Bears4Ever_34

For the professionals, I would agree. You have prior scouting experience? If you mean that you played the game in high school or whatever, that doesn't mean much. If NFL teams started going around hiring just anybody who enjoys watching football, the success rate as a whole would see a major drop off. I think that's a pretty realistic assumption. You would see far less successful picks made in the later rounds of the draft. If we're only letting people determine who a team takes in the 1st round, then I would agree with your premise. But we're not.

I included myself as well, not just you. It wasn't an insult directed towards you, personally. It was a reality check for anyone who thinks they could walk in and be a GM without any type of professional experience.

Are we including you? If so, yes. It could always be worse, and it would be if somebody on this forum took over a General Manager position of an NFL Franchise.

I believe you have been on record saying you could personally do as good, if not a better job at drafting than some of the NFL GM's of the present and past. Do you know how incredibly arrogant that sounds, coming from somebody with absolutely no experience whatsoever, at any level of football, to think they can just waltz on in to a job right away and know how to evaluate players better than the professionals who have done it for a living? That is some F'd up logic. If teams started hiring anybody who has ever watched film or taken notes before, that 40% success rate would drop astronomically. All the more reason why NFL teams don't just hire anybody who has ever watched film or taken notes before....

They are trained professionals. They are paid to know how to watch film and make judgements on prospects. No offense, but I'm pretty sure nobody here is qualified to be an NFL scout or a GM. You have to know what to look for, outside of the obvious. There's certain intricacies that go into knowing how to evaluate players that an untrained eye would not know how to read. No problem with someone trying to formulate their own opinions, based on tape they have watched, but to act like it's so easy to be able to do a job as well as trained professionals at the highest level is pretty laughable and more than a little presumptuous. And to clarify, I'm mostly speaking on the true NFL scouts, not the talking heads you see on TV. Especially former players.

Arthur Brown is actually the same size as Ogletree now. Increased his weight to 241 at the time of his pro day. Ogletree is not the athlete he's being touted as coming into the draft. He is by no means a freak. Looked slow to me on film, and I don't like the way he plays in the run game. His best attribute comes from being a decent pass coverage LB. Arthur Brown surpasses him in almost every other category besides that. He's a more sure handed tackler, and he's excellent in tight spaces. Ogletree makes sense if they are planning on keeping the Cover 2. If not, Brown is a better pick because I think he's going to be a better player.

That would be a "Wow" move that I wouldn't expect. I can see the reasoning behind it, but it just doesn't appear to me that we would go this route, especially after the comments Emery made about these moves giving him "Flexibility." That sounds to me like he solidified the TE spot and now he can focus on other positions.

Could be. I wouldn't be surprised to see the Bears use McClellin in multiple roles defensively. I think you will see him play some SLB occasionally and rush the passer the way Rosevelt Colvin did back in the day. I think you'll see him do a lot of what he did last year with his hand on the ground as well. Eventually, maybe they decide to move to a 3-4 front, but even if they don't, there are ways that you could utilize these athletic LB's we have now that you couldn't do with Nick Roach, Urlacher (the Old Urlacher) and Briggs. Williams and Anderson have experience in both systems and they know how to rush the passer as well. It will be very interesting to see what this defense will look like in training camp. I agree. That scares me a little bit, but hopefully the added muscle will help him withstand a lot of the shots he gives out.

Saw an article on ESPN Chicago about how we are getting more athletic at the LB position, possibly hinting at the fact that the Bears may deviate away from that cover 2, still stick with a 4-3 front, but play their LB's like it's a 3-4. The more I look at these signings, the more I like them. I'm all for more athletes. Hopefully we get Arthur Brown and everything will be golden.

I believe he's still with Dallas.

I don't get what you're disagreeing with. You basically just proved my point. It doesn't happen that often.

I don't understand a word of this.

The Bears got over the loss of Olin Kreutz's supposed leadership just fine while there were still people bitching about the Bears not re-signing him. It will be no different with Urlacher gone. Can he play or can't he?

Looks like it's gonna be McCown. I actually thought he was pretty serviceable when he was forced into action 2 years ago. Looked good in pre-season last year. If McCown would have to fill in for a game this season, I think we will be okay. If Cutler goes down with another season ending injury, like with the thumb, then the Bears are screwed anyways. Very few teams are fortunate enough to have a backup who's good enough to take over a team and lead you into the playoffs.

Unfortunately, you know as well as I do that there is going to be people who still think Cutler can do no wrong and the offensive line will still be the reason for everything he does poorly.

Hopefully he plays better than last year, because last year he was awful.

Anybody else find it a little creepy how Dan Pompei keeps calling him Tommy Zbikowski? Even Brad Biggs keeps writing articles about him coming home. Who the hell cares? Have the Bears never had a Notre Dame product play in the city of Chicago before? I don't get it.

I could go definitely go along with that.

You can find a rookie to return punts and or kickoffs. Not that difficult.

Not sure the logic behind this move. He's pretty much just a guy.

Good stat from Zach Zaidman. Emery said this about him.

He's 30 years old. He is what he is. The Bears still need more youth at that position, so it shouldn't change their priorities in the draft at all. I'm not sure he's a MLB in our system either.

Bushrod, Rookie/Brown, Rookie, Louis, Webb/Carimi

So basically you just don't like the read option? Just trying to see what your stance was on everything else. The funny thing is though, RGIII wasn't even hurt on a read option play. It wasn't even on a designed run either. I understand that play leaves your QB open to more hits, but it's not nearly as dangerous as the spread option, or the triple option play you see in college football where the QB is running parallel to the LOS until the last possible second when he chooses to either keep it or shovel pass it off to the RB. You usually have room to slide or get out of bounds because of the space it creates in a defense. I'm not even hung up so much on the Bears running the read option as much as I want to see them be more creative in general with their play calling. I think San Francisco is a perfect example of an offense that's a pain in the ass to game plan against, even prior to them running the pistol with Kaepernick. We witnessed it first hand. Now they're just a nightmare.

I'm not sure either Ogletree or Brown are true MLB's, unfortunately, although Ogletree might be best suited to play there if need be. I'd still probably take a chance on them just because of the value they present, and IMO, they're clearly the two best LB's by far.