Are you so ignorant to realize all of the moves that have been made were discussed on this board BEFORE they were made?

 

Yes, the collective of this board could do just as good of a job if we had to make the call on draft picks and personnel moves.

I went back looking at all the posts about Urlacher leaving and if we use your logic of we can do a better job, do you realize the board would have voted to not have him back. They are only a few that have you near sightedness when it comes to his valve. You come up with some good posts sometimes but this bandwagon is a lonely one your on.

Are you so ignorant to realize all of the moves that have been made were discussed on this board BEFORE they were made?

 

Yes, the collective of this board could do just as good of a job if we had to make the call on draft picks and personnel moves.

Yeah a lot if us had them signing Williams and Zbikowski.

I don't think that's necessarily true. They run football teams, but you imply that they all run teams well. they do not. Connections, career path, and nepotism goes a long way. I honestly beleive we could run the bears better as a board than the actual Bears front office runs the team.

 

There are plenty of retread scrubs running teams and doing a poor job year after year. Peter principle. It's just that the other scenario (i.e. us running a team) is not something that can be tested or proven. It's an unknown. For all we know, if you had chosen to pursue a career as a GM the Bears would have won the last three Super Bowls.

 

This seems like a silly post anymore but since I'm bored...

 

The "12 executives" could be a myriad of people involved with NFL teams. Not necessarily '12 owners'. Of, which by the way, would be in the minority considering there are 32 teams. So, using that logic and considering the fact that you can make polls read how you want I could theoretically keep asking 'NFL execs' their opinions were about Urlacher and once I get that magic 12, post what started this whole discussion.

 

Now if we assume these '12' were people like Matt Millen, Dan Snyder, Shahid Khan, J-Lo (part owner of the Dolphins right?), Al Davis, the citizenry of Green Bay (aren't they all "owners"?)... Then I might have to question the collective perspective.

 

This seems like a silly post anymore but since I'm bored...

 

The "12 executives" could be a myriad of people involved with NFL teams. Not necessarily '12 owners'. Of, which by the way, would be in the minority considering there are 32 teams. So, using that logic and considering the fact that you can make polls read how you want I could theoretically keep asking 'NFL execs' their opinions were about Urlacher and once I get that magic 12, post what started this whole discussion.

 

Now if we assume these '12' were people like Matt Millen, Dan Snyder, Shahid Khan, J-Lo (part owner of the Dolphins right?), Al Davis, the citizenry of Green Bay (aren't they all "owners"?)... Then I might have to question the collective perspective.

For sake of argument, since we dont who there are, they currently have jobs working for teams in the NFL, and I would say (no matter who there are) are in better position to make a football decision than were are. The fact there was 12 of 13 is the key to the article. Overwhelmingly there agree with the decision. Trying to nitpick on such an article because they dont agree with you is pretty lame.

The funny thing about the Urlacher situation is that he could have accepted the offer and then the Bears would've been blasted for bringing him back or lauded for their loyalty. Seems like a lose lose proposal to me. It was Urlacher's choice not to accept what he considered a low-ball ultimatum.

For sake of argument, since we dont who there are, they currently have jobs working for teams in the NFL, and I would say (no matter who there are) are in better position to make a football decision than were are. The fact there was 12 of 13 is the key to the article. Overwhelmingly there agree with the decision. Trying to nitpick on such an article because they dont agree with you is pretty lame.

 

What's lame is that you didn't apparently read any of what I wrote and would rather dismiss the facts for what they are. Instead you are grasping at what equates to weak rhetoric. But I'm not really all that surprised.

 

Lovie's gone, now Urlacher. As you so eloquently pointed out, nothing I can do about it. Oh well...

The funny thing about the Urlacher situation is that he could have accepted the offer and then the Bears would've been blasted for bringing him back or lauded for their loyalty. Seems like a lose lose proposal to me. It was Urlacher's choice not to accept what he considered a low-ball ultimatum.

 

Yep and yep

What's lame is that you didn't apparently read any of what I wrote and would rather dismiss the facts for what they are. Instead you are grasping at what equates to weak rhetoric. But I'm not really all that surprised.

 

Lovie's gone, now Urlacher. As you so eloquently pointed out, nothing I can do about it. Oh well...

I just took the original statement for what it was, your the one that keeps trying to make it out to be something more than it was. (they asking people until they get 12 opinions with what they want to hear) I clearing understand what your saying it just lacks commonsense sometimes.

I just took the original statement for what it was, your the one that keeps trying to make it out to be something more than it was. (they asking people until they get 12 opinions with what they want to hear) I clearing understand what your saying it just lacks commonsense sometimes.

Sure you can ask the right people to get the answers you want, but it does seem like the consensus around the league, from an economic and administrative standpoint, was that the Bears move was justified. With the tight salary cap, they didn't have the freedom to give him anymore money without limiting what they could do elsewhere. Listening to NFL Radio, almost everyone agreed that it was the hard right over the easy wrong. Once you get away from the cloud of loyalty that surrounds a move like this, logic normally arises.

 

Also, nothing was stopping Urlacher from accepting that contract. He ultimately had the choice to return, except for once it was not on his terms. It would be different if they didn't even offer him a contract at all. I thought that the Bears should've offered more, but after picking up Williams and Anderson, I am having second thoughts.

I went back looking at all the posts about Urlacher leaving and if we use your logic of we can do a better job, do you realize the board would have voted to not have him back. They are only a few that have you near sightedness when it comes to his valve. You come up with some good posts sometimes but this bandwagon is a lonely one your on.

 

It remains to be seen whether the Urlacher move was a good one.

Yeah a lot if us had them signing Williams and Zbikowski.

 

Many were talking about a FA LB even before The Urlacher move, and S depth has also been discussed. In fact, the Zbikowski move, if I'm not mistaken, had its own "what if" thread.

 

Eye roll indeed.

It remains to be seen whether the Urlacher move was a good one.

 

The final calculation of this will have to be based on the fact he wanted a 2yr deal. We know he wanted $5mil/yr but for sake of discussion we can assume he'd have agreed to something in the $3.5mil/yr range. Of course we'll be able to see how he performs for whichever team signs him, and for how much over these two seasons.

 

 

After the 3 FA signings for the defense this thread is a funny read and some of everyones comments towards each other seemed very emotional and a tad inappropriate. I hope in the future that all who post here realize that this new GM keeps a tight seal on what he is going to do and that waiting for his next move maybe the way to go.

After the 3 FA signings for the defense this thread is a funny read and some of everyones comments towards each other seemed very emotional and a tad inappropriate. I hope in the future that all who post here realize that this new GM keeps a tight seal on what he is going to do and that waiting for his next move maybe the way to go.

Your proposal has been rejected! We will decide what is best for this team...

I think I may have contributed to the Z what if thread...

 

Many were talking about a FA LB even before The Urlacher move, and S depth has also been discussed. In fact, the Zbikowski move, if I'm not mistaken, had its own "what if" thread.

 

Eye roll indeed.

 

Urlchacher, we hardly knew ya!