Fixing the Bears in 6 Easy Steps
by Adam T on Jan 5, 2009 1:06 PM CST
65 comments
What the Bears need to do to move in the right direction is pretty easy to figure out, so this article isn't anything new. What I'd like you to do is rank these based on order of importance.
Also, feel free to add one if you feel it is sorely needed.
Sign Marinelli now
Add a pass rusher
The first thing Smith figured out when he arrived was he didn’t have an end to make his scheme work. So the Bears dealt for Adewale Ogunleye, who will be entering the final year of his contract. That ought to provide Ogunleye motivation entering his free-agent year, but Smith can’t take that gamble. He also can’t count on Anderson panning out again, so an edge rusher is first and foremost on Lovie’s list. If they get the pass rush from the front four worked out, they won’t have to monkey around with linebackers Brian Urlacher and Lance Briggs at the line of scrimmage and can let them return to doing what they do best.
Get a safety
Stick with your strength
Want to make Orton better? Make the running game better. Rookie Matt Forte was impressive, but the Bears were still 24th in the league in rushing. They need to find a complement to Forte and not hesitate to use him. Otherwise, they’ll run Forte into the ground.
Get a receiver
Bring in at least 1 new player on offensive line (Not on list, but needed to be added)
0 recs |
65 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
Adding a Forte complement
is not going to fix the running game. What’s he going to do? Run behind the same line Forte is running behind? Forte was a beast this year but I get pissed to think what he could have done with a line that didn’t get pushed off the snap 90% of the time. If they are looking to add some talent to the line as well, then yeah, getting Forte a decent back-up is a great move. Vernon Carey to replace Tait, bring in a G to challenge Beekman and Garza, and draft a big strong RB in the late rounds for short yardage situations.
by McRipper on Jan 5, 2009 1:27 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
#1 Priority
has got be receiver (given that we don’t actually have any), but that is followed real closely by getting some improvement on the offensive line – that itself will improve the running game. Peterson and Wolfe are fine as change of pace and backup IMO.
The best moves are those that fix multiple problems – O-line help helps the QB and the running game. Similarly, #3 on my list would be to address the safety position with Tillman, and get the Oakland CB in free agency.
Getting a pass rusher and Marinelli are really kind of the same thing – they need to improve the pass rush one way or another.
I don’t really think they need another RB, but I do think they need to address the tackle position – I think it’s pretty clear that the linebackers (Urlacher in particular) do much better with big lineman, not the fast penetrating ones that Lovie likes.
by mac30 on Jan 5, 2009 2:06 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
WR
History says drafting a WR early is even dicier than drafting a QB, so the Bears really need to address that in free agency. Is Boldin worth more than a 1? How about a 1 and Nathan Vasher?
Tillman does need to move to safety, but Asomougha will never hit the open market. Even Al Davis isn’t too stupid not to franchise him.
And Urlacher is twice the player we saw this year if he has a 380-pounder in front of him, but that ain’t the Tampa 2, and getting Marinelli means that’s what the D will be playing for the foreseeable future.
The best thing that could happen is that Angelo grows a pair and tells Lovie no more Tampa 2. Unfortunately there’s as good a chance of that happening as the Bears getting Asomougha.
by garsky on Jan 5, 2009 2:17 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
WR is iffy in the draft
but there really aren’t any WR available in free agency, unless they can swing a deal for Boldin (in which case – yay!). The best bet is to draft a bunch of wide receivers in the middle rounds and see who emerges. I still say they need to take a QB high in the draft as well.
The bears have shown a willingness to modify the cover 2 when needed – as shown by the high level of blitzing and the occasional shadowing of a WR with a particular corner. I just don’t know how much they’d be willing to adjust – maybe enough to have some big linemen in there.
by mac30 on Jan 5, 2009 3:44 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
True
Other than Houshmanzadeh, who’ll get a big payday a la Bernard Berrian, there’s not much. Shaun McDonald can play a little. The one I can see the Bears bringing in is Amani Toomer.
by garsky on Jan 6, 2009 10:27 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Ughhh...
Amani Toomer is 84 years old.
I'm not going to even bother trying to update this sig everyday anymore... that's what the standings column on ESPN is for.
Updated on May 25, 2008
by SackMan on Jan 6, 2009 10:49 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
85, I think
Yeah, I didn’t say I WANTED the Bears to bring him in, but it’s a move I can see Angelo make.
