Outside of the safety position, the most glaring need for the Chicago Bears comes in restructuring their offensive line. I use the word “restructuring� specifically because the offensive line does not require (a) wholesale changes or (b) minor tweaks.
Assuming the Bears make the intelligent decision and move John Tait back to his natural position of right tackle, then the right side of the offensive line is actually in pretty good shape with Kreutz-Garza-Tait. The left side of the line is an unmitigated disaster. How do we fix it?
This is where a more general question must be asked: how close are we to going back to the Super Bowl? If the organization believes a move or two can put us back in the mix, then free agency is rife with players who can step right in and make significant improvements. If they believe we’re a year or two away, then spending money frivolously across the line would be a mistake. I'm a member of the former group, believing the last two weeks of the season to be more than an aberration, and seeing the offensive line as a perfect place to put this club over the top. How?
I know this kind of management makes salary cap experts urinate in their dungarees but the Bears HAVE THE MONEY TO DO THIS. I think the NFC is proving year-in-and-year-out that its anybody's ballgame and the Bears can take it over in 2008. They are twenty million dollars under the salary cap and there are no major factors at safety hitting the open market. Spend the money on a primary need and open the season like this:
It wouldn’t matter who is running the ball. This offensive line wouldn't have a shelf life beyond two or three years but they could operate at an exceedingly high level during what I view as the Bears window for success, namely the prime years in the career of Brian Urlacher. Then again, I’m a believer in spending the money you’re allowed to spend. The McCaskeys…not so much.
#2 JB said . . .That sir is ridiculously simplistic "cure" for an ailing offensive line. "Let's just go and outbid the world on Alan Faneca and Flozell the Hotel Adams and call it a day." Oh well.
More productive exercise would be discussion on two fronts.
1. Which offensive tackle will the Bears select at # 14 (they WILL take an OT with that spot).
2. Which free agents are the most likely targets, and which one do we have a good shot at securing.
3. Should the Bears devote mid to late round draft picks on offensive lineman prospects.
4. Which current offensive lineman on the Bears are goners.
5. Does Josh Beekman have reasonable talent and is he ready to compete for a job.
January 30, 2008
#3 Shady McBears Fan said . . .Mike, you can't use "quotes" and misquote someone. What is your problem?
I'm not a big garza fan, and I really think he let the team down in the super bowl last year. if you look at a lot of the missed blocks, they belonged to him.
FA seems like the perfect opportunity for us to make a splash this year. Although I don't see us signing two guys there, I'd be all for it. I would love to see Faneca and Gross on the left side and you're right, we'd definitely have something to work with for those next 3 Urlacher high level years. I'm on board for Faneca and drafting a young stud at 14 since the draft class is ripe with talent.
Draft - Faneca - Olin - Brown/Garza/Beekman - Tait
January 30, 2008
#4 Decatur Staleys #7 said . . .-Top Offensive Linemen-
Ruben Brown, UFA, Chicago Bears
Alan Faneca, UFA, Pittsburgh Steelers
Flozell Adams, UFA, Dallas Cowboys
Jordan Gross, UFA, Carolina Panthers
Ryan Lilja, UFA, Indianapolis Colts
Max Starks, UFA, Pittsburgh Steelers
Floyd Womack, UFA, Seattle Seahawks
Jake Scott, UFA, Indianapolis Colts
Todd Steussie UFA St. Louis Rams
Travelle Wharton UFA Carolina PanthersOne of these players will be a Bear before the start of the '08 season. Jeff you're right, the Bears have to money to spend on a nice FA O-lineman who can mak an immediate impact. This strategy is less risky than drafting a lineman at #14 and expecting him to produce right away. While the Bears need to add youth at the position, the Bears can afford to wait until later rounds to draft an OT if they manage to pick up a 1 or 2 key FA acquisitions because of the depth at the position in this years draft class:
1. Jake Long Michigan 6-7 313 5.05
2. Ryan Clady Boise St. 6-6 317 5.25
3. Chris Williams Vanderbilt 6-6 320 5.25
4. Jeff Otah Pittsburgh 6-6 340! 5.35
5. Gosder Cherilus Boston College 6-7 318 5.25
6. Sam Baker USC 6-5 305 5.15
7. Carl Nicks Nebraska 6-5 330 5.35
8. Anthony Collins Kansas 6-5 310 5.10
9. Oniel Cousins U.T.E.P. 6-4 305 5.05
10. Heath Benedict Newberry 6-6 320 5.15Mike:
1. If the Bears can trade down from 14 they will. If not, they'll select Clady, Otah, Williams or a RB.2. Out of all the top FA O-Lineman, I like Faneca the most. He's obviously a proven commodity and an asset which will make him highly sought after by many teams this offseason. If not Faneca, then Gross, Lilja, Scott and then Wharton.
