The first move of the 2007 offseason is a simple one. It doesn't involve the devastating cap value of Lance Briggs. It doesn't involve the Bernard Berrian is-he-or-isn't-he-a-number-one question. It doesn't involve the quarterback (thank God). No, the first move of this offseason is much simpler than all that: re-sign Brendon Ayanbadejo.
I've been trying to find a way to convey what he means to this organization but I'll just let him do it.
“If I do leave, whatever team does want me the most, it’ll never amount to the achievements and success that I’ve had in Chicago being that we scored seven special-teams touchdowns this year...Just to do the things that we do on special teams and dominate games and control games, I don’t think any other team will have the ability to do that regardless of if I’m on the team or not.�
The Bears can't afford to sacrifice their game-altering special teams, even in attempts to strengthen other units. Ayanbadejo is second only to Hester in importance. Keeping him isn't a luxury. It's a necessity.
#2 Bill said . . .Jeff - I totally agree with you. I was thinking the same thing earlier in the week when I heard radio hosts talking about re-signing Rex, Lance, etc. I figure the Bears should sign the one guy that has perennially shown that he can contribute in big ways to scoring points and with field position and who the Bears can afford without destroying their cap scheme.
However, that being said, I have no faith in Bears' management or coaches to actually do the best thing for this team. Thank God this season is over.
January 2, 2008
#3 Pissed Off said . . .First? Or maybe not after I finish typing.
Signing Ayanbadejo shoudl be a no-brainer and I expect that will happen. I woudl like to see it happen in tandem with a restructure of Hester's deal.
From the other thread - I'm not looking for a ten-year run; I'd be happy with a two or three year run. Sure, they made the playoffs twice in the row with Lovie, but they got embarrassed so bad the first game two years ago I don't count that as much.
Here is the question - did they make the playoffs because fo Lovie or in spite of him? I really felt that overall Jauron was a good head coach, but too stubbornly loyal to Shoop. (And if Shoop was so great, why didn't Jauron take him with to Buffalo?)
I don't get a warm feeling that Lovie is a leader. His decisions are too strange; his explanations are too insulting to fans; his in-game decisions are questionable at best; he let Griese out to dry TWICE in the season. Why? No competition for Grossman; well, I could keep going but it's been said before.
Here is the deal - he said "trust me to make the right decisions" and he failed in nearly every one. In effect, he was a "good" coach until he got all this "power" to make these decisions.
Come on - SOMETHING has to change. I can live with RT and Babich and Lovie etc but SOMETHING has to change. You can see the sports writers are shaking their heads at what Lovie is saying. The team makes the SB and he shakes things up. Then the team goes 7-9 and he stands pat?? He is being stubborn and in denial and it's insulting to the fans who know better.
On another note - WCPF, I really enjoy having you here. I understand why you join in - if I lived in Milwaukee or GB (not that I ever would, mind you) I'd be on a Packer site too and would hope fans would understand why. The rivalry is a force unto itself. We can't exist without each other.
January 2, 2008
#4 Windy City Packer Fan said . . .Its a long offseason obviously. And thats evident by starting our offseason moves and talkers with the like of Brendan A. He is important. I would like him back as well. Unfortunately that about all I can say about him. Theres not much else.
January 2, 2008
#5 BFFE said . . .With regards to the signing/re-signing of a QB in the off-season, let me give you this point of view. Don't take this as a boast about Favre, follow through on the reasoning.
If Mike Holmgren never coached Favre, Brett would just be some random Mississippi guy, probably coaching high school football who served as a back-up for a few years. Holmgren brought in guys like Steve Mariucci and Andy Reid as his QB coach during his early years in GB. By the time Holmgren left, he had been coached enough to be a decent QB.
My point is, no matter who is brought in or kept on the Bears roster, take a look at who is teaching the QBs week in and week out. If you take a look at my posts after the Superbowl, I repeatedly posted 'they fired the wrong Ron (I stopped after many complaints). Is Ron Turner a guy that can develop QBs in this league? Certainly, Lovie with his defensive background is not going to be working directly with the QBs, like some of the other coaches in the league. Obviously, getting a guy with the physical and mental tools is important, but who is developing them?
If you look at the teams in the NFC playoffs, GB (McCarthy), TB (Gruden) and Seattle (Holmgren) are all hands-on offensive coaches, with QB being their main position.
When you look at teams with defensive coaches in this year's playoffs, NE (Belicheck), Indy (Dungy), Dallas (Wilson), Pittsburgh (Tomlin); their common thread is that they have the QBs with the right tools to be effective.
To follow up with Bill's post, if the Bears make any changes, it needs to be with the staff. Yeah, bringing in a guy with Martz's background would be a strong move to the hoop for the Bears. Look at what he was able to do during the first half of the season with Kitna at the helm. Not to mention his work with Warner and Bulger in St. Louis.
Damn, Lovie has a relationship with Martz. If they were able to bring him here, you guys would have to be considered the favorites for the division in 2008. (Ted Phillips, disregard the last paragraph of this post)
January 2, 2008
#6 BFFE said . . .Maybe this will make you feel better
January 2, 2008
#7 PolygonHell said . . .maybe this will make you feel better
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eUfhsipak7gJanuary 2, 2008
#8 Bill said . . .In absolute terms he shouldn't be that expensive, but it'll come down to opportunity cost... What else could Chicago get for that 2Million or so.
The problem for Ayanbedejo is that he may not be seen on the open market with the value that he has to the Bears. And at the end of the day your value is pretty much what people will pay.
IMO they should re-sign him early for top 5 special teams money, because it sends the right message from the organisation, and because they don't want to loose a leader on the team.
What will probably happen is that he'll be re-signed late for less than he wants.
January 2, 2008
#9 Pissed Off said . . .WCPF - I've had this conversation on this site as well as with friends and family - the dearth of decent QBs is the NFL's "dirty little secret". But as you point out it may be the dearth of quality QB coaches. How or why? Maybe becasue a good assistant coach can be a threat to many first time head coaches. It can't be that simple though.
January 2, 2008
#10 Mike said . . .Did I ever mention I hate Brett Favre or that I wish he would die. Madden doesnt help matters with his unconditional love of #4 along with some other media members but for God's sake enough already. I hate the Pack, I hate Favre, I hate the Vikings and their players too. I have no interdivision respect. In fact I hate our divisional opponents more than any other teams in the NFL, I'll throw the Pats in that mix too. The only time I could ever root for an interdivision player would be if he were on the NFC pro-bowl team cuz I always root for the NFC. The pro-bowl is a joke and I dont even watch anymore but that would be the only time I could say I would "root" for Favre or some interdivision player. And even then I cringe and hope he gets decapitated. I generally have no NFC rooting interest in the Super Bowl either, just the pro-bowl. I of course pick a team for the super bowl but it is certainly not based on conference, just who I like and if the Lions, Pack, Vikes or Pats are in it I always root against them.