He’s got a long track record, can still play a little, and won’t be expensive nor need a long deal.
by garsky on Jan 6, 2009 12:30 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
So why don't we just keep Brandon Lloyd then?
He’d be much cheaper than Toomer, and when he was healthy and on the field, he did some good things for us.
I'M A MAN! I'M 22!
by ChiFan13 on Jan 6, 2009 12:37 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I think Toomer resigns with NY
First off, they are a better team, but with the departure of Plaxico they will value Toomer more now.
Being Who You Thought We Were Since 2005!
by Adam T on Jan 7, 2009 9:19 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I've said it before
I think Lloyd has value as a receiver. You just can’t run with him as your #1. You have to have a dependable #1 first.
Being Who You Thought We Were Since 2005!
by Adam T on Jan 7, 2009 9:19 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Never underestimate the stupidity of Al Davis!
Being Who You Thought We Were Since 2005!
by Adam T on Jan 5, 2009 3:54 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
hmm
And Urlacher is twice the player we saw this year if he has a 380-pounder in front of him,
So, basically, you mean that Urlacher is better when he isn’t blocked?
Isn’t that true about every middle linebacker? And actually, every defensive player?
Bringing moderation to a place I don't moderate.
visit the mindful mission
by big_lowitzki on Jan 5, 2009 4:27 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
yes, but
the bears defensive scheme calls for faster smaller linemen and speedy linebackers who can drop back into coverage – the bears LBs can do this but having big linemen in there would probably play much better to Urlacher’s strength at this stage in his career – he’s still super fast in and around the line, but not quite as fast as he used to be, making coverage more difficult.
by mac30 on Jan 5, 2009 4:38 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I think Urlacher is slower everywhere.
He’s not pedestrian yet, but I don’t think he is faster near the line then he is dropping back. He’s 2 steps slower from my perspective everywhere. And he less strong. I didn’t see him shed one block this year. He let RB’s run him over a few times. I remember him catching RB’s and driving them backwards.
His skills are fading. His brain is there, but his body isn’t producing like it did.
Kick it to me... I'm open!
by #23 on Jan 5, 2009 9:45 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
you don't need to be as fast
at the line as in coverage
by mac30 on Jan 6, 2009 7:40 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Urlacher has stated this himself
He has said his best years he had Washington in front of him and he never had to take on offensive linemen. The when Dvoracek went down the second time, Urlacher said that was a big hit on him, because he wasn’t getting to move like he wanted.
Again this year, Dvoracek was playing poorly and Urlacher wasn’t doing great. When Dusty went down and Anthony Adams stepped in Urlacher’s numbers started to improve and he seemed to be more active.
Being Who You Thought We Were Since 2005!
by Adam T on Jan 7, 2009 9:22 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
If you really want to fix the Bears... it starts near the top.
1. Don’t be married to a defense, if your current personnel can’t succeed in it.
The Cover 2 is predicated on pressure from the front 4, and good safeties. We couldn’t achieve any pressure last year, and have had a poor group of safeties for two seasons now. On top of that, we blitzed more than almost any team in the league last year (ineffectively), even though blitzing contradicts the Cover 2 defense. So, either get the right players and coaches to perform in this scheme, or change the scheme.
2. If you want to call yourselves a “running” team, then build an offensive line designed to run the ball with authority.
Our line stinks… nothing else to add here.
I'm not going to even bother trying to update this sig everyday anymore... that's what the standings column on ESPN is for.
Updated on May 25, 2008
by SackMan on Jan 5, 2009 3:25 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
as I said on another post
Charles Tillman is too good at CB to move him. Plus, he’s only about to turn 28, in the prime of his career. Stop trying to Rod Woodson him before he’s lost a step people.
There are good safeties in this draft, and one could be drafted and step in and play right away if needed, a la Tony Parrish and Mike Brown. The thing is, they have to focus on drafting a safety, and not a convert safety. Instead of always trying to find the steal in the draft, we need to go after talented players at positions of need and not move back in the draft over and over.
Make safety a round 1 or 2 priority and then also an OLB or o-linemen in the other spot.
Sign T.J. Housh and one other Free Agent. Put Hester in the slot and say bye to Rashied Droppies. I used to be a fan but sorry to say he dropped to many easy passes in tight games, and that just can’t be done.
