(2) Tell me - as a Bears fan - you can read today's column on Da Site about Marty Booker's return and not feel a little happy to have 86 back in the navy and burnt. Booker belongs here.
"Hackett is one of the most attractive remaining free agents in a market that is already painfully shallow. He played in only six games last year due to a lingering ankle injury, but caught 32 passes for 384 yards and three touchdowns. Those totals project to a more than serviceable 85 receptions for 1,024 yards and eight touchdowns had he played in all 16 games."
(2) Rotoworld has Bryant Johnson visiting Tennessee today and describes the overall reception to the receiver as "lukewarm." I like Johnson as a player and think the Bears can't go wrong by putting as many bodies in camp as possible. Hackett just seems to have more upside.
Now that the Cardinals have locked up receiver Larry Fitzgerald at a more affordable (or, as the case may be, less unaffordable) price over the next four seasons, they might have to deal with another thorny issue at the position.
According to Adam Schefter of NFL Network, Anquan Boldin could want more money and/or a trade in the wake of Fitzgerald's $10 million-per-year contract.
Per Schefter, some in the Cardinals organization actually regard Boldin as the better wideout. But Boldin will make far, far less than Fitzgerald over the next three seasons -- he's due to earn base salaries of $2.5 million, $2.75 million, $3 million.
In our view, Fitzgerald and Boldin together is a luxury that the Cardinals don't need, especially with coach Ken Whisenhunt presumably trying to bring a Pittsburgh-style power running vibe to the desert.
Assuming that the Cardinals have a plan (which could be a dangerous assumption because we're talking about, you know, the Cardinals), the huge deal given to Fitzgerald should be regarded as evidence that they've opted to keep Fitzgerald over the long haul, and to get what they can for Boldin.
Throw in the fact that Boldin is represented by Drew Rosenhaus, and the stage is set for Boldin to start making noise about moving on.
Possible destinations are Philly, Dallas, and the Redskins.
#2 Start Olsen said . . .I think all Bears fans should be in favor of either guy unless they haven't signed because they're looking for a Javon Walker type contract. If one of them can be gotten reasonably, we should do it. I saw somewhere yesterday that we still have about 22 million in cap room.
March 12, 2008
#3 Shady McBears Fan said . . .good point on Hester and Olsen. Throw in Dez and Bradley if he is healthy, maybe Wolfe, and we have some weapons IF they can be properly used.
Last year, Hester only got the ball in predictable situations, and Olsen flashed a ton of talent in his limited time and was rewarded with... limited time. Wolfe was used wrong most of the time as well.March 12, 2008
#4 Matt said . . .Remember how much hype was surrounding Hester and Olsen in mini camp?
All of those predictions would only come true IF the Bears could run the football. They can't.
Everybody and their brother knows the talent those two have, but the Bears won't be able to see it unless they can run the football and protect the QB. The fact is, up until this point, the Bears have done nothing to address this problem. Having to rely on the draft to fill such a critical position is a sign that the Bears are re-building. Which pretty much tells me, unless the D can carry us on it's back again, this team isn't going to a SB in '08. I just don't see the effort from JA to WIN NOW. His actions (or lack thereof) have everyone lowering their expectations two years after playing in a Super Bowl.
I'm glad to see Booker return, he could certainly be a piece of the puzzle. But he is not the answer to (one of) the question(s) staring Chicago in the face: Who is the #1 WR? BJ and DJ are still on the market, and you can bet they will command a high price tag. They Bears would rather spend that sort of money on keeping some of their own.
March 12, 2008
#5 jeff said . . .From what I understand, the problem is that Hester may not be bright enough to grasp the offense. I seem to remember Bears receivers directing Hester on where to go before some plays last year
March 12, 2008
#6 Al in WI said . . .hester's not bright and neither of those players was expected to be a dominant offensive weapon last year. hester isn't the brightest but he has a year - a full human year - to learn where to run when he hears certain words. if he can't do it, he can't do it.
March 12, 2008
#7 PolygonHell said . . .Shady, really well said.
March 12, 2008
#8 jeff said . . .Hester certainly isn't articulate, but I wouldn't jump to the conclusion he's not bright.
The Bears WR coach has jumped to his defense on this front a couple of times. Moose did show Hester where to line up on a few plays but he was the outside reciever in hurry up at the time. The other critiscism was of him not breaking off a route in a blitz situation, but according to the coaching staff he did the right thing given the reaction of the corner. In the end we can only speculate on the exact circumstances.
