CB that well if the dline gets zero pressure, etc. Now I do think their is a fine line late in the year and you need to selectively sit certain guys because it is in your best long-term interest to do so (from a player development / evaluation perspective vs. a draft pick improvement perspective). I even will go as far as saying later in the season development matters more than wins (as I think that is true). But I fully do not condone tanking with rare exceptions (such as if Andrew Luck was going to get drafted and you knew if you lost the final 2 games you would get the top pick...I'm sorry...in that case I'm playing the worst QB on the planet and going with it). I'm not having a tanking because of the difference between the 6th pick and the 11th pick or even the 11th and the 1st (unless some once in a decade type talent is available). Let me ask you this...does anyone want to be the Philadelphia 76er's now? No NBA player wants to go there? What about the Browns (who consistently suck and pick in the top 10)? I certainly don't. The Packers have rarely had top 10 picks, same with the Pats, they do just fine (now you could argue this highlights the importance of QB and to a certain extent I agree).

Isn't the statistic that would matter most how teams performed who had top picks vs. teams with middle picks over a 1 / 3 / 5 year horizon. Essentially showing is a 4 win team more likely to get better because of their top 5 pick vs. a 6 win team with their top 15 pick? I realize their are a lot of variables to this equation and I presume you would have some sort of trend factor, identifying teams who are a 6 win team and trending down vs. a 6 win team that is trending up. My point remains, that you can't like at this in a vacuum and just say picking top 5 would be better. I am much happier having won 6 games than 1 game. I think we'd be in for a much longer haul if we had just won a game this year vs. the 6 we did win. Now I would argue that the difference between 6 or 7 becomes relatively meaningless in the grand scheme of things, so I get the point to some degree, but totally tanking just is crazy to me.

I think Royal, who is what, 5M cap hit next year, should restructure. That said, I like the idea of having Royal back along with Mar + Wilson + White + Alshon + Thompson and others who can battle out. As a result of all the injuries this year, I think we'll have a much deeper core next year. That said, I think none of the secondary guys proved they were anything but role players / depth guys (or in Thompson's case a guy with special teams potential).

I should point out, I was thinking more of Mariani as the #4 wideout. I think of him as a guy who should play week in and week out, albeit more in 4 wide out sets. Upside is minimal but value is real vs. say a Meredith or Wilson who may have more potential but not the consistent player you want on a 4 receiver set.

I don't recall any team that just decided to say, bench its QB because or its veteran players, because the season was over. If they are injured, that is one thing, otherwise, I think the veterans and young players should be playing every week. The exception to that rule is if you have veterans who are not part of future plans (i.e., impending free agents that you don't plan to bring back or guys who you might not bring back and thus you need to see other guys on film). In those cases, I am on board. If we were to pull every veteran and just play a million practice squaders the second we were eliminated, it would be very hard to actually gauge where your team stands in the grand scheme of things. Heck, if we just pulled the plug on someone like Houston 5 or 6 weeks ago, we probably would have came to a much different decision than I presume Bears bass would come to today (i.e., that we need to keep him). Also, if you pull your QB, how do you evaluate other wideouts or even backs. With the backup in (presuming it is a garbage backup with little upside and you plan on keeping your current QB the starter), you are going to make it harder to evaluate wideouts and probably your RB's (as people stack the box). Might also make it more difficult to evaluate young olinemen. Oh and while this is a business, these guys are paid to play and fans want to see guys play. I'd be pretty pissed if I paid money to see a bunch of practice squaders run around the field.

Yes...he has sucked as a returner, but damn has he been good in the slot. I want him back next year. Showed good hands, a knack for being in the right spot, and even did a nice job gaining additional yards after the catch. He reminded me a bit of Bobby Engram late in the year (who is the best slot receiver I can ever remember the Bears having in my span). I presume Royal will be cut (or restructure) and given what Marc showed, I'm okay giving him some additional responsibility.

I am a proponent of drafting another QB, but I see no one in this draft worthy of a #1 pick. If I'm taking a QB, I'll go with someone like Hackenberg later on in the draft. I don't think their is a wide gap between him and the 1st round QB's (said another way, I think all of them are most likely backups to mediocre starters, but maybe they take significant steps forward and become more). I actually think Hackenberg has far more upside.

Okay...so understand with LaBeau, but with the success Zimmer is having in Minnesota, does that change people's perceptions of someone like Fangio. I would think it would. Either way, I fully expect the Bears to lose one of their top coordinators (if not both).

Not even an issue for this year. And money talks a lot as does another year around the org. Either way, at a minimum, we have two straight years we can keep him here under our control (as I think you can use the franchise tag twice on a player, before losing that right). Whatever you think you will get for Jeffrey via trade probably does not commensurate with the value he brings to the Bears (and it isn't as if we are a playoff team with plenty of talent who could take a different route). Bottom line, I think Alshon is stuck with us (unless someone is going to give up a 1st round pick and I don't see that very likely). Also, money talks and he's going to get some big money offers from the Bears.

I respect Brandon for the work he put into the game and the passion he played with. I don't respect him for how he handles his attitude and obviously they are items he knows about and is consistently working towards and I do commend him for that. The deal worked great for the Jets, but from the Bears perspective, Fox needed a clean slate and needed to start building his vision and it was much better to start that by clearing the lockeroom of someone who wasn't very well liked.