There are a couple of younger OT and OG options in Free Agency, including Jordan Gross who could step in at RT. Perhaps Tait could move to left guard? I’d rather see serious talent be integrated at line than anywhere else. Including, keep who we have and provide SERIOUS competition. I mean, bring players in who have started and done consistent jobs for their old teams.
And someone slap the smile off Olin Kreutz’s face. He needs to get pissed, and maybe that will reignite his fire. His play was poor and he’s declined for at least two straight years. He cost the team some points with his holding penalities and his early snaps this year. I’m really glad he didn’t get the Pro Bowl nod this year. He shouldn’t have. He shouldn’t have last year, either.
by ethan a on Jan 5, 2009 3:37 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Let me remind you...
In the Tampa 2 defense, which is not to be confused with a base Cover 2, the most important coverage positions on the field are your two safeties, plus your middle LB, who drops back to cover the medium to deep middle. The safeties are the “2,” in the base Cover 2 and Tampa 2 defenses.
Therefore, the safeties are the most important part of the defensive backfield, and the CBs, in theory, are supposed to be more interchangable or replacable parts.
It is the opinion of many football experts in this town, that Charles Tillman would excel at FS in this defense. And, given the importance of the FS position to this defense, and our pretty good talent at CB with Graham, Vasher, McBride, Bowman, and Manning… I say move Tillman.
I'm not going to even bother trying to update this sig everyday anymore... that's what the standings column on ESPN is for.
Updated on May 25, 2008
by SackMan on Jan 5, 2009 3:57 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
True
but haven’t we more and more not run the Tampa 2?
Being Who You Thought We Were Since 2005!
by Adam T on Jan 5, 2009 4:00 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
We've been forced out of it
because we don’t currently have the personnel…
However, that’s the scheme that Lovie is married to, and that’s the scheme we’re supposedly drafting players to fit in.
It’s a passive defense, which is against my taste. I’d prefer a more aggressive defense, which forces the offense to react: like Dick LeBeau, Jim Johnson, and Rex Ryan run with their heavy blitzing.
I'm not going to even bother trying to update this sig everyday anymore... that's what the standings column on ESPN is for.
Updated on May 25, 2008
by SackMan on Jan 5, 2009 4:35 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
i agree here with wcg
this is not a tampa 2 defense, its the bear 2. the bears led the league in blitzing this year, albeit in a different way than the coordinators you mentioned above. I mean other than the packers game, we stacked the line and box almost every down. In most games mike brown was making tackles in the backfield on run plays.
Im not really sure which players we dont have to fit our scheme…i think the current guys just need to play up to their value.. and guys like babich need to do a more consistent job, week in and week out.
lovie blitzes 1/3 of the downs and our linebackers are not conventional tampa 2 LB’s the way they kept shooting the A gaps all season. the players are there but my point is that is not a typical tampa 2 defense but mainly because I believe we have some players that are freak athletes and playmakers.. hence we have to use them in different ways.
by rahulsriram on Jan 5, 2009 4:51 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
We've blitzed (incredibly ineffectively) all year long
because we weren’t able to generate the pressure from the front 4 required in Lovie’s scheme.
I'm not going to even bother trying to update this sig everyday anymore... that's what the standings column on ESPN is for.
Updated on May 25, 2008
by SackMan on Jan 5, 2009 4:56 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Yep, it was terrible
just about the only one that seemed to work with any kind of consistency was that Nickle-CB blitz with D.Manning and you just cant run that that often.
It’s pretty amazing we didnt get burned even worse in the pass game then we did.
by reprisal on Jan 5, 2009 5:51 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Yes, to the last two.
Mike Brown blitzed well also. LB blitzes were useless on pass plays. On running plays it worked well because there were no holes, but on pass plays it mean man to man.
I remember Briggs getting a sack, but how many sacks did we get from a LB this year? How many times were they blitzing? Tons of LB blitzes, rarely even a hurry as a result.
Kick it to me... I'm open!
by #23 on Jan 5, 2009 9:49 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
because we telegraph our blitzes
and make no use of angles. good coordinators understand this – baltimore, pittsburgh, and philly are really good with disguising blitzes/using different angles. every time they bring the heat, they seem to hurry up the play or sack the qb/drop the rb for a loss.
by guy incognito on Jan 5, 2009 11:14 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
We blitz so much because we cannot get a consistent pass rush
that nullifies the blitz. Blitzes are mainly supposed to catch a team off guard, but if they know it is coming and coming from the same spots it doesn’t work. If the Bears could generate a rush with their line, we don’t have to have Urlacher and Briggs hovering on the line the whole time and we could then bring blitzes from other areas that may catch somebody off guard, but it all starts with the line.