I think if Hester fails to develop as a WR it won't be because of what's between his ears. Clearly the coaching staff and Management have some level of faith in him to be successful.
March 12, 2008
#9 AfroCelt said . . .anybody got faith in them?
March 12, 2008
#10 jeff said . . .I seem to remember the problem with Olsen wasn't his awesome catching ability but his mediocre blocking. I'm betting he'll be an elite TE if he just gets that down.
as far as Hester (Skunk?), I just don't want to see him go down in game one....he's such a weapon on special teams.
March 12, 2008
#11 jdawg said . . .i've added the pft quote above. if boldin is really available, this is arguably the best receiver in the conference and the bears should call drew and get thee done.
March 12, 2008
#12 Phil from SATX said . . .I'm not going to dig for my old post about Boldin and Fitz, but a local sports talk show host, Dave Ragone, asked some DB's on his team (Texans, I beleive at the time) who the better receiver was when they played the Cards. Answer: Boldin. hands down, not even close. These were the guys playing against them.
At least it makes me feel better about Bears management that the Cards could fuck this up this badly. This would be like paying Dusty 3X what Tommy gets. crazy.
But, we will not be paying ANY receiver 10 mil. a year this year.
March 12, 2008
#13 Pissed Off said . . .I don't buy the "Hester Dumb" concept. He may not be the brightest guy on the Bears, but I was swayed by that article quoting the receivers coach. First of all, the receiver position is not an easy one to learn on the fly. Second, Hester has been asked to do more different things since he's come here than anyone. It's pretty obvious from his college background that he was never used very much in one position, and to the extent he was, it wasn't wide receiver. Guys like Berrian have been playing the position all their lives, and yet you still saw him running wrong routes - did we accuse him of being dumb when it happened?
Hester is a football player, and a great one. He'll get the calls down. I don't know if he'll turn into a great receiver, because that's just a complete unknown since he hasn't played it. But I'm not buying that some of the misadventures we saw last year was because he's dumb.
Can you imagine if we got Boldin? What a coup that would be - Booker and Boldin and Hester and Bradley, coupled with GO and Des. They should certainly go balls out on this one. Afterward we can all go pray at the altar of Jerry, for being smart and waiting to see what shakes out. We know the teams that signed Berrian and Walker and resigned Moss are out of the mix.
Very interesting about the lack of news about Johnson and Hackett. I think now, the longer they wait, the worse it is for them. Even though there are still teams looking, their price is dropping by the day. Would take either one, but Boldin? That would be a MONSTER deal for us.
March 12, 2008
#14 jeff said . . .Fitzgerald is the better WR. Boldin is terrific yes but he's not as good as Fitz, plus Fitz is younger. Would I want Boldin on my team, hell yeah but at what cost? I think Bryant Johnson had a hard time getting on the field with those two and an even harder time getting thrown to. Boldin is going to cost too much in my mind.
Glad to see you've come around on Hackett Jeff, he's the guy with more upside than Johnson and I'd love to have him.
I cant really speculate if Hester is "dumb" or what the deal is. I think more of it would be the fact that the staff only put him in rare situations last year and it was predictable. What we really need to do is have him be our #2 WR. Thats it. Then its not certain he's gettting the ball every time he steps on the field. Using him only as a decoy in certain sets last year failed miserably. Thing is, I dont know if he's good enough to be a #2. If not we'll be seeing the same garbage we saw last year where he came in for predictable situations and failed time after time.
Greg O on the other hand should breakout this year. He is certainly a top 5 TE in this league if he plays to his ability. Only Vernon Davis is faster than he is at the TE position in the NFL and GO has great hands. The blocking thing will work out fine in time.
What we need to do is commit to players on offense. I am so sick of trying to get everyone involved just a little bit and failing. This offense is not talented enough to be doing that. They try to do two TE sets cuz the value Dez......screw it, just put GO in and let Dez sit if need be....dont force a two TE set if the offense is going to suck just to get a so called playmaker involved.
Same with the WRs. Either use Hester a lot consistently or not at all. Use Bradley consistently or not at all, same with Davis etc. Dont put these guys in for one or two plays a game cuz you think their such great playmakers...that fails, just look at Bradley and Hesters numbers from last year. If you think their that great use them for an entire half or a whole game.March 12, 2008
#15 Pissed Off said . . .i love devin hester but the very few people i know who were at miami when he was there say his intelligence was coming knowledge. as for boldin, god would that be great. a boy can dream, cant he?
