The Bears traded their best offensive weapon yesterday. It's over now. I can preach to the high heavens from my blog pulpit about how they didn't get nearly enough (they didn't) but it seems to be futile with fans in an unexpected post-Super Bowl euphoria. Don't look now but the Bears of 2007 have started about as poorly as a sports franchise can. They lowballed a winning head coach and retreated faster than Napolean crossing the Russian border. They franchised a great linebacker and have seen their organization tarnished in the national media. They traded the shoulders which carried this offense through the most exciting two-game period for Bears fans in twenty years: the NFC playoffs.
But today is about Cedric Benson. A combination of fragility and toughness, bruiser and emotionally bruised, Benson has found himself where he always wanted to be...where he would have been if not for an extensive rookie season holdout. He is the man in the Chicago Bears backfield. As the scrutiny on the maligned signal caller will intensify week-by-week, the pressure on the ball carrier will grow at the same rate. Benson wanted it. Benson got it. The effective two-back rotation that rolled this team into the Super Bowl is now a memory - a banner in Soldier Field that reads 2006 NFC Champion.
Benson has to work to do. He was to win over his teammates - most of whom viewed TJ as a brother. He was to win over the fans who barely know him at all. He has to beat the injury bug which has claimed his at terrible times each of his first two seasons.
Here's my prediction: 1500 yards and 15 touchdowns. That may sound like a cockeyed optimist but I believe in this kid's talent and - more importantly - his will. This season Cadillas Williams and Ronnie Brown will become trivia questions for the casual NFL fan, "Which backs were taking before this guy?" No, the Bears didn't get nearly enough for Thomas Jones but in Benson they've got a genuine football star. The longer he stays on the field, the longer the Bears will play into January 2008.
#2 Midway Monster said . . .Does anyone here think that this move was made to clear up some money for Briggs? If it was, then I can accept it grudgingly, seeing that we still got shafted (a 2nd round pick!?!?!). But if they just dealt him without anything to do with the Briggs situation, then I am going to be really pissed off. The Briggs thing seems to be the only explanation for this.
March 6, 2007
#3 Ted in Iowa said . . .Dikka...saasage, here might be your answer:
The (Jones) trade came on the heels of Lance Briggs' critical remarks about the organization made to ESPN.com and WSCR-AM (670). Briggs lashed out at the Bears for placing the franchise tag on him, which would pay him $7.2 million next season, and vowed to do whatever he could to ensure that he is wearing a different uniform in 2007.
''I don't want to be there anymore,'' Briggs told ESPN. ''I won't play for them.''
http://www.suntimes.com/sports/football/bears/284469,CST-SPT-bear06.article
--Midway--
(rehab)March 6, 2007
#4 mikebdot said . . .Thomas Jones was a good back for the Bears the last couple years, but the handwriting on the wall was large and clear: he didn't like being a "tandem" any more than Ced did... and when it came down to it, really didn't want to be a Bear.
Probably best that we got something for him, even though it seems like a poor trade. I think this might be the big opening for Adrian Peterson (our AP, that is), because he is a more elusive runner than TJ is, and is a real team player. Going to be interesting to see if Ced makes the most of this chance - since it is what he has been crying for. I'll be glad to hope for the best - when he is ON, he reminds me of Earl Campbell.
March 6, 2007
#5 jeff said . . .The Super Bowl has made us all bipolar...
March 6, 2007
#6 mikebdot said . . .i knew thomas wasn't coming back but i still cant believe how little they got. they could have gotten a 2 straight up from indy last year.
March 6, 2007
#7 Nicole is miserable in this blue city said . . .Jeff, is that not what they got this year? I'm only assuming that Indy's pick last year was a late round pick, but perhaps I'm wrong...isn't the value of moving up 26 picks the same as a late round second?
March 6, 2007
#8 jeff said . . .Poor Midway is going to be in there longer than Britney.
