My Team

[Wesson44]

Right now we have a good team shaping up. But we could be even better if we got rid of Metcalf and went out and signed C/G Bentley. We just might lose Manning Jr, but we are good in the depth in the back secondary. We don't need Lynch....too slow now. If we are going to pick up a QB Farve would be a great addition, or Culpepper would be better if Farve didn't fall to us. I just don't like the idea of Henine being a starter if Rex/Orton get hurt. We know pepper could be the man with all the targets we have to throw to. Jones was my pick out of the RB'S

[DrunkBomber]

Culpepper would get eaten alive here. Hes terrible.

[sprout]

Right now we have a good team shaping up. But we could be even better if we got rid of Metcalf and went out and signed C/G Bentley. We just might lose Manning Jr, but we are good in the depth in the back secondary. We don't need Lynch....too slow now. If we are going to pick up a QB Farve would be a great addition, or Culpepper would be better if Farve didn't fall to us. I just don't like the idea of Henine being a starter if Rex/Orton get hurt. We know pepper could be the man with all the targets we have to throw to. Jones was my pick out of the RB'S

 

 

 

Who are these "targets we have throw to" you speak of? Outside of Booker, we don't have anyone who has proven they are quality WR's. I hope they step up and are great, but I don't think we can talk about them like they are an asset.

[Pixote]

Who are these "targets we have throw to" you speak of? Outside of Booker, we don't have anyone who has proven they are quality WR's. I hope they step up and are great, but I don't think we can talk about them like they are an asset.

 

The problem is for years we have no way of knowing how good our WRs really are because the abilities of the QB throwing to them directly effects how the WRs produce and look on the field. A bad QB can cause a good WR to look bad. A bad OL can cause a QB to be less effective and the running game to suck. A bad running game can effect the QBs production. Bad WRs can cause a QB to look bad. Ahhhhh... Everything is so complicated. I give up

[CrackerDog]

Who are these "targets we have throw to" you speak of? Outside of Booker, we don't have anyone who has proven they are quality WR's. I hope they step up and are great, but I don't think we can talk about them like they are an asset.

 

Well, Bradley can use her huge vaginal muscles to snag footballs out of mid air, I've heard.

[bradjock]

Right now we have a good team shaping up. But we could be even better if we got rid of Metcalf and went out and signed C/G Bentley. We just might lose Manning Jr, but we are good in the depth in the back secondary. We don't need Lynch....too slow now. If we are going to pick up a QB Farve would be a great addition, or Culpepper would be better if Farve didn't fall to us. I just don't like the idea of Henine being a starter if Rex/Orton get hurt. We know pepper could be the man with all the targets we have to throw to. Jones was my pick out of the RB'S

 

We need a LG. Period. That'd be great.

 

We can talk about quarterbacks, but Angelo said yesterday he's committed to Rex/Kyle, and I believe him. If we sign a QB, he won't get a chance this year. So none of them will help.

 

I agree we don't need Lynch.

 

I'd LOVE to see Bentley. Or Ruben Brown. Or any guard that's not terrible.

 

Here in Illinois, the Peoria Journal Star reports the temperature for Saturday is supposed to be 99 degrees. How's the whether there in Iraq? Keep up the good work my man.

[ASHKUM BEAR]

We need a LG. Period. That'd be great.

 

We can talk about quarterbacks, but Angelo said yesterday he's committed to Rex/Kyle, and I believe him. If we sign a QB, he won't get a chance this year. So none of them will help.

 

I agree we don't need Lynch.

 

I'd LOVE to see Bentley. Or Ruben Brown. Or any guard that's not terrible.

 

Here in Illinois, the Peoria Journal Star reports the temperature for Saturday is supposed to be 99 degrees. How's the whether there in Iraq? Keep up the good work my man.

 

I heard that interview too, JA said he likes to keep his word and he told both Kyle and Rex that they'll both get an equal opportunity to be the starter, that was back when negotiating deals. He didn't want to call it a QB controversy b/c he thinks both are good and are capable starters.