March 12, 2008
#16 JB said . . .Did that Jamaal Charles, RB Texas, play with Ced at all? Like when he was a freshman? Just curious. Cuz you know if we drafted that guy and they did play together Benson will try to be a vet to him and show he's the man etc. Maybe that would motivate him to kick it in the ass and stop being such a turd. Although I dont know if anything can motivate Ced at this point.
March 12, 2008
#17 Al in WI said . . .I like anquan boldin a lot, and i'd love a move to bring him in. I don't care if he's better or equal to or not as good as fitzgerald, the fact he's in the conversation is impressive because they're both very talented.
As far as our receiving corps...I think we're going to be solid. Olsen is going to be a beast this year, booker will be solid and hester will outrun everyone on the field. I don't know why, but I have a lot more confidence in the receiving corps right now than, say, the offensive line or the running back situation. To be honest, I'd say that WR/TE is the strength of the offense right now....although I realize that's saying next to nothing.
March 12, 2008
#18 Al in WI said . . .I would absolutely love a deal to bring in Boldin. To me it would change the whole tone of this offseason. That said, if this offseason has taught me anything, it is that the Bears won't even consider it, because they are approaching this season as a year of transition. A playoff year? Hopefully, and probably, but not a year to make a Super Bowl run.
If they viewed this as year to make a real push they would have scored a FA or two by now that could really make an impact.
How else can you defend a team with major holes at gaurd, tackle, and saftey doing absolutely nothing to address them. To say nothing about the bargin basement approach to reciever and running back right now. All of these issues exist with in the ballpark of $25 million in cap room.
Yes I know they're busy patting themselves on the back for saving the McCaskey's money, and how smart they are for doing so. Bullshit! That's just trying to rationalize their failures and mask their intent or rebuilding.
Bringing Boldin would be an excellent move, and would jump expectations quite a bit. But at this point, I'm betting they won't even pick up the phone.March 12, 2008
#19 KidronJesse said . . .I would absolutely love a deal to bring in Boldin. To me it would change the whole tone of this offseason. That said, if this offseason has taught me anything, it is that the Bears won't even consider it, because they are approaching this season as a year of transition. A playoff year? Hopefully, and probably, but not a year to make a Super Bowl run.
If they viewed this as year to make a real push they would have scored a FA or two by now that could really make an impact.
How else can you defend a team with major holes at gaurd, tackle, and saftey doing absolutely nothing to address them. To say nothing about the bargin basement approach to reciever and running back right now. All of these issues exist with in the ballpark of $25 million in cap room.
Yes I know they're busy patting themselves on the back for saving the McCaskey's money, and how smart they are for doing so. Bullshit! That's just trying to rationalize their failures and mask their intent or rebuilding.
Bringing Boldin would be an excellent move, and would jump expectations quite a bit. But at this point, I'm betting they won't even pick up the phone.March 12, 2008
#20 Pissed Off said . . .I think most people would agree that they would love to add Boldin. I know I certainly would, but we haven't even began to speculate what that would cost us...
March 12, 2008
#21 KidronJesse said . . .Yeah the Boldin thing probably wont happen but its fun to dream. Just like I dream about what it would be like to have Tomlinson or Chad Johnson or Peyton Manning.
March 12, 2008
#22 DTB said . . .this is also from Rotoworld...
The Arizona Republic's Kent Somers does not believe WR Anquan Boldin will be traded.
Somers speaks glowing about Boldin, calling him the "soul of the team" and more of a leader than Larry Fitzgerald. When the Cardinals speak to college scouts, they hold up Boldin as the ideal template for players they want. Regardless of trade possibilities, agent Drew Rosenhaus will want a new deal.March 12, 2008
#23 jeff said . . .Po'd, for the first time in all my blogging here, I am full disagreement with you on something. Though I will agree that Turner's futile attempts at creating sub packages failed miserably a year ago, I still think that we have players that, if used correctly can enhance the capabilities of our offense. The thing that Turner has a hard time with is creating tempo and rythm in his playcalling. In my opinion he is too reactionary. Instead of forcing a defense to adapt to what the Bears are doing, we call on situational packages that are dictated by down and distance. The key, in my opinion is disguising what you are attmempting to do. If Turner can figure out that he can mismatch personel within similar packages, our offense would be explosive. And in my opinion, I feel that the 2 TE set, hands down provides us the ability to create big plays all year long in '08.