3. Yes. Especially if they sign key FAs in the offseason and draft skill positions early in the draft (RB, QB, WR)
4. Fred "Turnstile" Miller, Ruben Brown might retire, back-up LT and LG Anthony Oakley could be gone because he's signed through 2007 but I think the bears should keep him for depth, Terrence Metcalf will also probably be around but he is certainly not a consistant starter.
5. Beekman scouting report:
Biography:
All-Conference choice the past two seasons and named as an All-American after his senior campaign. Started extensively at both guard and center last year.Pos:
Explosive, thick-bodied blocker who plays with a nasty attitude. Quick off the snap, gets his hands into defenders and fights hard throughout the action. Built low to the ground and plays with natural leverage. Solid position blocker who controls opponents and walls them from the action. Picks up blitzes, helps out teammates and works hard until the whistle blows.Neg:
Not dominant in the middle of the field, and must learn to finish blocks. Does not play with great balance.Josh Beekman was a highly touted prospect out of BC. My guess is that he is being groomed to eventually replace Kreutz but will be used as a OG in the mean time. The kid will need at least 2 years to develop into a quality starting O-Lineman. Don't expect too much from him next year, but Beekman should improve in his sophomore year and hopefully contribute SOMETHING positive in '08. I would have liked to see Beekman play a bit last year, especially at the end of the season, but because he was behind Garza on the depth chart he didn't get to see any action. Give it time and Beekman will contribute in a big way.
January 30, 2008
#5 serious said . . .I think Tai(n)t stays at left tackle,An Ruben might be invited back,He happy here an found a second life with his career here.
So right tackle would be the pressing need right now,
Hopefully Beekman gets in the mix at guard next year.I agree Tait should go back to RT but I think Halas Hall is ok with him still playing LT.
Alan would be a good pick up an he might be interested because we just went to the SB.
But Beekman could be the cheap solution,an if he's any good, next year would be the perfect time to play him.January 30, 2008
#6 Megan said . . .jeff. nice post.
i agree with you totally. We really need at least 1 FA starting LT or LG. I like Faneca, but i'm sure he'll be under high demand (meaning we wont pony up to get him). I think a solid LT will make a huge difference in keeping Rex from getting blind sided every other possession. We have the makings of a good line if we make a few changes.
I think pick #14 needs to be spent on a safety. There are no good value safeties in FA, and we NEED one badly. If we get the top FA LT/LG and then draft one in the 2nd round and maybe take a risk on a second day pick up... we will be much, much better.
This bears team is close to being very competitive in the NFC. Spend the money, make these moves and win NOW.
January 30, 2008
#7 jeff said . . .Weren't we calling for Garza's head not too long ago?
January 30, 2008
#8 jeff said . . .why would anyone rather take a "shot" with the #14 pick on a left tackle instead of paying the same money to jordan gross, who allowed like no sacks this year? you know who outbidded the world on a left guard? the minnesota vikings. you know who has the best running game in football? the minnesota vikings.
January 31, 2008
#9 Decatur Staleys #7 said . . .serious, i agree. no way i take a tackle at 14.
January 31, 2008
#10 Rancid said . . .jordan gross is probably the same player everybody GM in the NFL will target,an let somebody else overspend for Alan.
January 31, 2008
#11 Taylor said . . .In a post a month or two I did the research to show that the vast majority of O lineman drafted in the first two rounds become starters. Don't worry folks, I'm not going to agree with Mike though. I would like to see our O line fixed through FA. I think that is better basically because of the point that jeff makes in #7. I don't think rookie O lineman are big risks, but in this FA group there are sure things out there. It is a deep draft class but it is also a deep FA group. I think this will bring the overall prices down so hopefully some decent guys will be available for less. I overall like jeff's Keep the Right, Buy the Left appraoch. I would be happy with:
Faneca
Gross
Lilja
Starks
Wharton
AdamsMike, Everyone is beyond tired of the absolutes. You try to sound all-knowing but it was just about a month ago that you were telling us all the Bears should use their pick on Jake Long of Michigan. Everyone pretty muched laughed you off the site for thinking he would still be there. So I'm not buying that you have enough football IQ to play the all knowing football Nostradamus. Here's your quote from December 20th (we were 6-9, the very best we would pick was 9th):
"The only thing that I want to hear out of Roger Goodell's mouth on a Saturday next April in New York is this...
"With the blank pick in the 2008 NFL draft, the Chicago Bears select Offensive Tackle Jake Long, Michigan."