 

As to that interview, I thought Boers and Berstein did a good job. I love to listen to JA, he seems like a fair GM. Likes to stick to his word, and is willing to give anyone a second chance. Like with CB, he gave him the benefit of the doubt, gave him the chance as long as he was willing to show the team he wanted to be a part of it. After the 2nd visit to the slammer in 5 weeks, CB showed he cared more about CB than the team.

 

Also in the interview, JA said he did like a couple QB's in the draft (he wouldn't say who). The reason they didn't take QB is the organization thought RB was a much higher need and they really liked what they seen in Forte. The question I was dying to get an answer to but it was never brought up was about the LG position. I wanted to hear JA thought about that and why it wasn't addressed.

 

I think the team will be OK this year with our QB's and Favre would be interesting, Lynch makes me think about Arch, the only thing I would like is a G. Bring in Rueben for one more year.

[Connorbear]

Well, Bradley can use her huge vaginal muscles to snag footballs out of mid air, I've heard.

Oustanding!!!!

 

Or he could use them like a jugs machine in training camp to relieve Brad Maynard if he gets winded.

 

Peace

[jason]

Right now we have a good team shaping up. But we could be even better if we got rid of Metcalf and went out and signed C/G Bentley. We just might lose Manning Jr, but we are good in the depth in the back secondary. We don't need Lynch....too slow now. If we are going to pick up a QB Farve would be a great addition, or Culpepper would be better if Farve didn't fall to us. I just don't like the idea of Henine being a starter if Rex/Orton get hurt. We know pepper could be the man with all the targets we have to throw to. Jones was my pick out of the RB'S

 

You might as well stock up for armaggedon and 2012 if Farv comes to Chicago. He should never play for the Bears, and the thought is just blaspemy to the football gods.

[bradjock]

I heard that interview too, JA said he likes to keep his word and he told both Kyle and Rex that they'll both get an equal opportunity to be the starter, that was back when negotiating deals. He didn't want to call it a QB controversy b/c he thinks both are good and are capable starters.

 

As to that interview, I thought Boers and Berstein did a good job. I love to listen to JA, he seems like a fair GM. Likes to stick to his word, and is willing to give anyone a second chance. Like with CB, he gave him the benefit of the doubt, gave him the chance as long as he was willing to show the team he wanted to be a part of it. After the 2nd visit to the slammer in 5 weeks, CB showed he cared more about CB than the team.

 

Also in the interview, JA said he did like a couple QB's in the draft (he wouldn't say who). The reason they didn't take QB is the organization thought RB was a much higher need and they really liked what they seen in Forte. The question I was dying to get an answer to but it was never brought up was about the LG position. I wanted to hear JA thought about that and why it wasn't addressed.

 

I think the team will be OK this year with our QB's and Favre would be interesting, Lynch makes me think about Arch, the only thing I would like is a G. Bring in Rueben for one more year.

 

Agreed with everything you said. I like how you mentioned that's it's nice to hear JA say, "We liked some quarterbacks a lot, but we had greater needs." You've got to love that honesty. JA actually went as far to say that they didn't even worry about drafting the best player available . . . just need. And we needed a LT & a RB for certain.

 

Green Bay doesn't want to bring in Favre cause they think it would hurt team chemistry & mess up what they're trying to do. Except the street in front of the stadium is named after Favre. I think they could get away with it.

 

IMO there's no way in hell the Bears bring in Favre. It'd be a damn circus.

 

On a final note: I'm going to have a tough time bitching about JA since I saw him at Bourbannis & he seemed really concerned as to whether or not I was enjoying myself. I'm still shocked that's he's this really old looking nice guy who wants more then anything for the Bears to win . . . previously I thought he was an evil robot.

[BearSox]

I said it before, and I'll say it again, LeCharles Bentley and Byron Leftwich, but I doubt we see anymore moves this offseason except a trade/cut of RMJ and the regular roster cuts.

[DrunkBomber]

I said it before, and I'll say it again, LeCharles Bentley and Byron Leftwich, but I doubt we see anymore moves this offseason except a trade/cut of RMJ and the regular roster cuts.

I think Bentley HAS to be brought in. That would be such an enormous boost to the team risk/reward wise, similar to Jones. Leftwhich isnt an upgrade at QB for us right now though. Hes also less mobile than Rex so imagine what would happen to him behind our line. Id rather let Rex/Orton duke it out and if they both get injured or tank see what we have in Hanie sp? and if its nothing then go after a FA next year and draft a guy in the first two rounds. I still think we should have made a play for Brohm.