March 12, 2008
#24 Pissed Off said . . .i read the somers bit but i think drew and quan don't want to be second fiddle there...and if the cards can get picks now, they'll deal him. if you were told right now that there's a guaranteed rookie pro bowl-caliber receiver in the first round available at #14, would you take him? you would. boldin is that. i'd give up the pick and take my chances in 2 and 3 on the o-line.
March 12, 2008
#25 JB said . . .You're free to your opinion and to disagree with me but I stand by my sentiments. I guess in reading your post there I dont see where you disagree with me except on the two TE set. In fact I think you make my point pretty well for me. Its true, the sets arent disguised and therefore they dont work, thats my point. You cant possibly argue with what I said before about all these things not working cuz last year that was proved. I do think that if it can be disguised and whatnot it could work but up till now it hasnt...at all. I can come around on your two TE sets theory cuz I love GO and Dez, both are great possession guys, etc and give us a great chance to pick up some yardage but I still think it needs to be done more consistently or not at all. You know what I mean? Lets do the two TE sets for 2 out of every three downs for like the whole first or second half or something.
March 12, 2008
#26 KidronJesse said . . .DTB, that's the first time you've disagreed with PO'd? wow.
jeff...i'm with you. they can have the 14th pick for boldin, no question about it.
March 12, 2008
#27 KidronJesse said . . .if it's Boldin for the just the 14th, I would do that trade. It's been a long time since we had a Pro-Bowl WR, and it would help make a mismatch out of GO and Skunk... as well as taking some of the pressure off of our QB's and our new running back (Shaun Alexander?)
I agree wholeheartedly with the concept that if a pro-bowl receiver was there at 14 we would take him in a heartbeat, so why not make that trade.
I don't think JA will make the call though. Maybe somebody should send pass him a note in study hall...
March 12, 2008
#28 jeff said . . .The more I think about it, the more I like it.
Angelo has a terrible record of offensive draft picks... And this year we clearly need an offensive focus. So let's make sure we get a value for our 14. And this way, we get a player ready to contribute immediately. We get the O-Line with the 2nd and 3rd picks, sign Shaun Alexander, draft a safety in the 4th.... and we call it a day. Next year, we go running back early. And, if Rex can't get it done, we go QB early next year too.
March 12, 2008
#29 JAB said . . .VERY VERY RARELY do teams ask for more than a first round pick for any player not in the restricted free agent situation and the cards wouldn't. the bears can get him, i'm betting, right now for that. the cards were handcuffed in free agency by the fitz deal and this pick would enable them to get better immediately.
March 12, 2008
#30 KidronJesse said . . .I seem to remember the great Tom Brady looking very average if not bad in the super bowl because his offensive line couldn't block the Mack truck that was the New York Giants front four. Offensive line is the key and the Bears need it badly. The 14th pick presents the chance to get a good looking prospect in which is not available to fill in free agency. I can't stress enough how important a good offensive line is to having a great offense.
March 12, 2008
#31 Pissed Off said . . .It's true. And with Ken Wisenhunt looking to make the team a tough, run oriented team, he would go into the draft with the 14th and 16th pick. That would allow him to take Rashard Mendenhall and upgrade their line.
Or they could use the second pick to plug a major whole at CB with Mike Jenkins at 14, or they if Malcolm Kelly slips, they have a high value pick and replacement at WR for Boldin.
I think this trade is good for both teams, which is rare.
March 12, 2008
#32 KidronJesse said . . .Thats right JB, great minds think alike. Its not that inconceivable. Remember you and I used to agree on everything too until you did a 180 on one specific issue.
March 12, 2008
#33 JAB said . . .I realize the need for OL, but, since this is a deep draft for Oline, that also means that when teams draft value picks at Oline, they are likely to cut some of the medium to high priced veterans. This means that, after the draft, we might be able to add a couple value free agents.
And, I still think you can find productive lineman in the 2nd and 3rd.
March 12, 2008
#34 "Wiseass" said . . .I agree that quality lineman can be found in the 2nd round or later but how many of those guys come in and start and are effective their first year. I'm just asking because I bet those 2nd/3rd rounders aren't as most first rounders.
March 12, 2008
#35 "Wiseass" said . . .I think it would be great to get a receiver like Boldin, but not at the cost of our first round pick. We need to pick a o-lineman that can make an immediate impact. Otherwise it really won't matter who's throwing, catching, or running the ball. It all starts with the line.