I hate the fact I even responded to Mike cause I rarely do, he's not worth it, but I just hate when someone writes what the Bears WILL do in caps. It just ignorant to do that. If they don't do it through FA, then they probably should draft an OT at 14, but no one knows what they WILL do. Not even our beloved Mike.January 31, 2008
#12 Max said . . .I think Kreutz is so overrated. I know that he is probably the least of our worries with reguard to the offensive line, but i think he deserves some serious criticism. I saw an article or blog on fox sports a month or two back (unfortunately I can't find it anymore), and it had stats of all the fumbled snaps he had. It was ridiculous!!! It's popular to blame Rex for the fumbled snaps and rightfully so, but I think it's important to acknowledge that Kreutz was in on those fumbles and was doing that long before Rex was even in the picture.
As far as the rest of the line goes, I'm all for using the #14 pick to pick up a tackle (Sam Baker maybe).
Faneca would be great, but I have a feeling it won't happen. It just seems like the Bears are ineffective when going after players in free agency.January 31, 2008
#13 Jimbo said . . .Amen Jeff. . . AMEN. I wouldnt hate drafting a O-Lineman, but we need to sign 1 if not 2 through free agency.
Good postJanuary 31, 2008
#14 Mike said . . .A good number of mocks I've looked at have us taking an OT at 14. Ryan Clady, Boise State, has popped up a few times.
Flip side, during the Angelo-era the Bears have taken few O-Linemen and never higher than the 3rd round.
January 31, 2008
#15 Mike said . . .Riddle me this. When in the history of mankind have the Bears gotten into a bidding war for a premium free agent talent? Answer is never. It runs counter to the philosophy of the McCaskeys and Sweaty Teddy Phillips. Alan Faneca is going to receive a MONSTER payday from somebody. If Steve Hutchinson can get $54 million from Minnesota, then Faneca is going to be swimming in multi-millions as well. Does anybody honestly believe that the folks running the shop in Lake Forest are going to pony up $40 million or even $50 million on a veteran offensive guard?!? C'mon. And the same logic holds true for Jordon Gross who also will see a ridiculous payday.
I could see a Flozell Adams (but will Jerry Jones and Dallas really let a cornerstone lineman walk away??). I could see Jake Scott or Floyd Womack too.
Personal opinion? The Bears pick up a Jake Scott or Floyd Womack up via free agency and draft an Offensive Tackle at #14. They also invest a later round pick (or two) on a couple of offensive lineman "projects."
January 31, 2008
#16 Nigel Incubator Jones said . . .Ah, to the esteemed audience of mensas on this board, I suggested a first round draft pick of OT Jake Long out of Michigan when it could be not unreasonably envisioned after week 11 or 12 that the Bears were going to land a top 7 or so pick in the draft.
Of course Jake Long will be a goner way, way before the #14 pick.
January 31, 2008
#17 jeff said . . .Rancid, you can blow it out your tight "I can only deal in literal meanings" ass if you don't like opinion sharing and ALL FUCKING CAPS posted on an anonymous fucking chat board on the Al Fucking Gore invented Internet.
January 31, 2008
#18 RandomName said . . .bears outbidded the world for john tait. one correction: jimbo, didn't jerry angelo draft columbo in the first round?
January 31, 2008
#19 Rancid said . . .I'll admit ignorance here, I don't know how to fix the O-Line but i know if we had Brady's Line our quarterback could work with lead feet.
Anyway what's up with the advancement of the football rule? One game this year/or last year Garza caught a disrupted pass that bounced off a defensive lineman's hand.
he tried advancing it but after the refs took a 1/2 hour break to straighten things out it was ruled that offensive line men can't advance the ball.
That rule need to be changed. If any defensive person intercepts the ball he has the right to advance but not offensive linemen? I think in fluke situations where the ball is still live after a deflection they should be allowed to carry the ball for what ever yardage they can.
My two coins.
January 31, 2008
#20 Jimbo said . . .Cool. I made one of Mike's multiple personalities angry.
January 31, 2008
#21 Rancid said . . .Jeff, you're right, I was off on my "no OL before the 3rd round statement."
Colombo was drafted 29th pick in the 1st round, 2002.
I will now go stand in the corner for ten minutes.
January 31, 2008
#22 JB said . . .I have been a big proponent of saying that I think the Bears will fix the OLine through FA because that's what JA did last time. Maybe that's too broad a view. Maybe it's more situational than that. I am going to look at when we acquired Tait/Brown and see what sort of draft class was there as well as what the FA market was like. Although I bet the FA stuff could be hard to dig up.
I feel good about the line for the same reason I worry about safety. There are a ton of O lineman in FA and the draft so we should be able to get a couple without totally ruining our financial picture. There is almost no one available at safety in FA or the draft. That's why that position worries me so much.