March 6, 2007
#9 thegreenmenace said . . .no. getting an additional pick and swapping picks is like a different world. it isn't like they moved into the first round. the bears moved up 26 picks and then they don't pick again for a week. unless they have a player of great worth targeted there, i don't get it. the guy was the best running back in the postseason.
March 6, 2007
#10 mikebdot said . . .Is there some stud that the Bears expect to be able to pick up during the 2nd round that no one knows about? I don't get it...
March 6, 2007
#11 jdawg said . . .But you now have two picks nearly back to back...it's gaining something to be sure. Getting an additional late round pick would mean you have players at 64 and another above 60, instead of 37...if their board says this is about the same, what's the problem? I liked what their board said to do for the last 5 years or so...do you have beef with previous drafts?
March 6, 2007
#12 Phil from SATX said . . .OK
Think how long it to everyone to come around that Angelo did OK in last year's draft.
We won't know how this worked out until November or December.
I just hope that squeeking sound coming from Halas Hall is Hester's training wheels coming off.
March 6, 2007
#13 craig said . . .Jeff, glad you're coming around, although you do it with a heck of a negative intro. I must disagree with at least part of your intro - I can't see anything negative in the Lovie signing - that deal's done, is there really such thing as "damage in the media?" The media's all about 100% Damage All the Time - if you have the media on your side, I think that may be when it's time to worry. And I think it's the Lovie signing that sprung this Spring Fever. I agree with mikebdot, don't you like the recent drafts and free agent trades, for the most part? (How about the entire last year's draft? Dusty with an incomplete). Again, apparently no one's reading my post, but by the Official Draft Math Guide the 26-position second round move is worth a high 3rd round pick. (Not far off from your suggested low 2nd round pick, mike). With the reported depth in this draft, the 31st and 37th players could be, no should be, excellent quality additions, maybe even gamechangers. It's not an extra body, but draft math says it can be considered one, and the Bears aren't one of those teams that needs so many players as much as they need key players.
I totally agree with Jeff's prediction about Benson - IF HEALTHY. I'll say again, I think that's the only substantial unknown, not whether he'll be successful if healthy. I still think that running back is a position that has potential successes all throughout the draft - not just in the first round (maybe especially not in the first round, for some reason - what're you doing these days, Rashaan Salaam and Curtis Enis?).
March 6, 2007
#14 District Selectman said . . .For reference:
In 2006, TJ had 1210 yds for a 4.1 avg and 6 TDs and 4 rushes of 20+ yds. He was the second leading rusher in the postseason with 301 yds.
In 2005, Willie Parker rushed for 1202 yds for a 4.7 avg and 4TDs and 8 rushes of 20+ yds. He was the second leading rusher in the postseason with 225 yds.
Obviously, there are lots of differences, but let's imagine for a second that the two are roughly comparable.
Last year's #63 pick was Seattle's Darryl Tapp, DE from Virginia Tech. He appeared in 16 games in 06, registering 33 tackles, 3 sacks and an interception (and a TD).
Last year's #37 pick was Atlanta's Jimmy Williams, CB from Virginia Tech. He appeared in 13 games as a rookie and registered 24 tackles.
So in last year's terms, the TJ trade would've been sort of like the Steelers trading Willie Parker and Darryl Tapp for Jimmy Williams.
I'm not sure if that means anything to anyone, but at least it was an interesting exercise for me...
March 6, 2007
#15 Phil from SATX said . . .Jeff, just caught up with the activity here, and I'm glad I'm not the only one who crawled into a small hole and assumed the fetal position. I think I'm ready to re-enter society. It's good to be back.