January 2, 2008
#11 WCPF said . . .Well, it would seem to me that Brandon Ayanbadejo is headed elsewhere. Ditto Lance Briggs. I also hold a contrarian viewpoint on Rex Grossman and think he will be sporting a different uniform next season as well. There are going to be teams interested in his services. The chance for a fresh start away from the crush of negativity surrounding him in Chicago will make his decision a relative easy one.
January 2, 2008
#12 Scott said . . .Bill, egos play a pretty prominent role with some coaches, not just in the NFL, but at any level. Not to mention the player's egos, particularly at that level. Think about it, if you have a talented QB that is a complete a$$ (Ryan Leaf), who the hell is going to be able to coach the guy?
In the scheme of the offense, imagine if the QB coach and the OC are not on the same page, how is the QB going to be coached to a high level? Not to mention, is the head coach dictating the style of play (like it appeared Lovie was at times this year) and the OC, HC and QB coaches aren't on the same page?
When you look at most coaching rosters, you see that many guys have tenures of 2-4 years with a few different teams. This being the case, how much impact will a coach have on a guy that has a longer term contract for a ton more money.
To get back to your original point, yes, a newer head coach in the league could feel threatened by a core of quality assistants. But, the smart ones are the ones that surround themselves with great people.
PO'd...still love ya man!
January 2, 2008
#13 Bill said . . .Shocked that Mike would take a contrarian viewpoint re: Rex. I'm in the camp of hoping for the best. If Lovie is a beliver in status quo and Lovie is Angelo's guy then I've got to believe that many of the FA's will come back. At the very least, Angelo will make a run at 'em. That said, how much do we want to embrace Lovie's hope for status quo? This is a team that drastically underperformed so perhaps we've all been lulled into a sense that we have a roster stacked with talent. Each year the Pats let some talent go and restock with trades and signings. If we have to do the same then let's do it. I'd love to have most of these guys back but I also don't want to go 7-9 or worse next year. Let's get some shiny new players to go with our great players under contract, give Devin Hester a new contract and get ready to make a run in '08.
January 2, 2008
#14 JB said . . .Whenever I cringe at all the love Favre gets, I think of how fans in other cities must have been sick of hearing about Michael Jordan. If I were from another city - or if he played on another team - I woudl have complained heavily about how he got away with travelling (carrying the ball) after the hesitation dribble becaem one of his moves. (Just like Shaq committed about two dozen offensive fouls every game backing into a stationary defender.) But that's basketball, where the rules are obviously fluid.
Favre deserves the praise he gets because 1) his high level of play 2) his durability and most important 3) his willingness to change his game this year.
Still - when he throws dumb passes that most QBs get fried for, they are somehow excused as him "trying to make a play". (Of course, every other QB making a dumb pass was "trying to make a play" too.)
On another note - Mike: Why do you think Ayanbadejo will sign elsewhere? From what I read today in the Trib or Sun-Times web site, he seemed to realize his value as a player was higher on the Bears - that if he went somewhere else it would be lose-lose for him and the Bears. I can't see it taking a lot of money to keep him, and the cap goes up this year. I know a lot of people here get on you for seeming to be anti-Bears, and I never bought into it. But I really wonder why you'd pick him out as being gone other than just figuring the Bears are too cheap or he'd rather get out of this organization.
I fully expect Rex to leave if he feels he can compete somehwere else. I've resigned myself to knowing that Briggs will be gone even though I hoped it work out. Berrian will get more money than he's worth by somebody and that's one that I'll agree with the Bears for not upsetting the salary structure to overpay for a guy who drops way too many to be considered a top NFL receiver.
But I really don't see Ayanbadejo leaving. And yet I was wrong about RT, and I guess I coudl be wrong here too.
January 2, 2008
#15 Megan said . . .Where I'm at right now:
Rex will not be back...10/90
Lance is a coin flip
Berrian is a 75/25 return
Ayanbedejo is 95/5 return...I honestly can't see us letting him go. Mike, you're an idiot...as usual.
We're not talking wholesale changes remember, but the Bears have a good history of rewarding their own that perform well...and I think that BA will be rewarded with a very nice contract for a special teamer.Remember, it's okay to daydream about landing all of the big FA on here...just don't go out and say "we can sign bob sanders" in the real world because people will laugh at you, like i did when it was first posted...but I've had my laughable moments on here too.
Ready for the offseason! Anybody think Andre Woodson falls to 14? After his amazing bowl game? Yeah, me either...
January 2, 2008
#16 Mike said . . .I don't know how much better we can possibly get next year if Lovie takes the I-know-fully-well-what-I-am-doing-so-nanny-nanny-boo-boo attitude.
Does he have a special set of contact lenses he wears? Is he on special medication? How can he not see what we, the general public and/or some of the more legitimate sports media are saying (Is there such a thing?)? How can he not see the continually inept play calling on the offense? How can he not see the consistantly terrible blocking by a RB, WR or the whole O-Line (Minus maybe Kuntz?) Or the dropped passes, the bad pass patterns, the inability to see a hole and run through it rather then just barrel through hoping for the best?? Is it just me? or Us? The only shining light we have are special teams, really. I feel like I am missing something or not seeing what he is seeing. I just don't get it.January 2, 2008
#17 Papa Bear said . . .Ayanbadejo will be a salary cap fatality. There will undoubtedly be a team who will offer a lot more than the Bears are willing to.
"Gone-o-meter"
1. Ayanbadejo - 90%
2. Briggs - 100%
3. Grossman - 75%
4. Berrian - coin flipJanuary 2, 2008
#18 Al in WI said . . .Idea: re-sign BA at Mike Brown's salary. Keep Mike Brown at BA's current salary slot, throw in some incentives. Re-up Hester's contract and lock him into a deal, can't let him go into next summer without a new deal only to see his free agent value continue to go up and pay the price for waiting.
I too saw Jake Long dominate yesterday. He won't be around at 14, but man it would be sweet to see him in a Bears uni. There's this Michael Oher kid down at Ole Miss, supposed to be a pretty good LT, if he comes out, he should still be around at 14.
January 2, 2008
#19 Megan said . . .Jerry needs to make sure these guys don't leave town. That means locking these guys up before FA begins.
In my opinion in order to compete for the NFC next year, we have to get 3 out of 4 of these guys back. And that's before making any moves ourselves.
The first order of biz though needs to be cutting ties with the dead weight and opening up the cap room to get some deals done.
