DABEARSDABOMB

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.

You know what this analysis is missing / ignoring, the fact pattern of what drove you to those additional victories. Is the improved pick, which gives you a chance at an additional player, more valuable, than the improvement of key young players on your roster / momentum build heading into the following season? I.e. would you rather finish with a top 15 pick because your team ran off 5 straight wins and you had some young stars developing and leading you down that path? Or would you have rather lost all those games, because your young talent busted, thus getting the #1 pick, but being so far worse as an organization and having so many more needs now vs. had you been picking 15th? I think that is what is missing from this analysis. Clearly you can get better talent picking top 10 vs. 15 and below, but, if you have a better team around it, the increased benefit from the right pick at 15 is far more valuable than what you are going to pick between 5-10. The exception to this rule is when a clear cut franchise QB is staring right at you.

I am so pissed that we wasted money on Ball vs. bringing Peanut back. I rarely am one of those veteran homers on this site, but Peanut was that guy for me and I hate seeing him play somewhere else. He brought so much to the lockeroom and community and was always a good mentor/role model for other players. Wish Peanut a speedy recovery and I hope if he is truly going to hang it up, he signs a 1 year deal with the Bears and than announces his retirement.

With Von Miller likely getting the franchise tag (and they have to deal with Osweiller or finding another QB), Broncos have some other critical free agents. That includes Brandon Marshall, but they have two quality, young, DE's who will also be hitting the market. Fox has familiarity with both and the Broncos are likely going to have trouble getting it all to work under the cap. Malik Jackson, DE, Denver Broncos: He turns 26 in January and is another 3-4 defensive end who is adept at putting heat on quarterbacks while capably handling the run. He is getting better and is playing some of the best football of his career the past three games. Derek Wolfe, DE, Denver Broncos: Like his defensive line teammate and fellow free agent Malik Jackson, Wolfe also turns 26 in a few months. Also like Jackson, he's one of the stronger young 3-4 defensive ends in the league. Unlike Jackson, Wolfe's strength is against the run, while he is still improving as a pass rusher.

Fair points and as a whole I agree with this premise. Although I argue, find the best fit possible in FA and than worry about the other fit in the draft (while still accounting for BPA).

I put ILB as much lower need cause I don't see ILB as a defensive playmaker in a 3-4. I view an elite OLB as the defensive playmaker in that defense or a playmaker in the secondary as higher needs. Do we need an ILB, absolutely, but I don't want to use a top 10 pick on it (if we do really pick top 10). I think we target a defensive playmaker in FA, although I suppose we could always pivot and use the FA money on a tackle instead. I expect us to pursue Berry as well. Pairing him with Amos gives us a very strong back-end of the secondary.

What is the reason that a guy who stunk at RT would be better at LT? Do they think Long is a better fit their? If so, why wasn't he their to begin with (vs. play him at RT now and than move him to LT a year from now). To me if you are going to switch his position, move him back to guard. I presume its the fact that RT's tend to be bigger and stronger and they watch the tape and see Long just isn't a good fit their, but what he does well would excel on the left side? The only way I endorse this move is if they think he can be a probowl type LT. If they do, fine, otherwise put the man back to his natural position, let him beast, and add a top pick at tackle (or use some FA money). Either way, stud olineman and defensive playmaker are 1A and 1B on my wish list.

I'd have rather stunk early and went on a run late than peak in the middle of the season and stink late. The way we have finished is worrisome, but it does provide a truer picture into our areas of need vs. mask potential deficiencies. For example, the oline was masked for a while.

So is Grassu the worst center you've ever seen? I don't think I've ever seen someone as bad as him at the center position (a position you normally don't notice that much). I notice him getting mauled all the time? And in Long's case, why would he be a better LT than a RT? Is he getting beat lately because of strength (aren't RT's typically more maulers vs. your LT who is more athletic?). I think you put Long back to a spot where he is a plus.

The defense has played poorly but the oline has been brutal. Jay was crushed again this week and the good news is, he still is largely playing smart football, however, this was the 2nd street week Long had a brutal block that led to a quick sack and fumble. On top of the 5 sacks this week (and similar to past weeks) the penalties by our oline absolutely killed momentum and big plays. This is a totally different football game if we aren't consistently negating big plays with penalties (not to mention killing momentum). I'd argue the defense is bad (and it is...scheme could only cover up so much for the lack of talent) but man the oline is playing horrendous football (and this is with a scheme that is largely well designed to minimize the time a QB is dropping back and that focuses on rushing so a defense can't just guess pass). They need a significant infusion of talent. At this point, we have to ask if Grassu is a bust or if they truly think he can get strong enough (and that is what he needs). He is getting absolutely mauled. Long is stinking it up. Its bad. LB corps and secondary need playmakers too. Pace, Fox, Gase and Fangio have their work cut out for them.

I was more perplexed by our use of timeouts at the end of the first half. We could have used timeouts to ensure we had about 45 seconds to a minute to try and get more points (and get further into the game). Instead we kept our timeouts and had almost no time and than tried to go for it. Made no sense. Fox does a lot of things right, but he, like many coaches, has his faults too. With our playcalling and game strategy, we stand no chance to win games where we give up that many points (that just doesn't fit to our conservative style).

Lovie had some solid lines (back when we signed Miller and had Ruben Brown, Kreutz, and Jonathan Tait). They got crappy later on but early in Lovie's tenure Angelo had been pretty succesful dumpster diving on some free agents (in addition to the big Tait signing).

I read somewhere that technically, they could still get the #1 pick, although that scenario seems highly improbable. I wouldn't be a fan either, because if we lost the next 3 games, it means something very bad happened. I.e., total lockeroom issues / team quit and those type of issues set you back much farther than the difference in talent between the #1 pick and the #10 pick or wherever we end up. This year was about fixing the culture in Chicago and giving everyone confidence for the future (as well as ideally finding some new pieces to build / plan around). Thus far, we have done that, you lose 5 in a row to finish your season and that can be well detrimental and basically puts you back at square one, if not worse (unless of course Jay gets hurt and its purely because Fales can't move the football).

I think safety is about as bad of a waste of a pick as early as the Bears are projected to go as anything else. I do agree with the other areas of need. Ultimately though, outside of say wideout/rb, I think you go BPA. We absolutely could use additional talent on the oline. I'd say one of guard / tackle is a major area of need (hoping that our center can continue to develop and thus fill the current need at center). I leave it to the Bears to decide whether Long, with a full off-season and more coaching, can become above average to elite at tackle. If he can't, than I think we need to put him back where he is elite and a game changer. No matter who the QB is, it is important to have a quality line. Makes every aspect of the offense better.

Yep...I think the whooping Grasu is getting will be further validation to listen to the coaches and put in the work this off-season. Still, I hope he is able to show enough that the coaches see a guy who can be a starter with added strength.

I want more picks. I want so many guys early on in the draft...so many needs to fill and the right coaching staff to develop them. Desmond King is a guy I like a ton, just a total playmaker who plays a very instinctual CB position for Iowa. Turnover machine. We need playmakers on the Defensive side of the ball.

I tend to agree...lets put him back to where he can be the best at his respective position and find a new tackle. Additionally, it definitely appears all the coaches were right on Grasu needing to get stronger. Hopefully he can do it and become effective cause right now he is brutal. Looks like a guy who doesn't belong on the NFL field.