March 12, 2008
#36 Duff Diggler said . . .Please stop with all the Alexander talk. He is not what he was. He is old, unreliable, and a shell of his former self. A young running back is what we need. I just don't see Alexander lighting a fire under Benson's ass the way a rookie could.
March 12, 2008
#37 AfroCelt said . . .The way I see it is that.....
.....due to our lack of activity in this offseason, that 14th pick we talk about is the only thing keeping our team from having to use a defibrillator!!!
Yeah, it's great we signed Briggs....
...and It was probably the best choice to lock Rex back up. He has unfinished business, and the fact of the matter is; none of us really want him to fail! We just want what we deserve. That is: a stable, productive QB (at least once in our lifetime....)
.....but to talk about trading the 14th for Boldin is f***ing crazy!!! Don't get me wrong, I love him! But we just signed 2 WRs! I know neither of them are #1s, but maybe Bradley is..... Maybe Hester is..... plus we'll probably still get one in the middle of the draft.....
Fabiano is on about Hester and Olsen. That potential is begging to be unveiled! It's just a matter of RTs plays being pulled out of his head, or his ass (hard to tell the difference sometimes)....
I think the only question left in the WR hunt is: Who do we draft (1 pick, between late third to fifth round)....
Anquan Boldin....
Jason Taylor....Pipe dreams!!!!
Focus people!
OFFENSIVE LINE
RUNNING BACK
QUARTER BACK
SAFETYMarch 12, 2008
#38 Duff Diggler said . . .O-line is the key...I completely agree with JAB.
Without a solid O-line, you can have Joe Montana, Walter Payton, Moss and Jerry Rice in your skill positions and you still won't have a top tier offense. No matter how good a skill player is, he can't move fast enough to dodge 3-4 mean quick d-linemen who are essentially unblocked.
I think my DT roots are showing :P
March 12, 2008
#39 Pissed Off said . . .The Bears refusing to make any kind of splash is probably the primary reason for all this crazy talk in the first place!!! We're running out of material!!!
March 12, 2008
#40 jeff said . . .You're all either on something or onto something. I truly hope one of the top 2 left tackles are left in the draft at #14. We need to draft that guy. This should be a sure 1st year productive starter. Then, barring injury we have New rookie LT, Olin, Garza, Tait, Beekman etc. Really if we get a top flight LT at 14, we can probably plug guys in to make this line good. With Olin being a good base in the middle and the two tackles being solid, effective guards should be easy to come by. Hopefully on day two we draft another two lineman and hopefully at least one works out.
I cant wait for draft day! Its kinda shitty that we have to look forward to an O-lineman right away instead of the fancy new QB, RB or WR but we all know what we need. In the later rounds there are still a lot of good skill people to be found, like RB. I cant wait to see who we draft after that #14 offensive lineman.
March 12, 2008
#41 Pissed Off said . . .the problem with the "pipe dreams" (iceman cometh) is that they're doable! these are players that seem to be available and would make the bears better. you can't hold out for positions that are NOT available. draft who you want but i'm a firm believer that the draft rarely makes you immediately better. look at how the bears under-used olsen this season. anybody brought in will inevitably be bears red-shirted or wasted. (hester, of course, the rookie exception - but he did that on his own)
March 12, 2008
#42 said . . .If you click the link (my name) it takes you to a couple of clips regarding Jeff Otah. I think this guy is who I'm going to officially hitch my wagon to. Three or four O-lineman might go before we pick but this is the guy I think I like. Obviously Jake Long is the stud be he for sure wont be around. Next up is Clady, Williams and Otah and I like Otah. It would be so cool to have a guy with his quickness, and youth to be playing at such a key position, and he's a monster.
March 12, 2008
#43 Phil from SATX said . . .You could give up the 14th pick to get Boldin - as long as you packaged picks to move up to take one of the stud tackles. Otherwise you've probably wasted one expensive year of Boldin. But the concept of whether a Pro Bowl receiver who is only going into his 6th year is worth a #14 is pretty simple to me - there's a good chance that if the Bears weren't in such dire need for Oline they'd consider a WR with the 14th pick, and a guaranteed Pro Bowl level receiver is so many kinds of better over an unproven 14th round pick who can easily bust (one of the easiest positions to bust at) - well worth it.