The second move should be to re-sign Rex Grossman now. If we let him get to the market he'll be the most sought after QB and someone will offer him a huge deal. In the meantime we'd be stuck with a wonderful camp battle of Griese-ball or OR-ton. Yuck.January 2, 2008
#20 Pissed Off said . . .I felt so awful for Illinois yesterday. They didn't really have any chance. USC played like animals. That MLB, Maiava--whoo doggy, he was fast and furious, like Urlacher in his heyday. The Florida/Michigan game was great to watch. Tebow is something, and Henne wasn't bad.
You know Tebow will go far... I don't think Chicago tho..January 2, 2008
#21 Mike said . . .Yeah I do think Andre woodson falls to #14 since there are a lot of good QBs in this draft and probably at least two better than him. Not to mention some teams dont need a QB so they wont even consider drafting one in the first round.
JB I'm not sure where you come up with your % chances that those players will be here but I hope we re-sign Rex (God do I hope we do or else he's gonna be a star somewhere else and we're gonna kick ourselves for possibly lettting the franchise/long time/stable QB that we've been waiting for for like 20 years). Anyway Rex did say he would like to be back....if he's wanted. I assume he'll entertain other offers but like he said.....he missed the boat on the big one. He could be just saying the right thing at the right time but if he wants to be back I think they can get a deal done.
Regarding Berrian, he is the premier free agent WR this year and I dont know if we can afford him because of that. He'll get overpaid and I'm not all that big on keeping him around at a high price.
I would like to re-sign Briggs as well. I dont know if he'll be here next year but he said he would like to stay as well. He's comfortable here and he knows with #54 next to him they make up the best LB tandem in the league. He gets respect here too. I think again if he doesnt get greedy we'd be fools not to re-sign him. And finally regarding Brendan, he's gotta be back doesnt he? He's not gonna cost that much to keep and the staff should recognize his importance at that price is well worth it. Plus didnt he say too that he wants to stay?
Megan I dont think this team is far off. Yeah special teams is fine. Then you look at the Defense, adding a healthy Mike Brown (or other safety), Tommie, Dusty and Vasher to what this team did the last few weeks of the year.....we'll be more dominant than we were in 2006.
On offense, we need Rex back. Yeah he hiccupped early in the year but when he came back he was good. Good enough that I strongly feel we make the playoffs with him healthy. We could have beaten Washington and Minnesota and ended the year on a four game win streak going into the playoffs. Probably one and done but so what? That said we still need some changes. We need to draft a safety and then move the O-line around a bit. Lets draft a huge left tackle, Move Tait to the right, then have Brown/Miller/Garza/Metcalf as guards. Its that simple. Then we have a quality tackle backup in St. Clair too or we can sign or draft a couple O-lineman. We havent seen Beekman yet. Anyway a few minor changes and we are in business next year.
January 2, 2008
#22 Mike said . . .I don't see the Chicago Bears taking a quarterback in the 1st round. Even if Rex Grossman leaves via free agency. Maybe in the 2nd or 3rd round they do something at QB.
January 2, 2008
#23 Bill said . . .Offensive tackle Ryan Clady of Boise State announced today that he will enter the 2008 NFL draft. He could very well end up with the Bears at the #14 pick. He's the next best thing to Jake Long at offensive tackle.
January 2, 2008
#24 Megan said . . .If BA signs elsewhere, then Angelo suffers a real rep hit. How can you lose an special teams player? His "cap hit" woudl hardly be a ripple, but losing him says "we dont' reward for perfromance." Not a real smart way to run a business.
If BA goes, then woudl Hester be gone too in a year or two? Why pay even bigger bucks for a return guy - unless he makes the transition to full time receiver - which I hope he does NOT do. I like getting the ball on the 35-40 most of the time.
Oh no - know I rememebred something I read earlier in the week I tried to forget becasue it upset me so much. Peter King didn't name Hester his special teams player of the year BECAUSE he doesn't get enough touches. What the Holy Mother F*** does THAT mean????? The reason he DOESN'T get touches is BECAUSE he's the best in the league!! (steroids aside, it woudl be like saying Bonds isn't a good hitter because he takes too many walks.)
What an F'ing MORON! A guy gives you field position EVERY kick, and the one time they mistakenly kick to him he goes in UNTOUCHED, but he's not the best.
The TV guys actually said the Saints were doing a good job keeping in the kicking game, as the Bears started another possesion near the 40. If that's a "good job", then why is do teams get the ball on the 40 after a kick out of bounds? By theri definition, that's a reward for the kicking team.
And why are announcers in general so bad? Is it becuase they don't watch enough football as simply a fan? Is it because the producer is yakking in their ear about some "clever" comment they have to get in that they can't realize what is happening?
January 2, 2008
#25 JB said . . .PO'd The last two games of the season were far better and most of the rest of the season. I had honestly hadn't thought about Vasher, he has been a key player and having him back and healthy as well as Tommie and Mike in '08 will help the defensive side of the ball. I have never really been too worried about the defense. What about the offense?
Here's the thing, If RT calls the same plays, just like he did this season and if Lovie can't see or at least says he doesn't see what serious changes need to happen, how are we going to get to the play-offs in '08?We cannot keep running the same offense we did in '07, there needs to be more flexibility with plays and players. I know I sound like I am making generalizations here but, any good business professor will tell you that if it's not working, changes need to be made! AND you need to be open to new ideas or options. I think AP is a better running back, he has the natural ability to adjust. Our O-line sucks-- so our running game cannot really get off the ground against even mildly okay defenses. Runing the same routes/pass patterns is just like sending a neon sign to the opposing team"Meet me here, this is where I am going to catch the ball" We have experienced WR's who have serious ball security problems we have all said that. All the opposing teams will have to do is remember what plays we called last season and blammo, there you have it, psychic defense...amazing..
Please inform me as to how wrong I am.January 2, 2008
#26 Mike said . . .PO'd, my percentages or whatever are just my feelings from a few different factors. I like Rex, would love to see him back, but I honestly can't see how he'd want to come back. A change of scenery would be good for him. You very well could be right about Berrian, and after rethinking it a bit, I may downgrade my percentage from 75% to 74.5%. The organization could very well believe in DH, Bradley and the aging Moose...not sure that's the best decision. Again, they need to resign B-Twice because I have his jersey, and I'd hate to retire it after one year...and he's a very good WR on a corps that isn't very strong.
January 2, 2008
#27 Al in WI said . . .Every year there is some team out there willing to pay a goofy sum for a special team standout. I think Ayanbadejo will see a goofy offer or two. And he would be a fool to pass it up given the short lifespan of a NFL football player and the fact that he will never be "rich" in the grand scheme of NFL salaries. It would be a mistake for Jerry Angelo to tear up his salary cap management philosophy to fit Aybandejo into the mix. Angelo has never deviated from the philosophy and I seriously doubt he will this time for a special team performer.
I'd like Aybandejo back just like everybody. But it is doubtful to happen.