Being Who You Thought We Were Since 2005!
by Adam T on Jan 7, 2009 9:24 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
maybe Urlacher doesn't look as slow
if he is back where he normally plays instead of so close. I’m hoping that is the case, but he still looks less strong and doesn’t make side line to side line plays anymore.
Kick it to me... I'm open!
by #23 on Jan 7, 2009 1:43 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
We regularly sent more then could be blocked and couldn't get through
I think that is on players. How can they stuff you if a guy isn’t assigned to you.
Get through there and make a play.
We could disguise the blitz better, and mix it up some, and angles like you say, but I can’t understand why more often we don’t get through when we send more than they can block man to man.
Kick it to me... I'm open!
by #23 on Jan 7, 2009 1:42 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
We must use FA and the draft
Kick it to me... I'm open!
by #23 on Jan 5, 2009 3:57 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Stupid web browser, Take 2 -
Kick it to me... I'm open!
by #23 on Jan 5, 2009 3:58 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Take 3 and I can only laugh at this point. Or shoot myself
#1 Offensive Line – I recommend FA over the draft to save the draft pick and to not put our hopes on two rookie linemen. Offensive line will help the Forte, help our backup RB’s look better, help Orton have more time to survey the field, and the running game will help the WR’s to get more open. Only offensive line will help so many positions to succeed!
#2 Defensive End – I recommend a first round pick here because I doubt we’ll find an elite guy in free agency. Defensive end will help our passing game more than any other positions. Sacks, hurries, and knockdowns will help make the QB less effective and create 2nd and 3rd and long. Double teams will also help free up the DT next to him and the LB’s behind him.
#3 Safety – This is nearly as high as defensive end, but I think we still have a small chance that Payne and Steltz and McGowan could help us at safety. No matter what we should resign Brown to low base salary with incentives. Even as a backup he is valuable and as a starter he does more good than bad. But we should pair this group with a #1 or #2 draft pick that we project will be a Dawkins, Reed, Sanders, Old Mike Brown, Sean Taylor, or Palamua type safety that makes plays.
#4 WR- I think at minimum we should get a #2 guy to come in, but should try to get Housh, Bryant, or Burress. We should also draft in the middle of the draft 2-4 and pair him with Bennet as upcoming WR’s to develop. That combined with Hester, Olsen, Clark, and resigning Lloyd as the #3 and dropping Davis to #4 or #5 would drastically improve our passing game. Not trading for a WR has to be the number goal so we can save draft picks. It is better to pay a lot for a FA then to pay a lot for a WR and lose a pick. Housh is our best option, but I’m not sure we can convince him to come.
Kick it to me... I'm open!
by #23 on Jan 5, 2009 4:00 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Drafting a pass rusher in the 1st round always scares me...
Seems like too many of them bust (without looking up the facts).
I'm not going to even bother trying to update this sig everyday anymore... that's what the standings column on ESPN is for.
Updated on May 25, 2008
by SackMan on Jan 5, 2009 4:37 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I can't say for sure, I don't know
I don’t envision an elite guy coming past the early second round though. Safety seems to hit very often in the first round though, so if you are playing it safe and have a good prospect. That may be the for sure thing. I personally would rather keep the safeties we have to get a pass rusher, then keep the pass rush we had and have a safety. We need both, but pass rush is more important to me. We can get by with our safeties, especially if Brown resigns. We may even be able to grab an average guy and make him above average.
Kick it to me... I'm open!
by #23 on Jan 5, 2009 9:51 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
i say try to sign a DT/DE in FA
and draft a S in the first round. i’m thinking we target haynesworth and peppers, see if we can snag one. force vasher/wale to restructure their contracts or dump/trade them to free up some money for one big d-line FA. get a top safety in the first round, a LB in the 2nd, maybe a WR or RT in the third. make a run at housh or even holt for a legit #1.
by guy incognito on Jan 5, 2009 11:16 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Sounds good if we could pull it off.
I think that Peppers is a little risky. I don’t trust that he’ll stay healthy each year.
