BRING BACK BOOKER!!!

[madlithuanian]

Brad,

 

What do you have agasint Booker? It really seems like you have apersonal issue with him. If Booker catches everything...why is that bad? Because an inept coaching staff and bad QB's can't find him? But yet when they do, he makes the catch? Gee, sounds like Moose, but catches the ball!

 

That to me makes sense...

 

Please, Chambers is a tier 1 guy, and Welker had youth and a potential returner upside to him. They are better than Booker! We're not saying Booker's better than Randy Moss! We're saying he's better than Moose! He can be had for relatively cheap, why the heck not? It's not like we're swimming in quality wideouts!

 

 

I hate to state the stupidly obvious, but if he catches everything thrown to him, why didn't the Dolphins throw his way every time? As bad as Miami QB's have been, other teams traded to get Welker & Chambers, yet Miami dumps the guy that catches everything?

 

Sorry, but that makes no sense.

[madlithuanian]

I'm not sure your point.

 

Yes, it's all just media hype etc... But it is out there. It's not just a guy on this board saying, "Wouldn't it be nice..." There is some legitimate interest whther it's chest pounding or not...

 

There is some basis to this discussion other than just board banter because nothing else is going on. Whether it's it cursory, just being freindly, or real interest...there is a story. Sorry to disappoint you.

 

When an agent contacts the team, and the agent lets the media know they are talking with the team, that's the agent trying to get better for his client. Other then the fact that "Angelo likes Booker" (he probably likes a lot of former players not named Tank) there is nothing to suggest the Bears have any interest.

[fenom283]

The funny thing is comparing Mush and Booker statistically Mush is supposed to be a number 1 receiver where as Booker was behind Marty Booker up until the Trade deadline. There numbers are very similar with Moose blowing him out in the dropped balls column, I can live with that though

[nfoligno]

I think Parcells is over-rated.

 

Here in Dallas, you would not believe how bad he was blasted. He reminds me some of Ditka, who was considered so great after great success, but then it just seemed like the game passed him by. Parcells improved Dallas, but also held them back and made some very questionable moves, including personnel.

 

Dallas improved their personnel under Parcells, but it was not all Parcells, and some of the bad moves have been more directly tied to him.

 

A couple years ago, Parcells was very high on Spears, but his staff (and Jones) really liked Ware. He was finally convinced that Spears would be available w/ their next pick, but Ware would not, and made a deal w/ Jones to draft Ware first, and then get Spears. Well, Spears has been a bust, while Ware (who Parcells never really wanted) has been a pro bowler.

 

It was also all Parcells, who wanted to trade down the prior year because he wanted Julius Jones over Stephen Jackson.

 

Last year, Parcells was super high on Carpenter, who has been a bust. Two of the players Parcells was highest on are now on the block (Carpenter and Spears) as they have been busts.

 

It should also be pointed out the staff really liked Romo, but Parcells was against playing him and prefered the likes of Testaverde and Bledsoe to the young Romo.

 

I am not saying Parcells sucks, but his record in Dallas was far from great, and it was not until he left that Dallas really seemed to take that next step.

 

The point? While Parcells has the rep., I question how much we should base our opinion of Booker based on that rep, which simply may not be equal today to what it was years ago.

[madlithuanian]

Thanks for throwing out the local perspective on Parcells!

 

Given all that, I'd tend to agree with you!

 

I do tend to give him the benefit of the doubt over his career...but I think the move to get rid of Booker is simply cleaning house for Miami. I don't think it necessarly reflects on how "bad" Booker is as a WR.

 

I think Parcells is over-rated.

 

Here in Dallas, you would not believe how bad he was blasted. He reminds me some of Ditka, who was considered so great after great success, but then it just seemed like the game passed him by. Parcells improved Dallas, but also held them back and made some very questionable moves, including personnel.

 

Dallas improved their personnel under Parcells, but it was not all Parcells, and some of the bad moves have been more directly tied to him.