January 2, 2008
#28 Scott said . . .Here's the question I have for people. Yes we all want Brendon back, but is he really worth $2-3 Mill as a 3rd string linebacker? And then is he worth getting back at the expense of not getting Briggs, Berrian ect back?
That's the problem I have with it.
January 2, 2008
#29 Pissed Off said . . .That's fairly flimsy logic, Mike. Not sure you or any of us saw him breaking the bank for Vasher or Peanut but he did. He's creative when it comes to keeping the guys he likes and all of the decision makers like Ayanbadejo. He's a core member on this team and those guys have tended to get paid. Plus, it seems to me like the whole team wants a re-do. All of them are talking about wanting to come back. That usually means that some will resign for a discount. Remember that the Pats are not always the ones offering the biggest money, just the best chance to win. If BA and some of the others feel that way about Chi then we've got a pretty good shot at landing them.
January 2, 2008
#30 B.A. Baracus said . . .Megan, I dont like Ron Turner either but its not quite as simple as "meet me here, this is where I'm going." Its a litte ridiculous to say that but I hear you. I would love for us to get rid of Ron Turner and SIGN MIKE MARTZ. He's available RIGHT NOW. If we keep Turner it wont be the worst think in the world but I would like to see more diversity. If we get that O-line together like I've laid out even RTs play calling will look good, much like it did in 2006.
January 2, 2008
#31 Pissed Off said . . .First, it is highly doubtful that Briggs will be back here next year - so drop him from next year's equation.
Second, if the Bears pick up a QB in the first round next year, they will add insult to injury. The Bears don't need a QB - the Bears need an offensive line!! Ange-blo needs to build from the inside out. He should take an O Lineman with the first pick (IMO, he should have taken an O Lineman in last year's draft).
Third, Bernard Berr-li-catchin-anything is not going to be worth the money the Bears will have to pay for him. I expect him to be history.
Finally, after an O Lineman is picked first by the Bears, they should take the next best offensive player they can get - preferably a running back or wide receiver.
January 2, 2008
#32 Bill said . . .I like that take B.A.
January 2, 2008
#33 PolygonHell said . . .Anyone see a 10 win season next year without an unusual combination of career years and lack of injuries? I don't.
January 2, 2008
#34 Bill said . . .Honestly I don't see why we can't win 10 next year.
If we can keep key defensive personel healthy, we can be in a lot of football games.And if we can get some of the offensive line issues resolved, and get a half decent running game, we'll win our fair share of those.
Look how close a lot of games were this year in some cases despite horrendous performances on both sides of the ball.
Now I think to move beyond also rans when the play-offs start, we need more than that on offense, but what's not clear to me right now is how much a working running game and O-Line will improve our passing game with whoever happens to be starting at QB.
January 2, 2008
#35 PolygonHell said . . .As long as we don't "get off the bus runiing". Seriously, why does a team have to be a running team , or a passing team. I'd rather see a balanced attack. Pass to set up the run, run to srt up the pass, whatever. Just be balanced and FLEXIBLE. Don't stop what works becasue the the other team was going to stop it eventually anyway.
My God - I wonder if some sportswriter will compile a list of idiotic Lovie quotes.
January 2, 2008
#36 Willie from Chicago said . . .Actually I do think the Number 1 need of the Chicago Bears going into next season is a decent PR coach who can explain to the coaches and players how to communicate with the press without looking like morons and frustrating everyone involved.
I've said before I think there is a PR policy in place in the organisation, that ends up hurting the relationship between the fans and the more prominent members of the Bears.
Other than that I agree "Getting off the bus running" was a dumb statement even when we had a running game.
You need to be able to both Pass and Run in this league.
Having said that I understand why it gets repeated. Because they are trying to reinforce the mantra that the Bears identity hasn't changed. Which is of course crap...
January 2, 2008
#37 WCPF said . . .I keep hearing people talking about getting rid of Grossman and signing Derick Anderson on the radio. Like Ive said before, Rex is a good QB that plays like a pro bowler at times. If we get a good line in front of him then he will play better. My buddy in sciece class in high school said why dont we sign Derick Anderson. I said if the Bears do then its a BAD move. Why do you guys think the Browns are trying to get rid of him? Because they know more than the other teams do about DA. they know that this will probably be DAs best year he will have and they want to get rid of him while he still has value so we are set at QB. Then when another team gets him, he underachieves and the Browns get a better deal.
As far as Brandon A. We should sign Hester first then sign BA.
Bill, we are playing week teams next year with our hardest games being @Indy and against the Jags. So I think it is very possible. We just need a good O-line and a backup saftey and then we can do it. I mean we cant be worse with that schedule.
Great post Jeff.
BEAR DOWN
in the offseasonJanuary 3, 2008
#38 WCPF said . . .Early word is that Martz is a candidate for the San Fran OC.
RT would have to be fired, then his contract (which is through 09?), would have to be eaten by the organization.
A few weeks ago I heard an interesting tidbit on ESPN 1000; apparently Lovie, RT and Babich all share the same agent. Which makes it a little intriguing when I see the 'fire Turner/Babich' posts.
Thoughts?
January 3, 2008
#39 Mike said . . .The more I think about this, if I'm Ted Phillips, I'm strongly considering talking to the aforementioned Mike Martz to gauge his interest, then make a decision on RT.
Although, could Lovie's and Martz' egos co-exist on the same team? Could Mike work under a coach that once worked under him?
Martz strikes me as a guy that would be reluctant to be in a situation like that.
Damn, you guys would be scary.....never mind....disregard the entire idea....don't do it....
January 3, 2008
#40 Maddux Boy said . . .Ron Turner will be back as Offensive Coordinator. It's already a feat de accompli in the mind of Lovie.
January 3, 2008
#41 Shady McBears Fan said . . .Ron Turner is coming back. Lovie Smith wants him back and that means he is coming back. Next subject.
The Bears aren't going to match the money other teams offer Brandon Ayanbadejo. Therefore he is as good as gone. Don't think for a minute he is going to accept a hometown discount or the like. He's going to go where the money is and who can blame him. The Bears are smart enough not to blow the salary cap out of whack on a special teamer. Next subject.
Lance Briggs is already out the door. Don't fall for all the melodrama from Briggs that he really wants to come back. The bidding for his services will go sky-high, to include a monstrous signing bonus as part of the package. No way Drew Rosenhaus advises one of his marquee clients to accept an inferior dollar offer from the Bears. Next subject.
Rex Grossman will be playing elsewhere in 2008. There are likely to be several teams interested in his services and willing to structure a deal that trumps a one-year incentive-laden deal that the Bears are willing to offer. Who can blame Grossman for wanting out of Chicago at the first chance. It's been a nightmarish five year marriage and he has been the whipping boy of the media and the fans. He'd have to be a sado-masachist to want to come back. Next subject.