I also would like to dispel a notion that's popular (even if I once supported it myself) - that of picking a QB in the 3rd round (or 2nd). 2008 is the year for determining whether Grossman will be our QB of the future. If he's not, Orton will get a fleeting chance to prove the same. If these guys fail, 2008 offseason is the year to draft or trade for a franchise QB.
Therefore, we should NOT spend a 3rd round pick on any QB in this draft. We NEED a guy with that pick who will help us THIS YEAR. None of the QB guys we'll have a chance at picking in the 3rd round should be someone we feel good about hanging the franchise on. The general concensus is this is NOT a good year for QBs. We fall in love with the tastiest morsel of the slim pickings - that doesn't make them better than they actually are.
Go ahead and use a 4th rounder plus on a QB (actually I'd prefer a 5th). But all four of those first 3 round picks are spoken for in Oline, RB, WR, and safety. Don't throw one of those important picks away on an iffy QB who will definitely not help us next year.
Let's face it - if Rex falls on his face next year, we're dead. Okay, for the Orton lovers out there, if both Rex and Orton falls on their face next year, we're dead. Then it's balls out for a QB. But don't waste it this year, I beg of you Jerry. Chad Henne and the like will NOT help us in 2008.
March 12, 2008
#44 Phil from SATX said . . .#42 was me.
March 12, 2008
#45 Pissed Off said . . .I'll also add that I no longer believe we should add a safety with the first four - I'll reiterate - to take maximum advantage of a draft that is unusual in its depth for oline IN THE EXACT SAME YEAR THAT WE HAVE THAT AS GREATEST NEED - we need to use TWO high picks for lineman. The other two for RB and WR.
2008 will be a referendum year on the likes of Mike Brown's health (actually the results are already in) and the promising Kevin Payne and B. McGowan. With Briggs' return and a great Dline the BT can be excused for feeling that we COULD be okay at safety with the guys we currently have. If that doesn't work, then that will be a top need inked in for offseason '08.
March 12, 2008
#46 Phil from SATX said . . .Wouldnt it be sweet if Branden Albert fell to us for our 2nd pick? Wont happen but the word is that he can play tackle as well. The only reason he's projected as a late 1st rounder is becuase he's listed as a guard and not a tackle. It'd be nice to have a versatile guy like that. I wouldnt care if we used both of our 1st two picks on OLine.
March 12, 2008
#47 said . . .That's what I want to happen too. Still think if we could get Albert plus (Otah/Clady/Williams/Cherilus/Baker) our line would be transformed overnight. Go ahead and take the RB in the first 3rd - Ray Rice or someone will be there. But you'll have to give up something to do that because Albert isn't worth a 14th pick but will be gone by the 23rd pick - and he really needs to be considered a guard, not a tackle.
I'd love to put two huge guys on the right and keep Tait and move Garza to the left (or maybe he gets beaten by Beekman) - we'd become a monster running team to the right regardless of who was back there (even though his name is practically a dirty word now, if you think back to before you hated him, Ced was running decently to the right, and that was with Miller and Garza - at least I remember runs to the right were the only time he would ever get yards). Think of the play action when teams have trouble stopping us to the right with two young strong hosses over there, even when they know the run's coming. Remember that run blocking is easier than pass protection by a long shot - better for rookies - and most teams and right handed RBs run better to their right than left.
March 12, 2008
#48 tenacious d said . . .The Bears were able to run right because Ruben Brown would pull to the right and lay a block on the linebacker, springing the RB free...
March 12, 2008
#49 Pissed Off said . . .Phil, I like your idea of drafting 2 lineman, RB, and WR with the first 4 picks. However, knowing how much JA loves to draft defense, I just can't see him going offense with all 4. My bet is that he'll draft defense with at least 1, probably saftety with one of the 3rd rounders.
March 12, 2008
Awesome analysis Phil. We'll have to see what the BT does and I think a lot of the direction they go will depend on whos taken by the time we pick at 14 or when we pick in the 2nd round. If Long is the only OT taken by 14, who knows what we do, probably still take Clady, Williams or Otah but what if all four of those guys are gone, then maybe they take Albert at 14 and still get a good value guy at tackle in the 2nd round. Who knows but it will be exciting to see how this all plays out. I'm sure that no matter what we're taking one of those stud Tackles first. Because the draft is deep for O-line (tackle specifically early) I wonder if we took Albert at 14 if we could still get a starter at Tackle for our 2nd round pick? I'm not real excited about chancing that but just speculating.
March 12, 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.