adam

I only had 6 correct picks and 25 correct 1st round picks. If we did it by team I would've had more with Jones going to Dallas.

lol, but actually true.

The complimentary comparison was more like Benson: fall down after 2 yard gain and Forte: plow thru to the 2nd level and make people miss More like "Shock and Awe", Forte being the Shock and Benson making the crowd say "Awwwwwww" in disgust.

The more I am reading about Bennett, the more I am liking him. Hard to knock him with his production in the SEC. Also, with him only being a Junior, we are getting him a year younger.

Wow, that would've been ugly.

We probably could've traded down in the 2nd, picked up Brohm 1st, then traded up to pick up Forte late in the 2nd without even giving up anything. Same, same.

Thanks for the update. When people get over the fact that we did not draft a QB, they start liking the draft more and more.

YES! It is amazing the influence a neckbeard has on the draft these days. You basically have to knock 0.5 off their 40 time, and add 10 reps to their bench if they possess a neckbeard at the combine. Pretty crazy stuff.

Yeah, Baltimore was the last team to win an SB with a QB that had a rating under 85. Now would any of those QB's mentioned be at least that good in the NFL? The last 10 QB's drafted in the 2nd Round: Kolb, Beck, Stanton, Clemens, Jackson, Brees, Carter, Tuiasosopo, King, Batch. That is an ugly group other than Brees, especially for Franchise QBs. The last 10 QB's drafted in the 3rd Round: Walter, Greene, Schaub, Ragone, Simms, McCown, Redman, Huard, Quinn, Griese. Any QB's to build a Franchise around in that group? Schaub? If you look at the past 10 Super Bowl champions, the QB's have came from the 1st Round (5 times), 6th Round (3 times/Brady), 9th Round (1 time/Johnson), and undrafted (1 time/Warner). Going back to 1980, only 2 QBs that were selected in the 2nd-5th rounds won a Super Bowl (Theismann and Montana). So our only hope is Grossman.

nfo, I am still a bit shocked we passed on Schuening, when he was right there. I think they were scared of Charles because of the whole Texas RB thing (Ricky/Benson). I don't understand how Brohm and Henne both fell so far, but there has to be reasons that most teams passed on them. If they liked him, the Bears could've even traded down in the 2nd to pick Brohm, then used the picks gained to trade back up to pick Forte. They would've had Brohm/Forte instead of Forte/Bennett. Then you pick Caldwell instead of Harrison and Schuening instead of Bowman and we are looking pretty damn good. So Williams or Albert, then Brohm and Forte, then Caldwell, Steltz, and Schuening.

If Forte shows he can be an every down back, then I can only assume that Benson will be gone after this season. Anyone (LT2) know what Benson's cap hit is for 2009?

I am also a bit shocked/perplexed that we did not draft a QB, but how strong was this class of QB's? Before the combine, Ryan was a mid-1st round pick, and now he goes at #3. Many analysts said that this was a 1 QB draft. Baltimore reached big time on Flacco at #18, and he was not even on the QB radar until April. There is probably good reason why Brohm and Henne fell to the late 2nd round. If they were so good, why did teams wait so long to pick them? Miami traded up to get Henne after GB came out of nowhere and picked Brohm. If GB passes on Brohm, they would've fell even further. CAR and KC, both in need of a QB, did not draft one either. There are a bunch of teams that completely passed on QB this year, even with a need. Could this just have been a bad year to draft QB's? Hell, just comparing numbers, Orton looked pretty damn good coming out of Purdue with 3,000 yards and a 31 TD to 5 INT ratio for a 4th round pick. How much different would any of these QB's have been compared to Orton and his neckbeard?

Thanks for the update.

So you are saying that a playoff team who rests almost every starter is playing to win? Why are they allowed to "take a week off", yet a team out of contention has to play to win or for pride? I understand we can debate the play to win thing forever, but how would the 1 loss affected our drafting?

Someone mentioned that Tampa now has like 6 QB's. More than likely they will cut 1 or 2. That would be an easy pickup for a team looking for a 3rd String QB.

In mid-December of 2007, The Bears were 5-9 after losing Monday Night to the Vikings and were completely eliminated from playoff contention. With their super motivational 2 game winning streak to end the season, they moved from a #8/#9 pick all the way to #14 in the 2008 draft. With one loss they would be drafting #9 and would be the only 6-10 team. That would mean they would not be in the draft rotation for teams tied at 7-9. So if the Bears had the #9 and the #40 picks, plus earlier picks in the later rounds, would that have made a difference in the draft, or do you see them picking the same players? Ryan Clady would've been available in the 1st. The Bears could've moved down and picked up extra mid-round picks as well. I understand teams play to win, but there is no reason you can't evaluate some talent at the end of the season. The Bears win vs New Orleans gave the Saints the 10th overall pick. So does the motivation/pride of a winning streak carry over into the next season? I know we had a discussion about this at the end of the season, and I would like to see the discussion now that we know how the draft played out.

This link mentions the QBs: http://www.suntimes.com/sports/mulligan/91...mully28.article

Really nice to see. There are a bunch of guys like him that did not get that opportunity in the past. Nice to see the change in policy. Here is a little story from ESPN: http://myespn.go.com/blogs/hashmarks/0-6-4...mp;lid=tab1pos2

I said "B", I wrote my analysis here: http://www.talkbears.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=2316

I just don't see us going 2-4 in the Division, or losing to TB.

Ok, we were 0-4 vs MIN and DET. That is not going to happen again. If we split with them, we are a 9-7 team. Also, look at the points. We let up something like 90 more than 2006 and scored 90 less. So we had a 180 point swing towards the negative in 2007. Also, of those 7 losses, only one was a blowout (DAL). We were basically in every other game last year. If we don't blow the game to DET and the one to NYG both in the 4th quarter, we are 9-7. SD, leading 3-0 at half, lose 14-3. DET, leading 13-3 going into 4th, allow 34 points and lose 37-27. MIN, tied at 31-31 late in 4th, lose 34-31 on last minute FG. DET, down 13-7, Griese throws 3 Red Zone INTs, we lose 16-7. SEA, tied 17-17 at half, lose 30-23. NYG, leading 16-7 going into the 4th, allow 14 points and lose 21-16 to SB Champions. WAS, down 17-13 in 4th, lose 24-16. MIN, leading 13-6 at half, lose 20-13. So in 16 games, we had the lead or was tied at some point in 14 games. Also, we were destroyed with injuries like no other team last year. That has to be taken into consideration (no excuses). With players returning to 100%, plus the draft picks there is no way we regress even more in 2008. At worst we stand pat at 7-9. I say 9-7.

That is true, but getting Thomas at 34 and Kelly at 51 were both good values. Also picked up a nice TE in Fred Davis and solid Guard in Rinehart at 96. They did all that without drafting in the 1st.

There were some obvious ones: KC, Miami, and Dallas. How about Pittsburgh, NY Giants or Washington?

I thought it was a good draft. With so many picks you are bound to get some decent players. Only 1 OL in the first 8 picks was a bit shocking, so was not drafting a QB (when GB drafts 2, lol).

I guess what they were thinking was in a year or two, Olsen and Davis become 1-2 for TEs. Basically lock that position down for the next 4-6 years. Also, with the trade that moved them from 175 to 158, he became a pretty good value. He was the 7th best TE coming in and the 12th drafted. Other than value, I dunno.