March 6, 2007
#16 Nicole is miserable in this blue city said . . .I know we're all pseudo-quasi-fake-experts here, that's why we all enjoy writing together. However, let's step back for a minute. When I take off my P-Q-F-Expert hat, I can conceive of the possibility that running a football team is actually quite complicated. I'll upgrade that - how about very complicated? 53 players, all with contracts to be negotiated, all in various stages of their contracts, all done under the rubric of salary cap. Multiple year contracts which have impact not just on this year, but next year, and the next... Free agency, draft, unsigned prospects, developmental squad...Dare I say we may be a little over-simplistic when we look at one move and analyze, slice and dice it to death? Because there's really many many many moving parts here. You can't pay everyone the money they want or deserve. The Bears may realize there's money that needs to be spent on O-linemen, Briggs or Briggs' replacement, a new safety, Charles Tillman and/or Nathan Vasher -- and that may be just this year's considerations - when a bunch more key players come up for renewals, extensions, whatever.
To me, this is why the Lovie and Jerry signings were so important. This brain trust seems to be working together pretty well. I just dove in to 2006 draft grades to realize how little the media experts know about this stuff - the Bears graded out in the worst category for every single site I visited. We went to the Super Bowl last year, in part due to the efforts of Devin Hester (thought by most to be a major project and not worth a 2nd round pick), Daneal Manning (another laughingstock-maker where he was picked who played pretty darn well as a rookie starter), Mark Anderson (although most thought that was a pretty good steal there) - how about free agent pickups in Ricky Manning Jr. and Brandon Ayanbadejo. All key parts. Let's wait and see what we get, who we sign, etc. before declaring this a disastrous off-season and the brain trust as idiots.
March 6, 2007
#17 Phil from SATX said . . .Haiku returns:
Damn this day sucks bad
Wish I could look into the future
Can't eat humble pie againMarch 6, 2007
#18 Pissed off said . . .Here's mine (no offense Nicole)
"Man we need Haiku
Training real bad here right now
We suck bad at it"March 6, 2007
#19 Pissed off said . . .Phil, the winter aint over yet, Sunday high of 50 Degrees, Monday high of 20, and today its about 35. The weather here is fucked up, always has been. In 97 we had one of the worst snow storms on record in late April and into May! Yeah messed up.
Midway, if Briggs really said that, fuck him, he's good but not worth Urlacher money and if he thinks he's gettin it hes wrong. We dont need that cancer at Halas Hall, fuck, 7.2 million for a year, thats pretty good. What does this guy want? He's one of those greedy fucks who goes from team to team in his career only looking for the paycheck.
I agree with Jeff that Ced will have a good year, if he stays healthy, mainly by default though becuase a Chicago Bear RB will always be a big part of the offense. Hell, if Ced goes down AP will have 10 TDs and 1000 yards easy. I want Ced to succeed big time now, and I want huge numbers from him, not by default.
Craig, TJ and Parker are not comparable in my mind. Parker is far and away the better back with far more upside in virtually every NFL and personal (age) category. Willie is somewhere around a top 5 NFL back. TJ is maybe in that 10-15 range at best.
Cmon Jeff, get of the shnide. I loved TJ, as you all were loving Benson last year I said TJ was the guy all year. Now I have to swallow my pride, turn the page and hope for a breakout year by Benson. I am worried, dont get me wrong but most teams in the NFL have one main guy at RB, now we are just one of those teams.
March 6, 2007
#20 Pissed off said . . .We will find a way to win each and every week, like we did last year, no matter who is at running back. (positivity)
I think this is Rex's team now, not TJs, and I like that. I want him to come out swinging this year and have a career season in a contract year.
TJ might be wishing he was still a Bear at some point in the next couple of years while the Bears are winning playoff games and the Jets are at home. Also the Jets have a couple of up and coming really good looking young backs in Cedric Houston and Leon Washington (Leons the better back in my mind). Those guys are going to get carries this year too, TJ aint gonna be "the guy" all year.
March 6, 2007
#21 craig said . . .Enough with the fuck
ing Haikus for the love of
God they are stupidMarch 6, 2007
#22 Phil from SATX said . . .FoxSports calls it a robbery:
http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/6533778?CMP=OTC-K9B140813162&ATT=5And PO'd... you're right, they're not REALLY comparable. I was just trying to find new ways to wrap my mind around the whole thing. Not exactly informative, I agree, but interesting none the less.