 

A couple years ago, Parcells was very high on Spears, but his staff (and Jones) really liked Ware. He was finally convinced that Spears would be available w/ their next pick, but Ware would not, and made a deal w/ Jones to draft Ware first, and then get Spears. Well, Spears has been a bust, while Ware (who Parcells never really wanted) has been a pro bowler.

 

It was also all Parcells, who wanted to trade down the prior year because he wanted Julius Jones over Stephen Jackson.

 

Last year, Parcells was super high on Carpenter, who has been a bust. Two of the players Parcells was highest on are now on the block (Carpenter and Spears) as they have been busts.

 

It should also be pointed out the staff really liked Romo, but Parcells was against playing him and prefered the likes of Testaverde and Bledsoe to the young Romo.

 

I am not saying Parcells sucks, but his record in Dallas was far from great, and it was not until he left that Dallas really seemed to take that next step.

 

The point? While Parcells has the rep., I question how much we should base our opinion of Booker based on that rep, which simply may not be equal today to what it was years ago.

[nfoligno]

Compare it to when Angelo dropped Engram.

 

Was Engram done? I think Engram has well proven he was far from done. But Angelo took over a team he thought stunk, and development of younger players took a greater importance.

 

When Angelo came in, we had a slew of young WRs many thought could develop into something.

 

David Terrell - top 10 pick rookie.

Dez White - High 3rd round pick entering 2nd year.

Booker & Bates - 3rd round picks entering their 3rd year.

 

That's four 1st day draft picks w/ 2 or fewer years of experience. In addition, we had Robinson one season removed from setting the team mark for receiving yards (1,400).

 

Two other young WRs on the roster were Merritt and John Capel, who I believe were both rookies that year.

 

So Angelo comes in and simply cuts Engram. Though Engram was probably the best WR on the team at that time, keeping him would have lessened the reps of the young WRs the team was high on, and since Angelo had no clue we would win 13 games that year, development took priority.

 

Now look at Miami.

 

Ted Ginn was a top 10 pick this year.

 

Derick Hagan was a 3rd round pick last year, and has shown some big flashes.

 

Camarillo is a 2nd year player who started to show something at the end of the year when given a chance.

 

They have three young WRs they want to develop, and are a near lock to add another young WR this offseason. They are unlikely to be good this year, and development will be a priority. That means they do not want an older WR who isn't in the long term plans taking reps away from their youth.

[adam]

The funny thing is comparing Mush and Booker statistically Mush is supposed to be a number 1 receiver where as Booker was behind Marty Booker up until the Trade deadline. There numbers are very similar with Moose blowing him out in the dropped balls column, I can live with that though

Booker was behind Booker?

[fenom283]

Booker was behind Booker?

My bad he was behind Chambers

[madlithuanian]

Good comparison!

 

Compare it to when Angelo dropped Engram.

 

Was Engram done? I think Engram has well proven he was far from done. But Angelo took over a team he thought stunk, and development of younger players took a greater importance.

 

When Angelo came in, we had a slew of young WRs many thought could develop into something.

 

David Terrell - top 10 pick rookie.

Dez White - High 3rd round pick entering 2nd year.

Booker & Bates - 3rd round picks entering their 3rd year.

 

That's four 1st day draft picks w/ 2 or fewer years of experience. In addition, we had Robinson one season removed from setting the team mark for receiving yards (1,400).

 

Two other young WRs on the roster were Merritt and John Capel, who I believe were both rookies that year.

 

So Angelo comes in and simply cuts Engram. Though Engram was probably the best WR on the team at that time, keeping him would have lessened the reps of the young WRs the team was high on, and since Angelo had no clue we would win 13 games that year, development took priority.

 

Now look at Miami.

 

Ted Ginn was a top 10 pick this year.

 

Derick Hagan was a 3rd round pick last year, and has shown some big flashes.

 

Camarillo is a 2nd year player who started to show something at the end of the year when given a chance.

 

They have three young WRs they want to develop, and are a near lock to add another young WR this offseason. They are unlikely to be good this year, and development will be a priority. That means they do not want an older WR who isn't in the long term plans taking reps away from their youth.