[Pixote]

I still question why Bentley has not been signed by another team. We know he was once considered a STUD on the OL. He signed a BIG $$ contract, never played up to the contract due to injury/health issues, and is now a FA.

 

He has been on the market for quite some time. He is still available. There are a lot of teams who need help on the OL, not just the Bears, as is the case every year in the NFL.

 

So my guess is that this guy has a lot more injury/health issues than what you and I as "outsiders" know about.

[Wesson44]

We need a LG. Period. That'd be great.

 

We can talk about quarterbacks, but Angelo said yesterday he's committed to Rex/Kyle, and I believe him. If we sign a QB, he won't get a chance this year. So none of them will help.

 

I agree we don't need Lynch.

 

I'd LOVE to see Bentley. Or Ruben Brown. Or any guard that's not terrible.

 

Here in Illinois, the Peoria Journal Star reports the temperature for Saturday is supposed to be 99 degrees. How's the whether there in Iraq? Keep up the good work my man.

Hey thanks for the vote of confidence. Well it's like 109 to 120 over here at times, mostly that dry heat but still HOT!!!!

[Connorbear]

I still question why Bentley has not been signed by another team. We know he was once considered a STUD on the OL. He signed a BIG $$ contract, never played up to the contract due to injury/health issues, and is now a FA.

 

He has been on the market for quite some time. He is still available. There are a lot of teams who need help on the OL, not just the Bears, as is the case every year in the NFL.

 

So my guess is that this guy has a lot more injury/health issues than what you and I as "outsiders" know about.

Agreed. There are several teams that need o-line help. He is either asking for too much cash or is not 100% yet.

 

Peace

[Connorbear]

Hey thanks for the vote of confidence. Well it's like 109 to 120 over here at times, mostly that dry heat but still HOT!!!!

Dude, haven't you been there over a yr? When do you get back to the states?

 

Hope all is well - take care of yourself.

 

Peace

[Lucky Luciano]

I heard that interview too, JA said he likes to keep his word and he told both Kyle and Rex that they'll both get an equal opportunity to be the starter, that was back when negotiating deals. He didn't want to call it a QB controversy b/c he thinks both are good and are capable starters.

 

i could be wrong, but didn't angelo give his word to the cb we got from the panthers days BEFORE we hired ricky manning jr. to play the same role? also, what evidence has angelo seen to make him remotely believe ANY of our qb's are even capable of walking and chewing gum at the same time let alone being capable nfl starters?

 

Also in the interview, JA said he did like a couple QB's in the draft (he wouldn't say who). The reason they didn't take QB is the organization thought RB was a much higher need and they really liked what they seen in Forte. The question I was dying to get an answer to but it was never brought up was about the LG position. I wanted to hear JA thought about that and why it wasn't addressed.

 

these are some of the reasons angelo gives me cold sweats.

 

our qb staff over the last 2 years produced the worst offensive stats in the history of a franchise whose known for the worst offenses over the last 50 years. yet angelo thinks a runningback was a much higher need??? this EVEN when benson was touted as being a viable starter by this franchises coaches and angelo himself before and after the draft? what dimension is he living in?

 

it's mindboggling how this guy thinks!!

[bradjock]

i could be wrong, but didn't angelo give his word to the cb we got from the panthers days BEFORE we hired ricky manning jr. to play the same role? also, what evidence has angelo seen to make him remotely believe ANY of our qb's are even capable of walking and chewing gum at the same time let alone being capable nfl starters?

 

You're thinking of Dante Wesley. I don't think Angelo gave him his word on anything other then for a chance to compete and for a chance to become the #1 back-up. Wesley was the #1 back-up during pre-season that year until the 3rd game when he managed to get THREE passing interferences calls against him (I think it was vs. the Browns.) After that he was dropped down to strictly special teams.

 

If Rex & Kyle both looked flat out terrible in pre-season, I don't think Angelo would having a problem telling them "tough luck."