March 6, 2007
#23 Phil from SATX said . . .PO'd, I actually think it's Lovie's team now. I'm wondering what he thinks of the Briggs situation and comments. You may be referring to how popular TJ reportedly was in the locker room. I remember that he was not above using his popularity to polarize the locker room against Ced. That's gone now. If management thinks Briggs could turn cancerous, he'll be gone too. I think a cohesive locker room is extremely important to Lovie. He has gone on record to say he wants people who want to be here - and TJ and maybe Briggs are going show the corollary of that - if you don't want to be here, all together now, SEE YA! (still remember Mike North from my earlier days)
March 6, 2007
#24 Bear Dn. said . . .PO'd that was a really funny (and proper!) Haiku
March 6, 2007
#25 Phil from SATX said . . .Holy crap Phil. How about a picture every once in a while. I get to about your 400th word and my eyes glaze over. The jets are off our schedule for the next 3 years by the NFL rotation. Who has more yards rushing before the next matchup? Ced, TJ, or AP....threw a dark horse candidate in there for ya too!!
March 6, 2007
#26 Pissed off said . . .Sorry Bear Down, verbosity is my cross to bear. Just stop reading when you get bored - it works for PO'd.
March 6, 2007
#27 jeff said . . .Lovies team=Rex's team. You know that. Yes TJ was the popular locker room guy, now I hope they get behind Ced, or maybe they'll still hate him and side with A.P. What an ordeal we could have. We all know the team is behind Rex, or at least they all say they are in interviews, etc.
Briggs better get his shit right, and if he truly wants to be gone, no matter what, I say either trade him, and you better get some good damn players too, or if the trade market sucks, just keep his ass, let him hold out and then if he plays, good, he can help us, he's a damn good player, I dont care if he's playing happy or not, I think he's professional enough to give it 100% when he's out there and if he's not giving it 100% he's hurting his value for the next year when he's with another team. And if he doesnt play, we just take his money away slowly but surely.
March 6, 2007
#28 jeff said . . .bears need o-line help
levi brown or joe staley
package the two picksMarch 6, 2007
#29 The Moose said . . .sorry, POd...hadnt done one yet and thought i'd give it a whirl
March 6, 2007
#30 Pissed off said . . .I don't think that Benson will be a poor replacement but I do think that the Bears really got too little in return. They moved up 26 spots in the second round. They didn't pick up anything extra. You could argue it's a better player but they could have gotten a starter with the 63rd pick just as easily. They just didn't gain THAT much.
The Jets made a killing.
March 6, 2007
#31 Pyrobob said . . .Did the Bears just trade TJ and the 63rd pick for the Jets 37th pick? I didnt know. Do the Bears now pick 31st and 37th? I didnt know that either. Lets reiterate some more shall we.
This just in.....the Bears traded Thomas Jones and the 63rd pick to the Jets for the 37th pick in the draft. Did you guys know that?
Whats that, we have the 31st and 37th pick in this years draft. Thanks to all of you who continually repeat the same stuff.
BTW, did you know Briggs wants out? Did you?
March 6, 2007
#32 More Rex news: said . . .I would be willing to bet that Mr. Angelo is a pretty good chess player. He thinks several moves ahead and goes after what he wants.
I could imagine the wheels turning in his head... "We promised Jones we'd make it worth his while if he delivered in '06...hmmm, who has what I want and wants him....ah yes, NY and I want to be positioned to get XXXXX....he, he they'll see it as a bargain and jump on the deal like Ron Jrermy on Paris Hilton" "Yeah, that's the ticket"
March 6, 2007
#33 jdawg said . . .http://www.suntimes.com/sports/football/bears/284561,CST-SPT-rex06.article
March 6, 2007
#34 Still said . . .I wonder how Jones will do behind the Jet's O-line? D'brick was a first rounder but my understanding is he's very good at pass but is built like a basketball center.