[Controlled Chaos]

Hey, I want Haas to play as much as anyone else but your basing that comment on potential. Booker has over 500 career catches. He had 2 1000 yd seasons with the Bears. Haas has not played a down at receiver. There is no comparison.

 

Again, I want to see him play. He should have been given the opportunity last yr. I am hopeful he breaks out this yr and gets and shows what we all think he can do.

 

Peace

Every time you go with a young receiver you're going on potential...but with a stellar college career, a biletnikoff award and two training camps where he caught everything thrown to him...that potential is pretty high. I like Booker, I have no problem with him and if I really had to choose between him and moose, it would be him. But Hass is the same size, younger, probably faster(although neither are speed demons), a better route runner and has just as good if not better hands. IMO the money is way better spent elseware.

[Connorbear]

Every time you go with a young receiver you're going on potential...but with a stellar college career, a biletnikoff award and two training camps where he caught everything thrown to him...that potential is pretty high. I like Booker, I have no problem with him and if I really had to choose between him and moose, it would be him. But Hass is the same size, younger, probably faster(although neither are speed demons), a better route runner and has just as good if not better hands. IMO the money is way better spent elseware.

He is younger than Booker.

He has the same size as Booker.

He is most likely faster than Booker.

 

You can measure all of these things.

 

Saying he is a better route runner and has better hands cannot be measured unless you want to compare his college stats to Booker's pro stats which I don't think you can do since Book is playing against a much, much higher level of competition.

 

Haas has not played 1 down in the pros. Book has. Saying Haas is the best wr on the team has no basis in fact. It is merely your opinion. Not that there is anything wrong with that.

 

Peace

[KiLoc69]

I hate to state the stupidly obvious, but if he catches everything thrown to him, why didn't the Dolphins throw his way every time? As bad as Miami QB's have been, other teams traded to get Welker & Chambers, yet Miami dumps the guy that catches everything?

 

Sorry, but that makes no sense.

 

You're right, it makes no sense and that may be why that whole offensive staff is gone now. Chambers was the better athlete with high potential so the staff was determined to make him the number 1 guy despite his many drops. He'd have a couple of great games a year and the team would get enamored.

 

I think you're making a mistake in thinking coaches would make the obvious decisions and call the right guy's number. You see the coaches making head scratching decisions during Bears games, right? It was 5 times worse in Miami. Cam Cameron had Ronnie Brown, their starting RB, returning kicks at the begining of the year for god's sake lol.

[bradjock]

You're right, it makes no sense and that may be why that whole offensive staff is gone now. Chambers was the better athlete with high potential so the staff was determined to make him the number 1 guy despite his many drops. He'd have a couple of great games a year and the team would get enamored.

 

I think you're making a mistake in thinking coaches would make the obvious decisions and call the right guy's number. You see the coaches making head scratching decisions during Bears games, right? It was 5 times worse in Miami. Cam Cameron had Ronnie Brown, their starting RB, returning kicks at the begining of the year for god's sake lol.

 

But you're ignoring the fact that in 4 years with Miami, Booker was under 3 different head coaches (Wanny, Saban, & Cameron), 3 different OC's, and the results each year were pretty much similar. San Diego must have had no interest in trading for Booker & he obviously would have been available. Not to mention Shea was happy to get rid of him.

 

That's a bunch of different coaches & organizations that feel the same way.

 

Once again, I like Booker. I hated to see him leave Chicago. I would not be upset if we signed him. It's just that having two old/slow/average WR's on the same team is not good. Especially when you have an OC that wants to stretch the field (want in one hand, shit in the other . . . )

 

I just don't see how anyone could realistically expect that he would put up better numbers then Moose.

[DrunkBomber]

What does Chambers have to do with Booker? Does anyone think Booker is better or something? San Diego wanted Chambers because he was better than any of their receivers and was available.

[bradjock]

Madlith,

 

I know it's coming across that I hate Booker but it's not true. I'm annoyed that Moose is not nearly as bad as we're making him out to be, and I'm annoyed the Booker is not nearly as good as we're making him out to be.