January 31, 2008
#23 Mike# said . . .Jeff, do you really think we'll sign two guys? I guess that'd be great, but I think it'd be tough to do that and get Faneca. I would love to have the OL situation basically solved...for the '08 season anyways...before the draft. Landing a left side of the line and letting the returning line handle the right side would put us in good shape this year. I wouldn't be surprised either if Beekman replaces Garza because I just can't get garza's tornado blocks out of my head. I'd love to see that #14 pick used for an impact skill position player...so I'm on board for your aggressive FA plays on the OL.
January 31, 2008
#24 Pissed Off said . . .Signing John Tait is a whale sized different then signing a Steve Hutchinson. Or an Alan Faneca. Surely even Jeff understands this. The McCaskets and Sweaty Teddy Phillips aren't about to abandon a philosophy of fiscal conservatism (which has served this organization fairly well by the way) to get into a hyper-bidding war for Alan Faneca or Jordon Gross. They just aren't.
You can fantasize all you want, but chances are the Bears will be fortunate to land one good offensive lineman in free agency. The rest of the construction process will take place via the draft, starting with the #14 pick given the rare quantity of "1st round caliber" offensive tackles available.
January 31, 2008
#25 Pissed Off said . . .Hey mike or shall I say Nigel (what a fucking gay name, only you could think of that), good comeback on the last thread with the special olympics thing. Good to see now that Rancid has also pissed off one of your personalities. Your comeback was the equivalent of saying "shutup". Your have no mental awareness, that much is evident.
And BTW, Jeff, love the starting lineup you have there only I would put Ruben Brown in at one guard if he wants to come back.
January 31, 2008
#26 jeff said . . .Flozell Adams is kind of a love/hate thing. If I'm correct and I think I am, this guy gets more false starts than anyone in the NFL, like at least one per game. And we dont need more of those. But he is a wall so when he's not costing us 5 yards he's blocking nicely.
January 31, 2008
#27 Rancid said . . .lotta false starts, you're right. but great blocking too. gross is younger and more athletic. somebody's going to pay him well.
January 31, 2008
#28 Pissed Off said . . .My goal was to try to see how the BT has chosen to fill O Line needs in the past while taking into consideration what was available in the draft and FA.
So here's the deal. In 04 da Bears added Tait and Brown. Then in 05 they added Miller, Garza, and St. Clair. All through FA. The drafts in 04 and 05 saw 5 and 7 O linemen selected in the first two rounds. There were average or above average FA guys available those years. Also 5-7 guys drafted in the first 2 rounds is about average too. So in years where there was an above average amount of FA talent and average amount of talent available in the draft, JA used FA to meet needs, even when that meant getting 2-3 guys.
This years potential solutions make a prognostication based on past actions very difficult. This year there is both a large FA pool and a large draft class. There are 10-11 O lineman projected to be selected in the first 2 rounds.
Making matters more difficult, the last time there were 10 selected in the first 2 rounds, guess who we picked: Marc Columbo. So you could also say that when there is a lot of O Line talent in the draft, we use the draft, not FA.
My GUESS (not what WILL happen)
I personally view Columbo as the exception. First of all, that was JA's first pick, and he would obviously view that as a bad pick in retrospect. This may shy him off of doing it again. Then you have his FA pickups in 04 and 05 which were very successful for several years but are now beginning to break down with age. That has got to be an overall good experience. Sure they are breaking down but have a contract expiring in 09 so he's about right, plus it got him good results.
I think after looking at all this that JA will be inclined to fix the line through FA. I feel, based on looking at his past history that that will be his tendency. Were this a year with a shallow FA class, then the glut of draft guys at that position might tempt him. But with all the FA available, I think that will still be his preferred option.
Sources
Wikipedia - draft history
KFFL - history of past years free agency
Draft Ace - 08 mock draft used to estimate for this year
Chicagobears.com - contractInteresting notes
1. Hope you like Garza. He's signed through 2011
2. We selected KO 3 slots ahead of Marion Barber. SHIT.January 31, 2008
#29 JB said . . .Did anyone hear Chad Johnson on the Score? The reports are all over. He called the Score in Chicago and said he would love to come here and he would make Rex Grossman a superstar. HE WANTS OUT OF CINCY!!! I want him here. NOW! Make the phone call Angelo. Do it now!
January 31, 2008
#30 JB said . . .Rancid, in the words of peyton manning "CUT THAT MEAT!!!". You have brought it sir. I like your thinking and am now inclined to believe your research and Jeff's initial sentiment on the board that we will get two FA OL. excellent research. The question is, will they go for the top shelf or find a more economical solution? I love looking at draft position and wishing. I believe we selected Michael Haynes a couple slots ahead of Troy Palumalu.