Anyhoo, it will be interesting to see.
March 6, 2007
#35 Money said . . .What the Beloved want is to be like the Broncos since Shanahan has been there: you can put anybody in the backfield in the scheme and the commitment and get 1500 yards.
I like TJ. I really do. I thought some of you guys who wanted more Benson were nuts during the season. But I am 100% ok with Benson being the Dude next year. It is all about the 0-line and the commitment. Benson showed more "break a big-one" potential that Jones. Give him the ball. We will be fine.
As far as Briggs? I'm in the "say ya, don't let the door hit you but make sure it beat the shit out of your agent" camp. I'm really really sorry he had to open his mouth and reveal he was a greedy SOB. I'm done with him. Next?
March 7, 2007
#36 Da Colts said . . .I mean I think Cedric benson is a good player he had a 4.1 yard average last year the same as Jones but, he split time with jones and we dont know if he can carry the load as many times as jones did, We will just have to see. plus he better do good considering how high we drafted him.
March 7, 2007
#37 Megan said . . .Mwa Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha!
March 7, 2007
#38 Pissed off said . . .**Sigh**
March 7, 2007
#39 Bear Dn. said . . .Whats "mwa"?
March 7, 2007
#40 Pissed off said . . .Metro Waste Authority??
March 7, 2007
#41 mikebdot said . . .Well Joey Porter is gone. I guess we should try and draft a linebacker to replace Briggs. I think we have a couple now that have potential like Jamar Williams and Rod Wilson, both young guys getting smarter and stronger with the system. However on CB.com they have a list of the past 5 number 31 and 37 picks, and there are some damn good players on there. So I think we can get really good value with those picks. If possible we should get another stud linebacker, if available, at one of those picks and use him to replace Briggs, if not this year then next year. If Briggs doesnt play this year then we can fill in with those guys I mentioned before and use the rookie sparingly this year to prime him to start next year.
March 7, 2007
#42 mikebdot said . . .Yes, Joey Porter is gone...for less money than we offered Briggs last year? Or did I recall incorrectly?
March 7, 2007
#43 Phil from SATX said . . .Oh, Briggs was a 7 year deal that fell through, not a 5 year? My bad.
March 7, 2007
#44 Cosmo said . . .Wow, Fins D gets even better. Glad we're not seeing them next year.
So let's open up disccussion - now what are the top needs for the Bears, and where in the draft do you go to get them? I still think O-line and safety is top priority, although I don't know how many bodies they need at O-line given some of the backups in the wings. Maybe one O-lineman, a safety, a backup RB that can be found in later rounds (maybe someone hidden in a small school), impact tight end. Out of all the needs cited here, if I could pick one position to spend the highest pick on, it would be a safety to replace Mike Brown, because I don't think anyone on the roster does it.
Thoughts?
March 7, 2007
#45 Pissed off said . . .Billy Mumphrey was a cockeyed optimist too. And that's what led to his downfall.
March 7, 2007
#46 Phil from SATX said . . .I like our safetys when healthy, even without Mike Brown, D. Manning will be a star this year, mark my words. He'll shake off the rookie jitters and be very productive in 2007. Also Todd Johnson good, I thought they didnt use him enough down the stretch, he was a sure starter when Mike Brown went out and then when he got healthy they never really put him back in the mix. Chris Harris is still good and Brandon McGowan I like a lot too, but he was hurt all year. And if, IF Mike Brown stays healthy we are set at saftey.
I think we should draft DT, CB,and O-Line and of course if there is some stud playmaker still sitting there at 31 or 37, take him, like a WR, RB, TE or dare I say Quarterback, GASP! If that Drew Stanton kid from Michigan State is there, I'd take him. He can replace Orton and learn under Rex and Griese.