Jerry Angelo needs to have the draft of his lifetime in April. He also needs to strike it rich with one or two free agents if there is any realistic hope of a rapid turnaround. The worst kept secret in football is that the Bears will be targeting an OT with the #14 pick.
January 3, 2008
#42 Rancid said . . .MB aka Mike
1. You can't trust anything Lovie says these days, it's a big freaking joke. Saying he expects to keep Turner around this time of year doesn't mean as much as you'd think. Besides, the decision isn't entirely his to begin with.
2. You say "The Bears are smart enough not to blow the salary cap out of whack on a special teamer." So you're telling me they wouldn't budge even for a guy like Devin Hester? The Bears know the strengths of this team lie on defense and special teams and aren't shy about it.
3. What makes you so sure the Bears wouldn't try to match an offer for Briggs? I wouldn't be surprised to see the organization take out an insurance policy on their aging middle linebacker (#54) and re-sign Lance Briggs.
4. Rex doesn't give a fuck about the media and the fans (at least what they think anyway) he just wants an opportunity to start, and he knows he'll get that chance from Angelo in Chicago. Berrian has been on record as vehemently supporting Grossman, so if Berrian stays, look for Grossman to stay as well. Of course the opposite could be true too. By the way, if Berrian goes then what? Moose as a #1? That can't happen.
5. You're right about the last one though. Angelo is gonna have to earn his money this off-season. He needs to pull a rabbit out of his ass. And that rabbit's name is Joe Flacco.
Anyway, stop being such a smart ass all the time Mike. Next subject. Wah wah wah.
January 3, 2008
#43 Phil from SATX said . . .We might have blown it with BA when we ditched his brother. The way we handled that one wasn't so professional. I thought we had the roster space to make it work. That would have been an insurance policy to keep BA. I think there is still a chance for his return. BA gets a lot of camera time because of Hester and the overall special teams excellence we have so I think that will be a factor in convincing him to stay. I say it's probably 60/40 in favor of him re-signing. I sure hope we keep him. He is so much more than a 3rd string linebacker.
January 3, 2008
#44 JB said . . .Shady, I agree with you, and not with the various shades of Mike. I think part of Lovie's shtick is yanking media chain. So he may not be lying all the time, but since he lies much of the time, it's impossible to know what he's really thinking.
I will say that as much fun as the last two (meaningless) games were, I will be an extremely angry fan if there are no significant coaching changes made. Again, I think that words to date mean nothing, but if Lovie happens to be telling the truth about thinking no major shakeup needs to occur, then to me HE'S the problem, and Angelo and Phillips too for getting hoodwinked by him. It would be extremely irresponsible of the management of this team to not make someone pay with their job after this disaster of a season, and one which had the tangible evidence of coaching missteps all over it. If it's not Lovie (which it won't be) it damn well better be the offensive coaching staff.
Two great games during meaningless time do not change a whole season's worth of bad personnel decisions and worse game planning and play calling. And I have this sick feeling about the last two games, and the reasonable playcalling and personnel deployment we saw in those games - my sick feeling is that it only went that way BECAUSE the games weren't meaningful - if the Bears still had a shot at the playoffs, no way would RT have been calling those plays and using those players. Because he believes that his "conservative" playcalling early in the season was the RIGHT playcalling, just not executed well by the players. That Moose and Berrian are his #1 and #2 receivers, so therefore they should get most of the balls. That you can't win any meaningful game without handing it off to your RB on first and second down. THOSE are the things he believes in, not screen passes to Wolfe and long balls to Bradley, halfback passes for touchdowns - that was the equivalent of preseason carnival attractions. Not "real football" in RT's mind.
If we get to next year with RT at the reins, we're going to get the exact same playcalling as that which led us to the bottom of the NFL this year.
Brendan Ayanbedjo is a leader of the best special teams unit in the league - agree that he will be back. Not that much money in the big picture.
I thought Briggs had a high probability of returning until I heard all those comments of teammates - so now it doesn't sound so likely. Which will suck big time. With the only solace of freeing up money for oline FA acquisitions, and paying DH and Ayan, and Rex.
Rex WILL be back, with all that happened throughout this year I think the BT all saw that the kid CAN improve in short periods of time and everybody sees his upside. And sees the flaws of the others.
To me, it's a 50/50 pick at 14 between Ryan Clady and Kenny Phillips. And I'm good with picking for either position at that pick.
Did you happen to read the great article prior to the Saints game about how top 10 picks can really hurt teams monetarily? Argues that the Bears were better off on all counts winning that last game. It was a great article, and a great take.
But everyone's right about the importance of this offseason, and I sure hope Angelo forces an offensive coaching change, if Lovie doesn't. Mike Martz would be great, and hopefully not a threat because he seems to be out of the running now for head coach positions.
January 3, 2008
#45 Rancid said . . .Mike Martz? Seriously guys, there is little to no chance that's going to happen. This is a Bob Sanders pipedream situation.
Regarding the BA contract. We're not talking about ridiculous sums of money and signing him would not prevent us from signing briggs or berrian. I don't have the financial records in front of me, but there is money for these guys if we want to do it. The only question is, do we want to do it. Again, we don't have big money tied into an elite QB or RB or WR so there is money out there.
As for resigning DH...well, obviously we'd all love to see that happen, but it's not common at all to renegotiate a rookie contract with 2 years left. The bigger preemptive resigning should come in the form of #91...remember that guy...the guy that made the probowl this year while coming back from an injury? yeah, TH has one year on the contract left...let's get him locked away.
January 3, 2008
#46 Mike said . . .Good stuff Phil. But I have to think we are screwed with RT. I probably hate the man at least as much as anyone else here but I am already attempting to prepare myself for his return. I think it is Lovie's arrogance. Firing him means he was wrong, and you know that Lovie's never wrong. All I can hope for is that 2 quality wins against teams for whom the games were not meaningless will be enough to show RT he should games that may more regularly. I really really hate the man. I think he probably has a great football mind, he just doesn't have the nuts to step and call a creative game. That's why we see the conservative bullshit.
The worst game of the season for me was the debacle against the Gmen (probably because here in NY I caught a ton of flak) where we came out with great playcalling, got a small lead, and then proceeded to go stupid conservative and try to hold them for the whole second half without scoring. If that's what I have to deal with all next year I might have to change my moniker to Kill Turner. But like I said, I've got to hope the last two games showed him sonething.
Concerning the pick, I think that Phillips is going to be gone by 14. I am therefore hoping we go with Clady as well. One solid LG in FA plus Clady and I consider the starting line fixed.
January 3, 2008
#47 Pissed Off said . . .Jerry Angelo press conference, 10:00 AM Thursday at Halas Hall.