January 31, 2008
#31 Phil from SATX said . . .PO'd...I personally love Chad Johnson. I would be down for whatever they try to do to get him. Pipe dream? Absolutely, but I love that guy. I will buy an 85 jersey and put Ocho Cinco on the back....no seriously, I almost bought a bengals jersey because I like him that much
January 31, 2008
#32 Rancid said . . .The reason to use the combo of drafting plus signing a FA Oliner is money. Even at the 14th pick, the stud you get will be cheaper than the equivalent free agent. Remember that that's part of the allure of the draft - the chance to get usable pieces for cheap, because they're rookies.
Here's what the 14th pick got last year (Darrelle Revis, CB for Jets)
Salary $ 285,000 Signing Bonus $ 4,700,500 Other Bonus $ 333,500 Total Salary $ 5,319,000 CAP VALUE $ 1,401,916
As we've discussed previously, it looks like cap value is the best way to compare salaries. No way you're getting a quality Oline FA for a cap value of $1.4MM. On the other hand, at the 14th pick you should get a very fine lineman who, as Rancid had previously proven, WILL start. Later, if he turns into the real goods, you'll have to extend him at a huge price, but for now, he'll be cheap.
Also, good point about Marc Columbo, and I'm sure the brain trust looks at him and says, I guess he wasn't a bust after all. Who's the last first round lineman prior to him? Stan Thomas? (I know that I should not be invoking his name)
Flozell would be great, and his false starts pale in comparison to his great blocking. With Fred Miller we got false starts PLUS no blocking. Much better deal with Floz.
I have to say Mike has a real gift for being irritating. He must practice a lot at home.
January 31, 2008
#33 Taylor said . . .JB - I couldn't find info comparing what type of money we gave Tait compared to what other FA lineman got in 04. I was hoping to be able to use thast to answer whether we would go for the best available or middle of the pack in a FA. If anyone's got reliable info on that I'd love it. My memory tells me he was one of the best if not the best available but I don't trust my memory enough to be sure.
I'm on the fence on 85. I don't know what else to say. I just don't know how I feel.
January 31, 2008
#34 Phil from SATX said . . .This is a team in need of leadership. Without a great offensive leader, Chad Johnson would destroy this team. He is a selfish cocky asshole that won't go near the middle of the field.
January 31, 2008
#35 Pissed Off said . . .Yeah, what the hell happened to Michael Haynes? What a waste - we got more out of Ced than him, and Ced's career isn't over (yet, although it's on life support for sure).
A comment - we are very fond around here of saying "Jerry Angelo can't draft O" and "we get all of our lineman out of free agency" - these are obviously simplistic comments that I'm sure Jerry doesn't agree with, and that will likely misdirect us when we're predicting what they will do. If it's offense they need, they'll be drafting offense, and free agents will be considered along with everybody else.
I DO think the past will be considered and will influence matters - Jerry has had success with FA linemen, so he'll be comfortable doing that again. He got burned on a high draft pick for a RB, so I'm sure he won't do that again (especially now that we have a history at blowing high RB draft picks that is beginning to rival our history of QB futility). I'll be surprised like many others here if he uses #14 to pick a QB, because he doesn't want to invite the pressure of having another high QB pick go bust. But otherwise, he'll be drafting for O and for lineman, in addition to FA, regardless of what we think and what trends we see as emerging.
Let's remember too that for every FA move that has worked out, there's an Arch Deluxe and a Ricky Manning, Jr., even now a Moose, to counter it. Free agents SHOULD be much lower risk picks but even they don't always work out. It's pretty much all a crap shoot - or is that just what fans say when they're front office isn't great at picking? Hmmmm. I'll go ahead and go with crap shoot.
January 31, 2008
#36 Phil from SATX said . . .I'm with you JB, if we sign him I'm doing the orange bears jersey with Ocho Cinco on the back.
And Taylor I will politely disagree. Chad Johnson is like TO. He goes across the field plenty. I dont know if you just thought we wouldnt figure it out or if you really never watch the Bengals but he goes up for some big catches and pays for it a lot. He takes plenty of punishment across the field. Its not like he's Randy Moss.
January 31, 2008
#37 Taylor said . . .Misspelled "their." I don't know why we wouldn't want a receiving talent as big as Chad J. . He's a bonafide superstar receiver. It would be an absolutely huge signing. Probably won't happen, but I can't see why we wouldn't want it to. It renders the Berrian discussion relatively moot (even though they're different receivers) and combo of Johnson, Hester and Bradley looks pretty good.
I've said before that I always thought that Chad likes being a comedian, he likes the spotlight, but I don't think he's a bad teammate. I could be wrong. I'll pull the Moose card - we already had a "prima donna WR FA" in Moose, and while he always did the dirty work on the field, he always irritated me with his inappropriate and selfish comments about his teammates. SO, if you're going to get some of that, at least get it in someone who is a bonafide superstar.