Kick it to me... I'm open!
by #23 on Jan 7, 2009 1:44 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
OUR SAFETIES ARE HORRIBLE
I'm not going to even bother trying to update this sig everyday anymore... that's what the standings column on ESPN is for.
Updated on May 25, 2008
by SackMan on Jan 6, 2009 9:32 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
There are some line players
available in FA that would be worth taking a look at. Again it starts with the line. If our line could stop the run without us having to consistently have the LBs on top of the line, it leaves more options for getting pressure from other places.
Being Who You Thought We Were Since 2005!
by Adam T on Jan 7, 2009 9:25 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
swiss cheese
with the Bear’s vanishing defensive identity fixing this team is daunting.
1. Address Defensive needs in Free Agency
If DE is the biggest need (which seems to be popular opinion, which i question), then the Bears should sign Julius Peppers as a FA. Address your biggest need by signing one of the best in the league at that position. unfortunately regarding FA, and i realized this when looking at the previous post/list of FAs, while i look at the top of the list and try to sign the top talent, the bears start from the bottom and move upup hoping to discover a gem…
2. Focus on WR and OL in the draft
this years draft class is going to be very good. Trading away players like Wale and Vasher would not only clear up cap space but might bring back some picks. I think the 300+ lb elephant in the room is Chris Williams. This class may have very good OLs but i dont want to the Bears to draft OLs like the Lions do WRs.
More than anything I would like for the bears to move up and draft Michael Crabtree. Sure it is hard to evaluate WRs and Qbs and just about everyone in the first round. Very few players are talented enough to be “locks” in the NFL and when one of those rare players comes along you need to pay big $ or trade up to get them. When a team is as bad offensively as the Bears are it simply makes sense to pay an offensive star big $ to come in and fix the problem, instead of relying on historically poor ability to address offense and evaluate talent in the later rounds. Boldin would be a definite improvement @ WR but that trade will never happen as winning has likely mended wounds in AZ.
by No It All on Jan 5, 2009 4:23 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
You could probably come pretty close to building a successful franchise if you did nothing but draft OL in the first round every year.
by reprisal on Jan 5, 2009 5:59 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Once you have OL starters filled and they are all great.
I say 7 years to get 5 starters, then draft DL every year.
Kick it to me... I'm open!
by #23 on Jan 5, 2009 9:53 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Signing Julius Peppers could be bad
The guy is getting older and has had some injuries. Also, I doubt he leaves. We won’t be the first choice either.
I hate to pay a lot for a guy on the decline…. Like Urlacher.
Kick it to me... I'm open!
by #23 on Jan 5, 2009 9:56 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I have a bad feeling
Angelo and Smith will forgo any offensive help in the first round and draft a big fast DE. And I will be mad. We need a receiver and another o-lineman before we need a game breaking pass-rusher. We can find those in a later round.
Fire Ron Turner!!!
Fire Angelo!!
by GallopingGhost on Jan 5, 2009 4:50 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Very true, but
what about a Julius Peppers-esque end? He’s a great player and dramatically helps any line he’s on.
I’d be ok with a DE like Brian Orakpo. Dude’s a beast.
I'M A MAN! I'M 22!
by ChiFan13 on Jan 5, 2009 5:33 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
What about
The actual Julius Peppers? I think he’s a Free Agent. He still has 2 or 3 good years left in him.
I suppose it depends on if you feel the bears are ready to compete for a championship now with a little help or if we’re rebuilding and will be ready in a few years. If we just need a bit of help, and are ready now, then drop the cash for someone like Peppers who will pay off immediately.
by Subotai on Jan 5, 2009 8:40 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
either cut or make wale take a huge pay cut
and bring in peppers. if we’re going to pay big bucks, we’d better get production. wale and vasher are the two guys on defense i think we paid a lot to that didn’t do much this past year.
by guy incognito on Jan 5, 2009 8:53 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
You bring up some good points
The problem is I have no idea where we’re at or what we’re shooting for.
Peppers is a beast, but if we could actually hit on a DE in the 1st or 2nd round, it’d be cheaper. Plus we could use that money elsewhere….like one of the other 200 positions we need help in.