 

Moose was paid a ton of $$$ to be a #1 WR & he's not. Good blocker, good route runner, voted team captain, puts up solid numbers every year, but not a #1. I think a lot of Bear's fans are pissed (including myself at times) that he's never came close to approaching the numbers he put up in Carolina when we signed him.

 

Then we have this perception of Booker that he's a great WR who has been misused or not given the right opportunity. Miami's had 3 different OC's since he's been there and none are that high on him. There's a reason for that.

 

While everyone is bitching about Moose's hands, Moose is bigger and a much more physical WR then Booker. That somewhat compensates for the bad hands, and makes him more ideal at going over the middle.

 

Either way, I don't see how the hell Booker would be an upgrade.

 

As for Moose throwing his QB under the bus, in 2005 he made some comment on Orton because he wanted Rex in. In 2007, on a terrible Rex throw that was intercepted, he said he ran the correct route. (I have no idea whether that's true or not.) Two minor incidents in 3 years does not earn him the reputation as a QB killer IMO.

 

 

 

 

 

Brad,

 

What do you have agasint Booker? It really seems like you have apersonal issue with him. If Booker catches everything...why is that bad? Because an inept coaching staff and bad QB's can't find him? But yet when they do, he makes the catch? Gee, sounds like Moose, but catches the ball!

 

That to me makes sense...

 

Please, Chambers is a tier 1 guy, and Welker had youth and a potential returner upside to him. They are better than Booker! We're not saying Booker's better than Randy Moss! We're saying he's better than Moose! He can be had for relatively cheap, why the heck not? It's not like we're swimming in quality wideouts!

 

[bradjock]

He is younger than Booker.

He has the same size as Booker.

He is most likely faster than Booker.

 

You can measure all of these things.

 

Saying he is a better route runner and has better hands cannot be measured unless you want to compare his college stats to Booker's pro stats which I don't think you can do since Book is playing against a much, much higher level of competition.

 

Haas has not played 1 down in the pros. Book has. Saying Haas is the best wr on the team has no basis in fact. It is merely your opinion. Not that there is anything wrong with that.

 

Peace

 

I'm convinced Haas is like P.J. Pope. Pope looked great in pre-season in 2006, Lovie declared he'd be on a team somewhere. After bouncing around with different teams Pope wound up back on the Bear's practice squad in 2007 (before being IR'ed.)

Pope's likely gone after we bring in competition for Cedric. (which will make 4 running backs)

 

If Haas couldn't be activated in 16 games, especially when we're out of it, either:

a) The whole damn coaching staff should be fired immediately, or

He's not NFL worthy.

 

I give the coaches the benefit of the doubt on this one. (although why he was placed on the 53 man roster to begin with is a different argument. ) I'm guessing Haas might make it as a deep reserve & special teams guy (except he's slow) but that's it.

[madlithuanian]

I follow...

 

I guess we just agree to disagree in the end.

 

...I do recall a few more incidents regarding Moose passing the buck, but I honestly cannot come up with them. Maybe it's more perception than reality.

 

Madlith,

 

I know it's coming across that I hate Booker but it's not true. I'm annoyed that Moose is not nearly as bad as we're making him out to be, and I'm annoyed the Booker is not nearly as good as we're making him out to be.

 

Moose was paid a ton of $$$ to be a #1 WR & he's not. Good blocker, good route runner, voted team captain, puts up solid numbers every year, but not a #1. I think a lot of Bear's fans are pissed (including myself at times) that he's never came close to approaching the numbers he put up in Carolina when we signed him.

 

Then we have this perception of Booker that he's a great WR who has been misused or not given the right opportunity. Miami's had 3 different OC's since he's been there and none are that high on him. There's a reason for that.

 

While everyone is bitching about Moose's hands, Moose is bigger and a much more physical WR then Booker. That somewhat compensates for the bad hands, and makes him more ideal at going over the middle.

 

Either way, I don't see how the hell Booker would be an upgrade.

 

As for Moose throwing his QB under the bus, in 2005 he made some comment on Orton because he wanted Rex in. In 2007, on a terrible Rex throw that was intercepted, he said he ran the correct route. (I have no idea whether that's true or not.) Two minor incidents in 3 years does not earn him the reputation as a QB killer IMO.