January 31, 2008
#38 mikebdot said . . .POed.. Yeah that may have been a bit of a cheap shot but it doesn't change the fact that he is "me guy". As far as Randy Moss goes, he's had a great year with the Pats b/c of the great leadership on that team. Brady and Belichick wouldn't put up with any crap. If Moss or whoever acts up they'll go elsewhere. The Bears don't have that leadership or the ability to say we can do it without you.
January 31, 2008
#39 Phil from SATX said . . .http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2005_nfl_draft
Who would all of you rather have had us pick in 2005 instead of Benson? I was just kind of wondering to myself who else around him we could have got, but none of the top 10 have done much. Braylon Edwards was gone and he's the only one that has really done anything. I suppose we could have got Merriman? Shoot, most of the first round talent isn't very good. The Chargers made out well also picking Luis Castillo. Just wondering what y'all thought we SHOULD have done?
I think at the time he was the "#1 talent on the board". I'm not sure I can blame our staff for selecting him. I would venture to guess we'll do the same thing this year. Whoever we think is the best talent on the board, we'll pick them, (probably not a CB or LB though...)
January 31, 2008
#40 JB said . . .For sure you're right, MikeB, and I still agree that Benson was the right choice at the time - he looked like the perfect fit plus he was slotted that high by everyone. I have also heard that that year was a particularly bad one for the draft.
If the idea made sense at the time, we shouldn't piss on Angelo for blowing another O pick. There was simply nothing out there to suggest he wouldn't be great. What you can object to was the decision to let TJ go, but we've been through all that already and don't need to go there again.
The coincidence is still out there, though, about our spectacular lack of success at drafting high pick running backs. I wonder what, if anything, ties these three guys together.
January 31, 2008
#41 willie from chicago said . . .I'll bite on the trip down Cedric Benson memory lane.
Draft day '05 I said I would like anyone but Benson. I was hoping Ronnie Brown or Braylon would fall to 4, but when that didn't happen, I very much wanted to trade down and take Derrick Johnson (KC chiefs), because everything I saw on him, he was a beast. He's a borderline pro bowler now. I'd love to say I saw Merriman and Ware as studs...but I'd never heard of Ware and hadn't watched any Maryland games to hear of Merriman.
Anyways, it's all moot...were stuck with him for at least another year.
January 31, 2008
#42 Mike said . . .Mike, my bad on the last post dude, I thought that the post was written by you, maybe I should stop tracking down my crack hoes lol. Again my bad. : )
As far as the O-line, I think we should build from free agency and only suppliment it by the draft. Jeff's right it doesnt matter who our rnning back is as well as who our QB is (like ive been saying) if our line stays the same.
I would LOVE to get Phillips in the draft but it may not happen so i guess we have to take an O-lineman.
Great post Jeff!
January 31, 2008
#43 Pissed Off said . . .Observations...
- "Chad Johnson would ruin the chemistry of the offense..." What chemistry?!?! The current chemistry of being awful?!? I'd give my left nut to have Chad Johnson on this football team. But it's a pipe dream.
- Marc Columbo was not a bust, but rather the victim of a devastating injury that derailed his career. Last time I checked he was a reliable starter for the Dallas Cowboys. So cut Jerry Angelo some slack on this one.
- I dont' know what to say if some of you insist that the Bears will outbid the rest of the NFL and come away with two of the top offensive lineman free agents. We'll be lucky to get one, and his name probably won't be Alan Faneca or Jordon Gross.
January 31, 2008
#44 Duff Diggler said . . .I would agree Taylor that 85 is a "me guy" but he's probably a good teammate. He plays hard (not when he wants to like some players) and wants to win and he doesnt quit. I would like to have him not only because of the stellar talent he brings but he'll help shine the spotlight on Chicago with his antics, which I LOVE, the endzone stuff is terrific. As well as his trash talk about other teams/players and his "they cant stop me" list of cornerbacks, I love that stuff. I wish the No Fun League wouldnt be such hard asses.
And my remark about Moss was meaning that Moss doesnt go over the middle of the field, he's a pansy and hates to get hit, he's scared. It wasnt meant to mean his antics but that is a good point too. This is the first year in Moss' career that he hasnt caused a stir, and even that is debateable now with the alleged rape/assult in Florida.
Regarding the Benson talk, I wanted him on draft day. I thought he was the best between Brown/Williams/Benson. I was dead wrong. Jury is still out on Williams but Ronnie Brown is certainly a STUD.
January 31, 2008
#45 Scott said . . .Jeff... Can I get an official endorsment on taking Kenny Phillips (S Miami) 14th overall (if he's there....)?