 

our qb staff over the last 2 years produced the worst offensive stats in the history of a franchise whose known for the worst offenses over the last 50 years. yet angelo thinks a runningback was a much higher need??? this EVEN when benson was touted as being a viable starter by this franchises coaches and angelo himself before and after the draft? what dimension is he living in?

 

IMO, Angelo's line of thinking was:

1. It's a heckuva a lot easier to find a good running-back then a good QB. Forte looks freaking awesome, and he's likely to start. You couldn't get that from any rookie QB.

2. For a quarterback to be successful, you've got to surround him with good players. Benson sucked, AP is no more then a good back-up, and Wolfe didn't look like he belonged in the NFL last season (possibly because of the way we used him . . . but how do you average 2.7 yards a carry?)

3. As for his comments on Benson, Angelo's not going to bash a player publicly. Heck, I remember Angelo really bragging up David Terrell just before we cut him. You brag players like Benson & Bradley up and give them a chance to be success, but if they can't get it done . . .

[bradjock]

Hey thanks for the vote of confidence. Well it's like 109 to 120 over here at times, mostly that dry heat but still HOT!!!!

 

 

120??? Wow!!! I can't even imagine.

 

Be safe!!!

[Lucky Luciano]

You're thinking of Dante Wesley. I don't think Angelo gave him his word on anything other then for a chance to compete and for a chance to become the #1 back-up. Wesley was the #1 back-up during pre-season that year until the 3rd game when he managed to get THREE passing interferences calls against him (I think it was vs. the Browns.) After that he was dropped down to strictly special teams.

 

If Rex & Kyle both looked flat out terrible in pre-season, I don't think Angelo would having a problem telling them "tough luck."

 

thanks, that was the guy i couldn't remember, wesley.

 

here is my thought on the process angelo used on wesley... he hires wesley away from being a special teams player who played behind ricky manning jr. and gives him supposedly a shot at the nickle slot in chicago. angelo THEN hires the guy who was ahead of wesley on the SAME team for considerably MORE money to compete for the same position.

 

that's completely a slap in the face or lie on angelo's part to wesley. it's already almost a given, considering the amount of bonus and salary money, that manning jr. gets the job. it was a stupid move by angelo and certainly didn't give wesley the fair shake angelo promised.

 

IMO, Angelo's line of thinking was:

1. It's a heckuva a lot easier to find a good running-back then a good QB. Forte looks freaking awesome, and he's likely to start. You couldn't get that from any rookie QB.

2. For a quarterback to be successful, you've got to surround him with good players. Benson sucked, AP is no more then a good back-up, and Wolfe didn't look like he belonged in the NFL last season (possibly because of the way we used him . . . but how do you average 2.7 yards a carry?)

3. As for his comments on Benson, Angelo's not going to bash a player publicly. Heck, I remember Angelo really bragging up David Terrell just before we cut him. You brag players like Benson & Bradley up and give them a chance to be success, but if they can't get it done . . .

 

1. i agree it should be a lot easier finding good running backs than good qb's (although finding good rb's doesn't seem to be angelo's case in chicago). but... in todays nfl the qb is the most important position on the entire team, bar none. if you have failed to find that guy, to keep looking should STILL be the top priority every year.

 

just because a rookie qb may not start immediately is absolutely no reason not to keep drafting quality players if you have as pitiful a record of qb's like this franchise has had. even if it takes 3 years to get a quality qb into the lineup the end result will pay for itself tenfold if you have a franchise qb to play for your team another ten years. i will even say you should keep drafting good prospects even if you do have a quality franchise qb is a good practice.

 

2. agree one needs good talent around him. but you can also build your offense around that quality qb instead of waiting till everything else is in place to do so. surrounding him with talent is much easier to do with free agency that exists today and shouldn't be a deterrent. the benefits involved in this type of mindset is that the most important piece of the puzzle is under contract and you can then draft or acquire players to compliment him and his skills to the fullest extent instead of trying to find a qb to fit your existing scheme which is narrowing the field even more.

 

3. if benson was that big of a risk that you considered cutting him before camp then bring in an older free agent. in this day and age it's not that hard to find decent short term free agent rb's. then you can draft that qb prospect who you can groom until he is considered ready. if the qb's we have today actually do a miraculous turnaround you have a great draft prospect to keep in case of injury or a great trade possibility if he has shown good potential. if our qb's don't turn out we have their replacement who has learned our system already and we don't throw a rookie into the fire.