January 3, 2008
#48 Mike said . . .From #36 Willie, I agree with a good O-line Rex, or any QB will be efficient. The reason I am excited and want Rex back is that I want to see a full season of Rex now that he has been benched and with a good O-line. Yeah in 2006 he started hot and later was inconsistent and made mistakes and had horrible games. We saw 100% improvement in consistency and Rex was DAMN GOOD after he came back from the benching. His numbers werent spectacular after he came back but thats cuz the team as a whole still sucked this year. I want to see Rex NOW for a full year after that benching. Skys the limit. I just hope no other teams see that.
In regards to your Derek Anderson comment. Romeo Crennel said he will listen to offers on Anderson. It might take a 1st and a 3rd rounder to get him as he is restricted and most teams wont give that for him so it will be less IMO. But the only reason that the Browns will get rid of him is because the have big bucks in Brady Quinn sitting there. Its like the Phillip Rivers/Drew Brees situation in San Diego a few years ago. The Browns absolutely wont have Brady Quinn sit for 3 or 4 more years and re-sign Derek, they HAVE TO let him go and get good return at other positions/draft picks for him. They also signed Dorsey (their 3rd string QB) to a 3 year deal. Thats unheard of for a 3rd string guy and teams just dont do that but they think he's the perfect guy to groom Quinn and mentor him. Anderson will not be a Brown next year and its NOT becuase he's not talented its becuase they HAVE to use Quinn. Their hands are tied.
Also nationally there is really no news that the Bears have any interest in Anderson (as they shouldnt IMO) or McNabb. These signs point to us re-signing Rex.
January 3, 2008
#49 Al in WI said . . .Details of the Jerry Angelo press conference via feed on WMVP AM 1000....
- No excuses for a crappy year
- On defense, injuries took a big toll
- On offense, our identity is as a running football team.
- Didn't run the ball effectively, far too many turnovers on offense, lousy on play action
- Special teams...need to continue with the great play
- Would like to keep all free agents, but have no control of what the market dictates- Reporter questions to Angelo...
1. Coaching staff....it's Lovie's call who his coaches are....Lovie wants all his coaches back.
2. QB position...need to get the position stabilized....would like Rex back, but the market will dictate if that is possible.
3. Lovie says the team is close...first order of business is getting things stablized (whatever that means!?!?)....work to be done this offseason....will look at things objectively, not emotionally.
4. Running game....very disappointing....need 2-3 plays per game for 20 plus yars....we are a running team that couldn't run....some of it has to do with personnel, some of it probably has to do with scheme.
5. Cedric Benson...like to think he can still be a feature back, but there will be competition in 2008....Benson started to turn the corner before getting hurt.
6. Penalties....big contributor to offensive woes....very disappointing performance by the o-line in this regard.
7. How do you bring back the free agents....the market will dictate what happens....feel confident that Jamar Williams and Mike Okwo can take over at linebacker....feel that there are other receivers who can step up if Bernard Berrian leaves
8. First order of business is identifying needs, then coming up with plan to fill needs. Before going after our own free agents.
9. Draft....like how it shakes out.
10. Nucleus...like the core already in place.
11. Franchise tag....won't rule out using it on Bernard Berrian
12. Mike Brown....won't count on him....at least several months away from being healthy to make an evaluation.
January 3, 2008
#50 Mike said . . .The Bears need to get Berrian back. I cannot see this offense getting better by dumping their most reliable threat two years in a row.
I realize Berrian had some devasting drops early in the season that probably changed the season as much as anyone. I go back to the Charger and Cowboy games when he dropped a Td, and didn't run his route on another td turned int. Had he played well we may have gotten one of those games at least, and the Grossman situation may have been different. So I understand the hesitation to give him the big money.
However, he is far and away the best offensive weapon on this team. There isn't a wide reciever on this team close to him right now, and losing him will knock the development of the offense back another couple of seasons.
The Bears have to bring him back.January 3, 2008
#51 Bill said . . .In the opinion of Tom Waddell, the following are "gone" probabilities...
Briggs....90%
Berrian....75%
January 3, 2008
#52 Phil from SATX said . . .Angelo is as much a fool as Lovie and they are starting to sound like McCaskey. There is no real plan here apparently. The market dictates what happens to their free agents - the Bears apparently have little say in it. The team was disappointing, and yet everybody will be back.
Does this make ANY sense to anyone?
January 3, 2008
#53 Megan said . . .Mike, thanks much for that synopsis. I think there are positive signs in there - he definitely is blaming "scheme" (read RT) for inability to run. Maybe that means that even if they keep RT, there will be more input and orders to use his creativity and players throughout the season, not just in the last 2 games.
Appropriate focus on offensive line, like the "bringing in competition" for Ced - and folks, he doesn't mean AP, who will be on the squad but as a 3rd option - (where does that leave Wolfe?)
All FA deals prefaced by the "let the market speak" which, let's face it, is the only appropriate stance.
Al, I disagree with you about Berrian. Just because he may be the best receiver on the squad right now doesn't make him indispensible - and I'm surprised to hear about the possibility of franchise tag for him, and assuming that's just pre-negotiation fodder. Can you imagine paying Berrian the average of top 5 receivers, even for one year?
There are other receivers out there who could do more for us than Berrian. I agree he came on at the end of the season, but this could have and should have been his breakout season, and it wasn't. Not worth top 10 money, and yet he may be offered it, and we'd be fools for playing along. If he leaves, we will have several holes, because I'm assuming Moose will be a casualty. But better to fill those with cheaper guys or more bonafide stars than the up and down Berrian. If allowed, I think Bradley will have a Berrian 2006 season next year. (I know Mike disagrees). And who knows what Hester's upside can be. Maybe Mike Hass will turn into this year's Wes Welker (undrafted free agent who becomes breakout star for the Patriots, a team who sees potential in players despite their draft status).
But it sounds like their focus is not that different from ours, with the possible exception of RT. Sounded like Angelo was taking responsibility and has his finger on the problem areas.
January 3, 2008
#54 Mike said . . .I just don't see how Angelo can say we are close. Is he talking about talent? Like we have the talent to be the team we should have been all season? If so, why didn't we?
I still think it all boils down to leadership, and then trickles down. If Lovie's posture is "we're fine just the way we are" then how is the rest of the coaching staff/team going to push ahead and improve, or at the very least, play to their potential?
Very Frustrating.
January 3, 2008
#55 B.A. Baracus said . . .A point of clarification. Angelo was irritated by the question on whether the Bears would apply the franchise tag to Bernard Berrian. Suffice to say, I'll be stunned if the Bears apply the tag to Berrian. Given the dearth of good receivers available on the free agent market I think it is foregone conclusion that Berrian is a goner. I won't fault the Bears for letting him walk. Let some other team severely overpay for his services.