[madlithuanian]

I guess, for me, I expect better form Booker becuase he was a #2 guy and generated similar numbers as Moose, who was a #1. I would expect a bump up if he were placed back in the #1 role. I'm not sure you can judge the guy well based on this season's 1-15 'fins... And I hate to keep flogging a dead horse, but Moose drops key passes all the time. Booker doesn't drop nearly as many. That means he's doing about the same, but with less opportunity.

 

Not to mention, I just want a guy who wants to be in Chicago. Lip service or not, he's (or through his agent) saying the right things...

 

But you're ignoring the fact that in 4 years with Miami, Booker was under 3 different head coaches (Wanny, Saban, & Cameron), 3 different OC's, and the results each year were pretty much similar. San Diego must have had no interest in trading for Booker & he obviously would have been available. Not to mention Shea was happy to get rid of him.

 

That's a bunch of different coaches & organizations that feel the same way.

 

Once again, I like Booker. I hated to see him leave Chicago. I would not be upset if we signed him. It's just that having two old/slow/average WR's on the same team is not good. Especially when you have an OC that wants to stretch the field (want in one hand, shit in the other . . . )

 

I just don't see how anyone could realistically expect that he would put up better numbers then Moose.

[Controlled Chaos]

I'm convinced Haas is like P.J. Pope. Pope looked great in pre-season in 2006, Lovie declared he'd be on a team somewhere. After bouncing around with different teams Pope wound up back on the Bear's practice squad in 2007 (before being IR'ed.)

Pope's likely gone after we bring in competition for Cedric. (which will make 4 running backs)

 

If Haas couldn't be activated in 16 games, especially when we're out of it, either:

a) The whole damn coaching staff should be fired immediately, or

He's not NFL worthy.

 

I give the coaches the benefit of the doubt on this one. (although why he was placed on the 53 man roster to begin with is a different argument. ) I'm guessing Haas might make it as a deep reserve & special teams guy (except he's slow) but that's it.

The answer to your question is A)

 

You want to give the coaches the benefit of the doubt when they didn't play any of the young guys. ..Ridiculous. You're dam right Hass should have played...so should a number of other young players, but the coaching staff chose not to do it. For that you want to say he's not NFL worthy. Give me a break. I guess we should dump Beekman as well.

[Controlled Chaos]

He is younger than Booker.

He has the same size as Booker.

He is most likely faster than Booker.

 

You can measure all of these things.

 

Saying he is a better route runner and has better hands cannot be measured unless you want to compare his college stats to Booker's pro stats which I don't think you can do since Book is playing against a much, much higher level of competition.

 

Haas has not played 1 down in the pros. Book has. Saying Haas is the best wr on the team has no basis in fact. It is merely your opinion. Not that there is anything wrong with that.

 

Peace

Well yeah my comparisons on his hands and route running aren't based on stats. There are no stats for those measurables. It's based on what I've seen. Yes it is strictly my opinion. The guy has succeeded at every stage, as soon as he was given the chance. It's just ridiculous for this team, as well as the fans here to write him off as not being part of the future. The only thing that will stop him from being a top slot WR on this team or in the league for that matter, is him not getting a chance.

[KiLoc69]

But you're ignoring the fact that in 4 years with Miami, Booker was under 3 different head coaches (Wanny, Saban, & Cameron), 3 different OC's, and the results each year were pretty much similar. San Diego must have had no interest in trading for Booker & he obviously would have been available. Not to mention Shea was happy to get rid of him.

 

That's a bunch of different coaches & organizations that feel the same way.

 

Once again, I like Booker. I hated to see him leave Chicago. I would not be upset if we signed him. It's just that having two old/slow/average WR's on the same team is not good. Especially when you have an OC that wants to stretch the field (want in one hand, shit in the other . . . )

 

I just don't see how anyone could realistically expect that he would put up better numbers then Moose.