 

i just don't see why this can't be done. some teams like the packers do this all the time.

[Connorbear]

our qb staff over the last 2 years produced the worst offensive stats in the history of a franchise whose known for the worst offenses over the last 50 years.

Not to be a pain the arse but you really need to check the stats before making a statement like this. When looking at total offensive yds and total offensive tds (not including special teams) over the past 20 yrs, the 2006 team ranks 4th in yds and 4th in tds. The 2007 team ranks 14th in yds and 14th in tds. This is only a comparison to previous Bears teams not the rest of the league.

 

Here are the details:

 

Year Rushing Yds Passing Yds Total Yds Rank 1 Rushing TDs Passing TDs Total offensive Tds Rank 2

1988 2319 2998 5317 3 25 13 38 3

1989 2287 3088 5375 2 22 21 43 2

1990 2436 2544 4980 5 22 14 36 5

1991 1949 3120 5069 6 18 16 34 6

1992 1871 3070 4941 7 15 17 32 7

1993 1677 2040 3717 20 10 7 17 20

1994 1588 3091 4679 10 10 19 29 10

1995 1930 3743 5673 1 15 29 44 1

1996 1720 3185 4905 12 9 19 28 12

1997 1746 3241 4987 13 14 14 28 13

1998 1713 3053 4766 15 9 16 25 15

1999 1387 4136 5523 11 4 25 29 11

2000 1736 2805 4541 19 6 12 18 19

2001 1742 2952 4694 8 12 20 32 8

2002 1344 3051 4395 9 8 22 30 9

2003 1763 2617 4380 16 13 12 25 16

2004 1624 2192 3816 18 10 9 19 18

2005 2099 2002 4101 17 11 11 22 17

2006 1918 3281 5199 4 14 24 38 4

2007 1330 3701 5031 14 8 18 26 14

 

 

 

Peace

[Wesson44]

Dude, haven't you been there over a yr? When do you get back to the states?

 

Hope all is well - take care of yourself.

 

Peace

Well it's like this......its a rotation. A year here and a year in the states so you can see how that goes.

[Connorbear]

Well it's like this......its a rotation. A year here and a year in the states so you can see how that goes.

Does this mean you will be state side soon?

 

Peacae

[Lucky Luciano]

Not to be a pain the arse but you really need to check the stats before making a statement like this. When looking at total offensive yds and total offensive tds (not including special teams) over the past 20 yrs, the 2006 team ranks 4th in yds and 4th in tds. The 2007 team ranks 14th in yds and 14th in tds. This is only a comparison to previous Bears teams not the rest of the league.

 

you are correct. i did not explain very well what i was talking about. good job looking up the stats and facts.

 

as cryptic, and i’ll give you exagerated, as my original post was in regards to my meaning maybe this will help... what i was referring to is the individual performance of the qb on this squad that we resigned - specifically *rex grossman (although i ‘think’ some of griese’s performances could fit into this persona as well), whom we extended a short term contract and i tried to compare it to angelo’s explanation as to why we went RB rather than picking a qb prospect: “the reason they didn't take QB is the organization thought RB was a much higher need”. although i didn’t research prior qb’s than the last 2 years i find it hard to believe that any starting qb, even for the bears, could have had a lower qb rating than a single digit or the unbelievable ‘0’ rating and still be touted as our possible starting qb the following seasons without any thought of change.

 

forget the injury history, qb’s with ratings over a 2 year period like that are NOT in my opinion to be considered in any way a proven, elite, starter, someone you can count on or feel good about qb by any means. especially when that qb has been active for 4 – 5 years and you are still talking about potential. to bet your franchises season on qb’s like grossman and orton with no concern for future replacement if neither pans out is a poor, poor management practice and the same MO we have used for decades.

 

*i put orton’s info in there also to show what he accomplished but i have to weight this considering the total amount of games and when those games occurred over the last 2 years. i also have to weight in the factor that they didn’t even consider orton an option when replacing an injured griese in mid season. that in itself should be testimony enough of what angelo thinks/thought of orton. it certainly isn’t inspiring, at least to me.