A point that did irritate me??? The continuing ridiculous insistence that Cedric Benson can be a feature back. I hope when Angelo blathers on about "objective analysis" that includes the evaluation of Benson and the running game. Because from where I sit Benson is a bust who needs replacing. We need a true replacement, not simple competition.
January 3, 2008
#56 Papa Bear said . . .I actually tend to agree with Pissed Off on most of these issues. Although I am not a huge fan of Grossman, re-signing him and opening the position up to competition is the most prudent thing for the Bears to do right now.
As I stated earlier on this board, QB is not the most pressing problem on this team - even if the Bears had to go with Orton, they would be allright. The reality with this team is that the O Line is washed up and there are not enough genuine NFL caliber threats on offense outside of the TE position.
I personally do not expect a quick turn around for the Bears where they return to utter dominance. I do believe that they can compete and make the playoffs next year if Ange-blo addresses the most critical issues on this team right now.
Address the O Line first and then try to get as many playmakers on offense as possible. Also, move Tait over to the right side. The defense can hold the line for another year. Ange-blo can look to the later rounds for a QB or a safety to round out the offseason moves.
Finally, I could see Ange-blo taking a quality offensive skill position player with the 14th pick, but if he does, he better figure out a way to address the O Line with his remaining picks or with FA, or the Bears' ass is cooked in 2008!
January 3, 2008
#57 Mike said . . .If we re-up with BB, there's no way we're keeping Moose at his current salary. Not to be the #3 option behind BB and the TE package. Have to believe that Angelo is working on something...Either that or Moose makes this easy on everyone and just retires. With Lovie's talk of making Hester a full time receiver, he pretty much demoted Moose at the end of the season. Talk about one of our biggest disappointing free agent deals ever.
January 3, 2008
#58 Phil from SATX said . . .In my opinion Berrian and Moose are both goners. Devin Hester will be counted upon to step up. Ditto Mark Bradley (groan). The Bears will also draft a receiver in the 2nd or 3rd round and go after a veteran via free agency or trade (e.g., Marty Booker, Javon Walker).
I'm not saying I agree or disagree with this approach at wide receiver. Rather it's how I think the situation plays out.
January 3, 2008
#59 Pissed Off said . . .Megan, I like your reasoning. If the Bears are "close" on personnel but yet managed to compile a 7-9 record (really 5-9 plus 2 wins when they were fully out of it) - what other culprit could it be besides coaching?
But that's the elephant in the room that apparently won't get seen, at least until the room is fully destroyed.
Are the Bears close on personnel? I say, yes on special teams, yes on defense, no on offense. Not when there are question marks on offensive line, QB, wide receiver and running back (and, of course, OC). Can all those get fixed in an offseason? Probably not, it's a lot of moving parts in that equation.
But can the offense improve from bottom of league status? Definitely. Can that improvement, coupled with world class special teams and a defense that returns to top quarter status, mean a playoff run? Absolutely! Super Bowl? Probably not, but maybe if Peyton Manning and Tom Brady go down together on a puddlejumper in Hawaii. Who knows?
Because I lack faith in this overall coaching staff, my guess for next year is not pretty. Then if it's another underachieving season, I think all the coaches are surely gone, if not Angelo too. But I'll keep my fingers crossed nonetheless, and look forward to the rebuilding of our offensive line and hopefully a new RB to root for, and the regaining of health on D.
And of course, Devin Hester, who makes all that's dismal about our team a little more bearable.
January 3, 2008
#60 Phil from SATX said . . .But Phil if all those problems exist on offense and we were successful in 2006 with THE SAME EXACT GROUP (turner, Rex, Ced BB all of em plus Hester now and Olsen), which we certainly were, how are we SOOO far off according to you?? All we are missing is TJ.
January 3, 2008
#61 Al in WI said . . .The two biggest differences there are the decline of the offensive line as a whole and loss of TJ, which we now know was a disastrous decision. Also, Moose was more productive in 2006 than he was this year, as was Berrian. So those are 3 of the 5 areas I cited - Oline, RB and wide receiver (considering that either one or both of those guys are almost sure to be gone). Rex can do great with a better line, a better running game, receivers who get open and catch the ball, and better play calling. So he's last on the list for me - if we can reach agreement on a deal.
January 3, 2008
#62 Bill said . . .Phil, if Rex had not gotten hurt Berrian would have ended up with a couple more td's and 1,110-1,200 yard season. Which is pretty good in this offense. He had a poor start of the year which really hurt the team, but I have to wonder if the blame for that should go on Angelo for allowing Rex and Bernard to enter the year without extensions.
I cannot see how this offense could possibly be better with Bernard Berrian.
Mark Bradley is the most talented wide out on the team, but so what? He's always hurt, and is very inconsistant. You cannot count on him to be your number one reciever. Mabey #2 across from Berrian, and that would be less risky than #1. At this point Mark Bradley is Justin Gage. A guy who showed some flashes early and became a folk hero after that with the fan base.
Devin Hester is not a #1 reciever either, and I don't really expect him ever to be. In order to be a #1 he'd have to be able to block, catch tough passes over the middle, and have consistant hands. He's not done that, and that's ok. He is a niche reciever.
If the Bears really supported and loved Rex Grossman as much as some fans claim they would surround him with a supporting cast that is up to par. And for the second time in his career letting his best threat go is not the way to do that.January 3, 2008
#63 Megan said . . .It's going to be a looooooonnnnngg
offseason.January 3, 2008
#64 PolygonHell said . . .Phil/PO'd
Yes, the o-line. We have been bitching about that o-line for most of the season. We ALL agree that defense and special teams are not the focal point of problems. Yes, we had almost the same line-up offensively in '06. BUT we mixed up TJ and Ced, too. Can we use the same plot with Ced and AP or Wolf?? Why not? If we are going to keep Ced, like it looks like we will be. Let's confuse defenses with our mix-it-up running game, like we did in '06. However, do you think we utilized Olsen enough in '07? It's back to play calling/offensive strategy. If we had the tools, why didn't we use them? I think it's because we had to play conservatively due to the o-line and because RT needs to get his head out of his ass?
January 3, 2008
#65 Phil from SATX said . . .Given Turner was staying, it's pretty much what you would expect, at this point.
Would like to resign Grossman but it might not be possible.
Would like to resign other free agents, but will depend on the market.
Running game underperformed, would like some competition for Benson, but thought he played better before getting hurt.The most interesting statements, were the emphasis on coaching decisions being Lovies, and on suggesting that the offensive scheme was partially responsible for the running game problems.
If you wanted to read between the lines on that (which is always dangerous) you could easilly surmise he wasn't happy with Turners offense this season.
It's less than a week after the end of the Season, free agency ins still 2 months away, so I wouldn't have expected any real concrete plans at this point.