 

Lol trust me, I'm not ignoring that fact. The Wanny, Saban (aka Osaban bin lyin) , and Cameron staffs are HATED in Miami, not to mention they are considered some of the most inept in pro football. Think of how much we btiched about shoop and shea and multiply it times 10. Chambers has much more potential than Booker and in a stable offense would thrive imo. That doesn't take away Booker's consistancy the few times the ball went his way.

[nfoligno]

Here's the problem. You have been banging the drum for Hass for some time, and frankly, you got me on his bandwagon. You enlisted me last year, and particularly toward the end of the year, I was screaming w/ you at the coaches for Hass not getting so much as a look, even when we were totally done.

 

But there in lies the problem. No matter how much you like him, or how much potential you think he may have, it really just doesn't matter unless he is going to get a legit look. Our staff has shown nothing to lead me to believe he will get a legit look. Whether that is because Hass isn't showing much in practice, the staff being blind, or maybe the banged Lovie's daughter. I don't know. But if he isn't going to get a look from the staff, or even a freaking name drop from them, I do not see the point in factoring him.

 

It isn't that fans have written Hass off. The staff more seems to have, and thus fans follow suit.

[Controlled Chaos]

Here's the problem. You have been banging the drum for Hass for some time, and frankly, you got me on his bandwagon. You enlisted me last year, and particularly toward the end of the year, I was screaming w/ you at the coaches for Hass not getting so much as a look, even when we were totally done.

 

But there in lies the problem. No matter how much you like him, or how much potential you think he may have, it really just doesn't matter unless he is going to get a legit look. Our staff has shown nothing to lead me to believe he will get a legit look. Whether that is because Hass isn't showing much in practice, the staff being blind, or maybe the banged Lovie's daughter. I don't know. But if he isn't going to get a look from the staff, or even a freaking name drop from them, I do not see the point in factoring him.

 

It isn't that fans have written Hass off. The staff more seems to have, and thus fans follow suit.

I reluctantly see your point. I can't however, just write off a player who I believe, will bring so much to this offense as well as to whoever the QB is. I don't really need to say it cause we all know our WR's were pretty horse shit this past year...lacking discipline, dropping balls, cutting off routes etc. Lovie rewarded them, but not doing a dam thing. If camp is an open competition at the WR position, which it should be based on last season, Hass will beat out the competition. Moose should absolutely have no guarantee as the starter and if we happen to sign Booker...he shouldn't either. If we sign a big FA, then I'm all for penciling him in, but big FA does not equal Booker IMO.

 

I'm glad you're on the bandwagon though...even if you are hanging from the bumper.

[nfoligno]

Couple things.

 

One. I agree that Hass should not be "written off". My only point is that we should not "count on him". Those are two extremes. Saying you write him off is near equal to not even putting him on the 53 man roster. Saying we are going to count on him going forward, thinking starter, is another extreme in the opposite direction. To me, he is on the squad, and should be given every opportunity to prove himself and elevate his position. I hope he can move up, but I am not going to "count on it" to the point that I do not try to upgrade my WR corp.

 

Two. I do agree that it should be an open competition. If we sign Booker, I have to think it would be at the expense of Moose. While I think Book is an upgrade, significanlty, they are too similar in style to keep both for the cost. So I think if Book is signed, Moose is gone. At the same time, I would not give any guarantees to Booker. I would tell him we want him. I would tell him how I would envision him in our offense. At the same time, I would make no promises. He has to understand that anyone can win a starting job, and and that if a young player like Hass beats him out, then that is simply the way it is. I personally do not think Booker would have an issue w/ this. Any veteran that fears losing his job to a WR who was what, 6th on the depth chart last year and is basically an unknown, is not a WR I want on the team.

[Connorbear]

The answer to your question is A)

 

You want to give the coaches the benefit of the doubt when they didn't play any of the young guys. ..Ridiculous. You're dam right Hass should have played...so should a number of other young players, but the coaching staff chose not to do it. For that you want to say he's not NFL worthy. Give me a break. I guess we should dump Beekman as well.

The ony 2 young players that did not play this yr were Beekman and Haas so I don't get where you get a "number of young players' unless that number is 2. McBride, Graham, Olsen, and Wolfe all rookies and all played.

 

Peace