January 31, 2008
#46 Decatur Staleys #7 said . . .Chad Johnson would be great. Would give the offense a huge shot in the arm.
Mike, you're an idiot. This "riddle me this" bullshit is really stupid and, once again, you put quotes around something that nobody actually wrote. Dumb people shouldn't try to act smart. Just makes you look dumber.
January 31, 2008
#47 mikebdot said . . .I know some view that Tait should go back to the right side of the line,But do you think the Bears would switch him back again after he spent the last couple of seasons there.
The Bears will hopefully find someone for the left side of the line.If Chad wants to come here then he must believe we got the goods to go somewhere in the future,then what he got in Cincy.(even with C Palmer)
January 31, 2008
#48 RandomName said . . .Yeah, it's a moot point, now. I'm aware. I'm just trying to get a feel for what the braintrust WILL do. I'm thinking best available. I don't think they're going to be afraid to draft another bust. And, part of my point including that is that over half of those first round picks are "busts", at least according to some people.
January 31, 2008
#49 Taylor said . . .mikebdot:
ok Cedric Benson was damn high on the list, but if we could know then what we know now. I'd definitly take Marion Barber.
PO:
Never had I heard anything about Randy Moss being charged with rape. Although assault's nothing to write home about, let's just get the facts straight. I'm sure Court TV will fill us with all the details after superbowl's over.
I'm already waiting for the 08 season to start already. I hope Hester's ready to prove how high his receiver's IQ can be for all the doubters.February 1, 2008
#50 Al in WI said . . .Apparently Chad Johnson would also "love to play" in Boston.
I wouldn't get ur hopes up on him coming to Chicago. He just loves to get his name in the news and cause drama.
February 1, 2008
#51 mikebdot said . . .I think you'd have to take one or the other between Adams and Faneca. I don't know even with the room the Bears have that they can get both.
February 1, 2008
#52 Pissed Off said . . .$21M in cap space THIS year doesn't necessarily mean we could afford two premier free agent lineman, just as it doesn't mean we could afford both Berrian and another premier receiver (which someone else claimed previously). These people will not sign one year deals, so we're not going to kill our cap in '09 or '10, etc. to get two premier free agents at any position. If anything seems LIKELY to me, we'll sign people like Adams/Walker like we did last year on D. We'll scout the talent available and make a decent offer for a middle of the road FA who will either under/over perform, because that's what the law of averages says is likely. If they over-perform, great, if they under-perform, we can restructure later.
February 1, 2008
#53 Rancid said . . .Random, whatever, not rape then??
Chad Johnson has called into several cities stations saying he wants to play for their club, he's also done it with Miami I've learned. That being said it just shows he wants out of Cincy, thats evident.
Al might get this since he's in the Twin Cities radio area but on a radio show on KFAN sports Radio (P.A. & Dubay) yesterday is where I heard about this Chad Johnson talk and they were just saying that 85 would be a great fit in Chicago and they were talking about how nice he would be here. It got me kind of excited.
February 1, 2008
#54 bill said . . .If we skip out on the big names and pick a middle of the talent pool FA, I like Wharton and/or Starks.
February 1, 2008
#55 mikebdot said . . .You are right on with your analysis about the offensive linemen, whatever it takes to inprove in this area is a must. I have seen the people that don't like Grossman, [sure he has pulled some bad games out of his butt, but with more protection he should be able to improve, same with Orton.] think that another QB would make a big difference, but anybody that would play behind this revolving door of a line would have problems. Another area in need is WR. Mohammed dropped a lot of balls these last two years, and needs to improve. The Bears need to get better receivers so that they don't have to rely on Mohammed as much to make the big play. [ I remember when Randy Moss was coming out of college,I suggested to someone that the Bears should draft him, and he said to me that they don't need to have another receiver because they already had Curtis Conway, you have to have more than two WR in this league. Besides the fact that Moss would have been a bigger pain in the ass than he was in Minnesota, and wouldn't have worked out with his personality.]So you have to have three really good receivers to compete in today's game. Running back is a major need, Benson is a good #two, therefore the Bears need to get Michael Turner in free agency, he has been playing behind LT since he came into the league, I think he would have a fantastic year.The Bears have the money for this to happen, so get to it. bill17.......17hondo.com
February 1, 2008
#56 Pissed Off said . . .I still don't understand this love affair with Michael Turner. Most productive players are products of their O-line. This is why I hate Emmitt Smith, Troy Aikman, and Michael Irvin. The guys on that O-line were so damned good that they were actually recognized as premier talent at the time and I STILL feel they were underrated. This is also why I would love for JA and Co. to sign Lilja or Scott, or both. They are major cogs on Indy's line. If both leave I feel Indy will slowly fall from grace. I'm still not sure both or either will leave.