I'M A MAN! I'M 22!
by ChiFan13 on Jan 5, 2009 9:01 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
cheaper initially
but we would expect or hope that the DE they take in the 1st round is so good that in several years he commands Peppers type money anyway. Why wait on a hope and a prayer if u can sign Peppers? Maybe Peppers is on the decline (doubt it) and maybe he signs elsewhere… but with the hullaballoo about cover 2 and Urlacher i just keep imagining “Brian met your new best friend Julius”….
by No It All on Jan 6, 2009 10:23 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Very true
It’s a toss up either way, really. If we go young, we have more years out of him, but that also means we’re paying him more. If we get Peppers, it’s a lot of money up front, but we get him (hopefully) in his prime.
I'M A MAN! I'M 22!
by ChiFan13 on Jan 6, 2009 12:40 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Fire all the coaches, except Toub and [running backs coach].
Clutch: A measurement of how much better or worse a player does in high leverage situations than he would have done in a context neutral environment. http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/glossary/
by bs.uf15bosox9bears23 on Jan 5, 2009 6:14 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
dave kaplan just said that a detroit radio reported this afternoon
that the bears have offered their defense line coaching position to rod marinelli…
takes some real stones for the one certifiable cocksucker on here to jump into this convo.-mm
by furby2056 on Jan 5, 2009 6:23 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Sounds like a good plan.
Clutch: A measurement of how much better or worse a player does in high leverage situations than he would have done in a context neutral environment. http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/glossary/
by bs.uf15bosox9bears23 on Jan 5, 2009 8:37 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Sounds like bad news to me
That means Babich is staying and Marinelli will likely keep looking for a better job.
Kick it to me... I'm open!
by #23 on Jan 5, 2009 9:59 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Could be a set up.
If Babich doesn’t fix the D, he gets canned and Marinelli gets the promotion.
Clutch: A measurement of how much better or worse a player does in high leverage situations than he would have done in a context neutral environment. http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/glossary/
by bs.uf15bosox9bears23 on Jan 6, 2009 5:44 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
that sounds right
IF marinelli bites. the thing is, i wouldn’t be shocked if someone offers him a DC gig right now. unless the bears have actually offered him the DC spot, but want to keep it private in case he opts to go elsewhere (ie they don’t want to fire babich yet), i think this is a bad idea. babich had a healthy unit this year that continually blew. his game plans were consistently flawed. marinelli, crennel, and mangini are all available, and all would be better DCs. to keep him and not go after them is majorly incompetent.
by guy incognito on Jan 6, 2009 6:10 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
GM
Bill Cowher
Just throwing it out there…
by No It All on Jan 6, 2009 10:26 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
LOVIE SMITH
They to DEMOTE LOVIE to DC and Hire A HEAD COACH maybe BILL COHWER!
by CWALKUSNAVY on Jan 6, 2009 6:45 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
I'll accept almost anybody in the draft
so long as they pick up 1-2 offensive line players that are good. If they were to go out and get Jordan Gross I’d be ok with them picking up a DE in the first if they wanted. Gross makes the whole line better.
If they doubled up and got Gross and say Carey, they could draft a punter in the first and I live with it.
Being Who You Thought We Were Since 2005!
by Adam T on Jan 7, 2009 9:27 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Florida State's punter
…is good. I have no idea if he’s even eligible for the draft, but he’s a good one. Al Davis might draft him in the 1st, so we’ll have some competition.
I'M A MAN! I'M 22!
by ChiFan13 on Jan 7, 2009 10:22 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
LOL, no punter. You guys are silly.
Kick it to me... I'm open!
by #23 on Jan 7, 2009 1:46 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
come on
draft an uber-athletic punter. in 2 years, we’ll convert him to either a nickel corner or a WR.
by guy incognito on Jan 8, 2009 12:15 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
i lol'd @ the Al D. comment.
But his 1st round selection of Janikowski has paid dividends though.
Residence: Portland, Oregon Pro Team: Da Bears NCAA Football: LSU Baby!! Make sense?
by Dane Noble on Jan 7, 2009 3:55 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm starting to realize..
How important it is to our defense if we had a new, pro bowl caliber safety to take Mike Brown’s place. Could you imagine having an Ed Reed on our defense? With the way our pass defense was in 2008, I feel like it could have been the deciding factor to us winning the division and being in the playoffs as we speak. I’m thinking might be worth picking safety as 1st round pick or trading down to get Mays.
Please pick up FA WR’s!!!
by PolishSausage.Ditka.Bears. on Jan 8, 2009 12:40 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