 

below are some various stats over the last 2 years. i didn’t put in the fumble turnover stats as it related to grossman because the info i had didn’t include that stat. so, if i made some mistakes, feel free to correct me.

 

2006 - grossman

 

140.125 ave yds last 3/4 reg season

 

total yds for reg season 3281

 

average 205 yds per game for reg season

 

8 fumbles for reg season

 

JETS vs grossman

 

11 for 22

111 net yds passing - this includes 57 yds on one td pass to bradley OR 56 yds total for rest of game

0 INT's

sacks - 1 for -8 yds

-1 yd rushing

 

qb rating - 79.9%

 

CARDS vs grossman

14 of 37

130 net yds passing

4 INT's

sacks - 2 for -14 yds

-7 yds rushing

 

qb rating 8.6%

 

VIKES vs grossman in chicago

6 of 19

24 net yds passing

sacks - 1 for -10 yds

3 INT's

-9 yds rushing

 

qb rating - 1.3%

 

PACKERS vs grossman/griese game 2

grossman - 2 of 12

33 yds

3 INT's

-1 yd rushing

 

qb rating - '0' %

 

griese - 5 of 15

124 yds - bradley 75 yd td pass - rest of game griese total was 49 yds

2 INT's

 

2 sacks in game for -13 yds

 

how many single digit qb ratings?

 

a qb rating of 46.9%

 

2007 - grossman

 

total yds for reg season 8 games 1411

 

average 176 yds per game for reg season

 

6 fumbles for reg season

 

the first games for grossman were bad and he was relieved by griese. the second few games he looked much better and more loose BUT again he got injured.

 

BOLTS vs grossman

 

12 for 23

122 net yds passing

1 INT's

sacks - 3 for -23 yds

0 td

 

qb rating - 49.5%

 

KC vs grossman

 

20 for 34

132 net yds passing

2 INT's

sacks - 3 for -28 yds

1 td

 

qb rating - 52.5%

 

COWBOYS vs grossman

 

15 for 33

164 net yds passing

3 INT's

sacks - 3 for -31 yds

0 td

 

qb rating - 22.9%

 

came back in after griese injured and played 4 games before he was injured again.

 

orton came in game 13 and by that time the season was over for chicago. i can't say orton did poorly when he came in and the talent on defense he played against was pretty good with a possible exception of NO. i have to wonder why he was not put in to replace griese when grossman returned again before his injury. makes you wonder about the competence of the coaches and gm in this franchise.

 

VIKES vs orton

 

22 for 38

177 net yds passing

1 INT

sacks - 1 for -7 yds

0 td

 

qb rating - 58.7%

 

PACK vs orton game 2 - horrible conditions

 

9 for 15

104 net yds passing

0 INT

sacks - 1 for -7 yds

1 td

 

qb rating - 102.9%

 

NO vs orton

 

13 for 28

199 net yds passing

1 INT

sacks - 2 for -20 yds

3 td

 

qb rating - 91.2%

[Connorbear]

as cryptic, and i’ll give you exagerated, as my original post was in regards to my meaning maybe this will help... what i was referring to is the individual performance of the qb on this squad that we resigned - specifically *rex grossman (although i ‘think’ some of griese’s performances could fit into this persona as well), whom we extended a short term contract and i tried to compare it to angelo’s explanation as to why we went RB rather than picking a qb prospect: “the reason they didn't take QB is the organization thought RB was a much higher need”. although i didn’t research prior qb’s than the last 2 years i find it hard to believe that any starting qb, even for the bears, could have had a lower qb rating than a single digit or the unbelievable ‘0’ rating and still be touted as our possible starting qb the following seasons without any thought of change.

This explanation is much better. I really dislike when people generalize and then don't clarify. You did - thank you.

 

Let me add - I was extremely disappointed Angelo did not draft a QB this yr. Maybe Hanie will work out but with Angelo's track record most likely not. Possibly next offseason they will go after a reserve on another team (someone like Jake Delhomme when he was with the Saints). I simply do not see then going out and spending big dollars on a FA QB.

 

Peace