March 7, 2007
#47 jdawg said . . .PO'd, explain yourself. Are you thinking DT because of Scott leaving, or doubts about Tommie coming back strong? And CB because they won't keep both Vasher and Tillman? I would have thought we'd be set at that position given Ricky Manning Jr. out there.
March 7, 2007
#48 Pissed off said . . .Briggs will be on the field this season. Why? Let me count the reasons. The first reason is one, and there are 7,499,999 reasons after that. Those are a lot of fucking reasons. And you know what? If they franchise him again he gets over 8.5 million the next season. Nothing like a $15.5 million two-year deal.
Now, T Johnson will be gone and I can't remember if its Worrell or McGowan that will be gone also. I get those two mixed up because they both have W's in their last names.
As I've said before, the Bears will choose playmakers unless an O-lineman drops into their laps. Plus O-lineman are like porn stars: a little nip here, tuck there and they're as good as new -- until they hit 40.
March 7, 2007
#49 Phil from SATX said . . .I say DT becuase we dont have enough depth. Scott gone yes, I think Tommie will be fine, no injury concern for me. But who else do we have besides Tank and Tommie that is really good, if we can get a big name like we did when we drafted Harris, he can play alongside Tommie. Who know what the season will bring with Tank and his issues. Plus both of those will need a blow here and there. Its like Mark Anderson at DE, we have two studs in Brown and Wale but it never hurts to have a great 3rd guy, they find time for him. Same with DT.
As far as CB, I like Vash and Peanut a lot, well Ok, I like Peanut more but who knows how long we have them, there have all the rumors that we wont be able to keep both of them. Manning is good but is he a top tier CB, No. And if he has to start then we have zero depth left. Plus Vash and Peanut both missed time with injuries and then we had to use Hester at CB, please, never again. We need another corner now.
March 7, 2007
#50 jdawg said . . .jdawg, when you say playmaker, are you thinking solely offense - or "best player available?"
PO'd, my count on the inside is Tommie, Tank, Israel Idonije, and don't forget Dusty (he's inside, right?) We seem pretty set on outside, just need to play Mark Anderson more. Agree on Hester, he seems much better suited for offense than defense and I think we all would love to find out how good he might be at receiver. I sure hope we get to keep both Tillman and Vasher - we can't give up on The Interceptor (even if he has turned into the Occasional Interceptor).
March 7, 2007
#51 Max said . . .I'm mean O and D.
Word is the Bears prefer Peanut over Vasher if they can't afford both.
Don't forget Garay. He impressed the coaching staff.
Hester will be on O and mark my words, this could be HUGE. We will not make the same mistake as Miami and try to fit him into a certain position. I see Steve Smith-like screens, reverses, pitches, fake reverses, slants and sending him straight down the field to get everybody else the fuck out of the way.
Hester will get 10-15 plays a game, wither he's the decoy or not.
March 7, 2007
#52 jdawg said . . .I'm not sold on Hester as a receiver. Word out of the U (Miami) is that he has trouble securing the ball when he goes to make catches (which we have all witnessed him doing as a punt returner). There is a reason they couldnt find a consistent spot for him at Miami other than return man.
I'm not saying I wouldnt like to see him worked into the O. But more as a decoy, screens, and reverses. None of this slants and down the field stuff. That is why we have Bradley and Berrian.
Draft O-line, Cornerbacks, and Best available player.
March 7, 2007
#53 jeff said . . .What I meant is that Miami seemed like they were trying to find a position to stick him into. I think the Bears will just find a way to get the ball in his hands.
Secruring the ball should get better with time.
March 8, 2007
#54 WindyCityPackerFan said . . .i want him to stay at kick returner and that's it. when dante hall was moved to the offensive ball, he couldn't do ANYTHING effectively
March 8, 2007
#55 jeff said . . .Wow. You guys are brutal. I have found one (1) Bears fan that is happy about the 2006 season. No, you didn't win the Superbowl, but had a helluva good season.