In any event, I feel Michael Turner (and L.T.) are the product of their O-line. I don't think Turner did anything in the playoffs to say "oh, gee, let's sign him". I really don't. The only reason they beat the Colts is poor play by Indy (or good play by San Diego D, however you want to look at it) and Sproles awesome screen pass TD, once again a product of the line (and Sproles stupid fast speed). That is another reason spending money on O-line will be a blessing: blockers that can get out in FRONT of Devin Hester, at least, for a short time.
February 1, 2008
#57 Phil from SATX said . . .Yeah your right, LT sucks. He's not the best RB in the NFL every year because he has talent, its only because of his O-line. Same with Jim Brown, what a horrible back without that line.
February 1, 2008
#58 mikebdot said . . .I don't think that was PO'd. I agree with the general concept that it's hard to evaluate RB's when you have a bad line. I think one of the only ones to have success with a bad line was the great Barry Sanders, and the only reason he would have success was due to his ability to switch directions on a dime and run around like a crazy man. Otherwise, good backs look bad with a bad line, and okay RBs look great with a good one.
Totally agree on Emmitt Smith. A great workhorse, yes, but he didn't have close to the talent of Walter and it absolutely killed me when he stuck around to get the rushing record. That was a crime and an abomination.
I have to admit I didn't see much of Michael Turner and he didn't impress much in the postseason. I think the same way about RB as I do about QB - don't make any rash moves or spend too much right now until you get the Oline fixed. Much will become clearer then.
February 1, 2008
#59 KTL said . . .PO'd (or not): Yeah, cuz I said "LT sucks" anywhere in my post. I said they are the PRODUCT of their line. Same with Shaun Alexander. Same with Larry Johnson/Priest Holmes. When Hutchinson went to Minnesota, it certainly aided Chester Taylor (and then AP this year), and when Roaf retired that certainly affected KC's running game.
All I am saying is, if we got good talent on O-line, you'll all be amazed at how interchangable the pieces become (see Indy's RB situation, Dominique Rhodes looked like a fucking animal against us, how sad is THAT? He must be a fucking stud!).
And yes, Walter freaking Payton was aided quite a bit by a great O-line.
Also, L.T. and the Chargers are playing in one of the worst divisions in the league. Nobody ever seems to mention that. Oakland, Kansas City, and Denver have been terrible for multiple years.
Denver is actually another perfect example of an O-line that got old/bad. In '97 and '98 they made good backs look great and earned Elway those rings. He certainly helped, but my god those lines were awesome. Then, two years later, our very own Brian Griese put up awesome numbers before getting injured. I wish I had seen this truth before to be honest. Tony Jones went to Pro-Bowl in '98, was an All Pro in '94. Mark Schlereth was also a Pro-Bowler in '98. And of course Tom Nalen was also very awesome, 5 time pro-bowler and 3 time all pro. And, of course, '98 was the year Terrell Davis had over 2000 yards rushing.
And yes, I would assume Jim Brown was aided by a great O-line as well, considering in his rookie season his starting left and right tackles were all-pro and went to the pro bowl. Then the next year, two went to pro bowl and two were all pro (three different guys). In fact, there were two or three all pros or all-stars in each of his seasons. Jim Ray Smith and Mike McCormack were actually pretty good as it turns out. In '65 4 out of the 5 linemen were all pros.
Yes, the street goes both ways (i.e. a great back can make a line look good too), but you have to realize if you have a shit line, there isn't much you can do.
February 1, 2008
#60 Mike said . . .I'm grew up in North Carolina and the Panthers are my second favorite team behind Da Bears. Jordan Gross can't play left tackle. Carolina tried that experiment a few years ago. It was a disaster. Travelle Wharton is not what you would call an all-world left tackle, but they had to get somebody over there because Gross really struggled. The best thing the Bears can do is get a serviceable veteran to play left tackle and try to develop a pup from the draft or one of the young guys they already have.
February 1, 2008
#61 Chi-Town Joe said . . .Mikebd...have to agree with you on Michael the Burner Turner (go NIU). He's a decent back. Nothing more. He's been ridiculously overhyped in some circles. To compare his talent and ability to all-world Ladainain Tomlinson is idiotic. And yes, Turner has benefited in great degree by a good offensive line in San Diego.
I'd love Turner on the Bears, but not nearly at the pricetag it will take to get him.
February 1, 2008
Oh, for the direct offense, I came up with this plan:
DRAFT MIKE HART!!!
DRAFT MARIO/good recieverTRADE: Griese + Grossman + Benson = good QB? Dependable? NOT consistently inconsistent? PLEASE?!?
that is all. Go Kruetz.
February 2, 2008
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.