January 3, 2008
#66 Mike said . . .Still not agreeing with you, Al. Lack of extensions to Rex and Berrian had nothing to do with poor performance, and in fact should have led to the opposite, all things equal. I'm not saying I want Berrian off the team, I'm saying I am 100% against the major overpaying it's going to require. We can find someone else. Rex is good enough and accurate enough to get it to many different receivers, and we already have two who can streak.
I also object to the characterization of Bradley as "the next Justin Gage." Gage couldn't catch the ball, and pretty much still can't, not consistently. Bradley has not been given enough of a chance, for whatever reason we can't know but I personally put my money on RT establishing the depth chart. Bradley may not be as good as Berrian, but he's sure better than what he's been given a chance to show. And Berrian was horribly inconsistent in the first half of this season.
Just saying don't overpay the man, and that means lose him, because someone will overpay. We already have two guys who can stretch the field, we need a possession receiver free agent and another later round fast rookie.
January 3, 2008
#67 Al in WI said . . .Mark Bradley has been in the league 3 years and accomplished zilch. Safe to say he has been a major bust, especially for being a former 2nd round pick.
January 3, 2008
#68 Phil from SATX said . . .Phil, playing in a contract year doesn't alway produce the best results. Just because in some cases it does, doesn't mean every player will respond the same way.
I feel that in Berrian's case he was distracted by his contract status and that contributed to a lack of focus. Of course that is his fault and should be held accountable for it, but I think Jerry should have locked him up early because it would have been cheaper, and these issues could have been avoided.
I think in Rex's case he was already under too much pressure as it was to start the season. IMO this caused him and Berrian to press too much.
When they both seemed to relax later in the year, they played much better.
I hope Bradely doesn't become the next Gage, but I have too wonder. He's been here 3 years and has done what exactly? Had 3 or 4 good games, and gotten 3 or 4 serious leg injuries. I just think it's too much to count on the guy at this point much beyond a #2. I think the coaching staff doesn't like him, but mainly because they think they can't trust him because of his injuries and apparent inability to recover in timely fashion.
I think the Bears F'd themselves on this situation. I don't want them to over pay for Berrian but I think they have no choice because they didn't take care of this sooner.January 3, 2008
#69 Mike said . . .Agree with the injury side of Bradley - he's definitely one of the charter members of the Bears' Frequent Injury Club, with Mike Brown, Dusty Dvoracek, Tommie Harris, Nathan Vasher. However, the injuries have been the reason he's produced so little, not lack of talent. THIS year he wasn't injured, and it was a coaching crime that they didn't go to him earlier, because Moose and Berrian were NOT producing.
Instead, staff just waited and waited to see if things would get better with their declared starters. They didn't, and the idiots waited long enough to ensure that we wouldn't make the playoffs.
I'm not saying that had they played Bradley earlier we'd be in the playoffs. I AM saying that sticking to things that weren't working, and quickly abandoning things that were working, was the hallmark of the offense this year. Unlike the D side of the ball, which at least experimented (usually disastrously) with different personnel combinations, the only personnel changes that weren't forced by injury on O was the QB change, and rechange. Not until it was WAY too late - otherwise RT's MO was stand pat with performers who weren't performing.
That was inexcusable, and Mark Bradley is one of the guys that still hasn't been given enough of a chance while healthy.
January 3, 2008
#70 DTB said . . .Heavens to mergatroid. Blaming Ron Turner for the failures of Mark Bradley??? I suppose we should go back in time and blame John Shoop for the failure of David Terrell while were at it.
The failure of Bradley is a reflection on Jerry Angelo and his player personnel department.
January 3, 2008
#71 Bill said . . .What makes Bradley a failure? The fact that he has contributed well every single time his number has been called? Or maybe that he and Berrian play the same position in the offense. Its generally Moose and B2 or Devin. And yes it is RT who has kept him on the bench. Personel groupings are set by play calling, play calling is done by RT. If we are to get on RT for not using Hester or Olsen enough why is it that we cant say the same for Bradley? Every time I have seen Mark Bradley, I've asked myself the same question. Why doesn't this get get more PT? He will next year, I guarantee you that.
January 3, 2008
#72 Al in WI said . . .Coaches are usually unforgiving when a player takes it too easy in practice. I'm not saying that's what happened with Bradley - but it's possible. It just sets the wrong tone if a guy is going through the motions in practice and then gets rewarded with playing time on Sunday. Again, maybe that wasn't Brad;ey, but I suspect it was.
So by that logic, I wonder if Benson practiced hard and then failed in the games? OR maybe he failed in practice too but gave enough effort. Or maybe there is a double standard for "franchise backs".
I suspose we could read between the lines and conclude that Angelo wanted Turner gone but Lovie talked him out of it. We coudl go even further and say that the Lovie watch starts now - Lovie is making all the calls on the coachign staff, says they are close, convinced Angelo - now he either delivers or...
Or we go through all of this again next year.
January 3, 2008
#73 Mike said . . .Bill, you may be on to something there. I was formally on the Bradley bandwagon for a couple of seasons. WhenI emailed Mullin of the Trib to ask why he didn't get more playing time his answer was telling. Basically he said that last year Mark took 6 weeks or so to recover from a lower ankle sprain. The coaches felt he was dogging it, and took about 3 weeks longer to recover then he should have.
Phil, I agree with that statement you made. I think there is no excuse he didn't get more playing time this season, especially for Moose.
I just think it's a different discussion to talk about him battling for #2 as compared to replacing the best reciever on the team.January 3, 2008
#74 RandomName said . . .Good grief. Now some of you are trying to read between the lines and make ridiculous statements like Jerry Angelo really wants Ron Turner gone?!?! Turner's job security has obviously yet to be an issue at Halas Hall. Turner is being retained based on Lovie's assessment. And everything coming out of Angelo's mouth suggests zero controversy.
So please o' please boys and girls, lets put this fucking Ron Turner thing to bed. Like it or not the man is the offensive coordinator of this football team and has the support of the organization. His job security has never been an issue at Halas Hall.
And if some of you want to blame Ron Turner for the fact that Mark Bradley has shown zilch in three seasons, then by all means go right ahead. Lovie and Turner don't have a hidden agenda. If they thought Bradley could be a quality producer then he would have been on the fucking football field producing over the course of the last three fucking years. It's not exactly as if he was behind Randy Moss, Terrell Owens and Jerry Rice on the fucking depth chart !!!!
January 3, 2008
I agree we need to keep Brenden around. bernard berrian is a great receiver in my eyes, we should sign him back too. briggs is good but i think we got some good traits with the new guy(forgot his name).
other than that RIP Terry Armour, who passed away before the new year. a radio personality with tons of personality and a tribune columnist.
January 7, 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.