In today's NFL, there is not one team that can keep everybody together. Unfortunately for the fans, players are not loyal to one team. It's their job, but your passion. Look at it this way, if you were outperforming your fellow co-worker but getting less money, you would be pissed too. Jones wanted what Benson has and teams cannot afford to pay big money to players who are not playing every down.
With Briggs, they need to decide; will he be a cancer next year (like Mike McKenzie in 2005 for the Pack), or will they ship him off to avoid wrecking team chemistry (Javon Walker).
You got the most important signing, Lovie. A great high school coach once told me, 'Players come and go, coaches last and make the difference.' It applies at all levels. I would be looking more at the recent coaching signings, and deciding if Lovie has what it takes to help those guys coach at a high level.
March 8, 2007
#56 jdawg said . . .there's a lot of us who are thrilled about the 06 season. its the 07 offseason that's making me sick. 06 was wonderful
March 8, 2007
#57 Midway Monster said . . .2006 was awesome-0
I am not sick about this off-season. We knew Jones was gone and Lance was going to be pissed. Given who Lance's agent is I'm surprises there's not a bigger pile of poop that the stink is wafting from.
Hester will get touches. He is Dante Hall plus, as in 30 lbs of muscle. He will line up on O and the defensive coordinators will hold up two fingers, letting the teacher know why they need to be excused.
March 8, 2007
#58 Nicole is miserable in this blue city said . . .06 was great. from the 2nd half of the Super Bowl till today has been a hangover.
Midway
(rehab - time to take my meds)March 8, 2007
#59 Phil from SATX said . . .06 was a great season to remember.
"Technically" the superbowl was in 2007 thus the stomach ache of 07 began...Take care Midway.
March 8, 2007
#60 Pissed off said . . .Totally agree about using Hester. There is no reason in the world he couldn't effective on reverses, at least. I believe he could do a lot more. Catching punts/kickoffs is much more difficult than catching short passes. If you're worried about that, hand it off to him - or decoy him 8 plays, use him 3-4 plays. Just running deep routes opposite Berrian - that great sucking sound you'd hear would be all secondary defenders clearing the middle. He's a weapon - use him.
Appreciate the reminder, WindyCPF. I am still glowing from 2006, the burn from SB has eased. Finally took down my giant Bears flag because the neighbors started murmuring. Rest assured, it was folded with care and will be away just a few short months. Perhaps I'll pull it out on draft day just as a reminder to the indigenous Cowboys faithful as to who rules in the NFC.
March 8, 2007
#61 Phil from SATX said . . .I dont like Hester as a reciever either, he has enough trouble hanging on to kick and punt returns let alone passes that are coming at him faster and harder than a kick. I wouldnt mind using him as a decoy or even on the occassional reverse, double reverse, triple reverse, WR pass, whatever. Even maybe a little slant route to try and get him into open field to make move and show his speed. Man I love when this guy gets in the open field.
I just want to be clear that I appreciate your input and knowledge Windy but I dont give two shits, no....not even one shit about Packer football. Maybe I'm bitter. BTW, what are you guys gonna do at RB this year? Whaddaya know, maybe I do give two shits about GB football.
March 8, 2007
Maybe it's different, being able to make guys miss when they are running full speed at you vs. in a regular play. Somehow, though, I don't think it would be different with Hester. Get him some open space and I think he's got the tools to make guys miss on any given play.
Remember that he's not a guy who goes down at first contact either (think that's what jdawg is referring to with Hester's 30 lbs - we saw him get some of those returns by breaking multiple tackles). Hester's ability to get up to full speed in an instant is what separates him from all the other guys on the field. It's a separation factor that is way too important and distinctive to use him only on punts and kickoffs, when teams have an option to prevent him from getting the ball.
March 8, 2007
Here at DaBearsBlog, you are free to kill us or the Bears as you so wish. You are not free, however, to be an asshole. So if you spew racism or ill-meaning foul language (cursing about football is just fine) or anything of that ilk, your comments ain't gonna last long, jerk.