The Bears Offseason Thread

[CaliforniaRaisin]

Eric Steinbach might as well find a house in lake forrest.

 

I hope so.

[Banedon]

"There's no need to shout"

 

"I'M NOT SHOUTING!...ALL RIGHT I AM, I'M SHOUTING! I'M SHOUTING! I'M SHOU-"

 

Clue.

[BigSlick]

CubsColtsPacers, its a little too easy to say a blanket statement like "he's got to improve his completion percentage"

 

I hate hate hate to use the "Good Rex" "Bad Rex" terminology, but his relatively low completion percentage stems completely from his inconsistent games. Like he said before, he has 12 games he's really proud of and 5-6 games he really would like back, and in those 12 games when he's on he has a fine completion percentage.

 

I also am of the opinion that those 5 "bad" games aren't completely his fault. (Though he seems to lack the ability to "cut his losses" and turn a bad game into just a mediocre one)

 

I also like the points brought up by others concerning the offense we run and the high Y/P/C that Grossman has.

 

I would both agree and disagree with this statement. Most of the problem is his awful games, yes. If he could turn those into average games, he'd be a much better QB. At the same time, there are some games that aren't mentioned in his awful games or even close where Grossman had a low completion percentage.

 

Minn (first game)-56%

Seattle-54.8%

Giants-60%

Jets-50%

STL-56.5%

Det (second game)-55.5%

Seattle-55.2%

NOR-42.3%

 

None of these games are mentioned under awful rex, but they are all poor completion percentage games (really with the exception of the Giants game, but I threw that one in there for comparison). Now, a QB can survive some poor completion percentage games-I'm not saying that he had bad games in all of these games, or even most of them (in fact, in a couple of them he was quite good). It's not just the awful games that are bringing his completion percentage way down though-his average games would have him around a 55-56 percent anyway, which needs to improve if he's not at all a threat to run either. Otherwise, defenses will do like the Colts did-rush only 4 each play, drop 7 back in coverage, take away the deep ball, and make Grossman dink and dunk for small gains and see if he can move the chains that way.

 

:-\

 

I'm just gonna blame the playcalling for holding his completion percentage back. He's by no means one of the most accurate QB's ever, but Turner doesn't call a game that will lead to 65% completions.

 

EDIT: Unless you count the Superbowl where he decided he didn't want firstdowns.

[jaydee]

It wasn't grossman's first year, but how hard is it to think for a few minutes and realize he has spent a lot of his first few years rehabbing. In other words not playing football. Its not that hard to figure stuff like this out people.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

Eric Steinbach might as well find a house in lake forrest.

 

That's what the Bears need -- former Hawkeyes.

[Soriano12]

Article of the Year goes to Mike Downey

 

http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/columnists/cs-070210downey,1,7122975.column?coll=cs-home-utility

 

Bears bashing boggles the mind

 

How did the Bears go from being one of the top teams in football to the butts of jokes and to the targets for all sorts of verbal and critical abuse?

 

How did a seven-point underdog lose a game by 12 points and suddenly turn into a different kind of dog?

 

How did a team win its division a month early, win its conference championship game by 25 points, win 15 of its games and lose four, only to end up on the receiving end of an almost daily bashing?

 

A week ago this day, the Bears were on a wet field in Florida with the favored Indianapolis Colts, a team led by perhaps the best quarterback of the 21st Century.

 

At the end of a quarter, the score was Bears 14, Colts 6.

 

Chicago's fans must have been as proud as punch. Their heroes were up by eight. A 92-yard kickoff return put the Colts in a hole. Grossman threw a touchdown pass.

 

Thomas Jones broke a 52-yard run. In a word, the Bears looked super.

 

At halftime, the Bears were behind, but only by two. They didn't touch the ball much. But there was a Colts fumble and a missed field goal. It was still anybody's game.

 

At the end of three quarters, the score was 22-17.

 

It wasn't a blowout. It wasn't a Bears embarrassment. The favored Colts were up five. They did not score a touchdown on the Bears' defense in the third quarter. Manning passed for 54 yards in this quarter—big deal.

 

In the end, Indianapolis did win. A team that was expected to prevail by a huge majority of NFL analysts—many of them former pro coaches and players with a certain amount of expertise—did, in fact, beat the Bears.

[CaliforniaRaisin]

Linebackers will carry a franchise tag of $7.206 million and a transition tag of $6.493 million. - from the Boston Herald

[CuseCubFan69]

Here's a John Clayton article from ESPN about the offseason and how each team is looking heading into 2007.

 

Two interesting/maybe false things he mentions about the Bears.

 

-1. The Bears want to re-sign Rueben Brown

 

-2. The team is "nowhere close" to getting a an extension done with Lovie Smith.

 

I wonder if Lovie laughed or cried at the Bears "fair" offer.

[Soul]

Linebackers will carry a franchise tag of $7.206 million and a transition tag of $6.493 million. - from the Boston Herald

 

That's important. If the Bears final offer to Briggs was, in fact, $5.5 mil/yr as reported, then it looks like Briggs is as good as gone.

[Brian]

Chargers are going to interview Ron Rivera.

[Handlebar McSkullet]

Zimmerman also predicted Chicago would lose the NFC championship, writing, "One thing I don't like about the Bears is their special teams." Bears' special teams to that point had scored six touchdowns!

Greg Easterbrook Edited February 14, 2007 by Handlebar McSkullet

[CubColtPacer]

Zimmerman also predicted Chicago would lose the NFC championship, writing, "One thing I don't like about the Bears is their special teams." Bears' special teams to that point had scored six touchdowns!

 

That's from this week's TMQ by the way-a very funny article about predictions:

 

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=easterbrook/070213&lpos=spotlight&lid=tab3pos1

[Soul]

I'm saving that article. Next year, when people start posting some ya-hoo's prediction as if its proof about something, I'm going to whip it out.

[Soriano12]

Chargers are going to interview Ron Rivera.

I'm sure he will "wow" them with his 2 page defensive playbook.

[Guest]

Linebackers will carry a franchise tag of $7.206 million and a transition tag of $6.493 million. - from the Boston Herald

 

That's important. If the Bears final offer to Briggs was, in fact, $5.5 mil/yr as reported, then it looks like Briggs is as good as gone.

 

Nah, I think he plays ONE MORE SEASON in Chicag. I know Angelo is hesitant on using it, but I believe Briggs is the one player (outside of maybe Kreutz/Harris and Urlacher) that warrants using the Franchise Tag atleast once. So, again, I think the Bears will franchise him.

[Soul]

Chargers are going to interview Ron Rivera.

I'm sure he will "wow" them with his 2 page defensive playbook.

 

There have been a couple jobs where Rivera was at the top of the list or very near it, and didn't get the job.

 

It's starting to look like Chico is a solid candidate when viewed from afar, but once he gets into the interview he falls a little flat.

 

Which doesn't suprise me.

[Mark Priors Calves]

There hasn't been much coverage of it following the Super Bowl but apparently Cedric Benson's MRI came back negative on his knee.

[Soul]

There hasn't been much coverage of it following the Super Bowl but apparently Cedric Benson's MRI came back negative on his knee.

 

 

Buffone and Holmes were on the Score a couple days ago questioning Benson's toughness and commitment. Their argument was, if you can walk yourself off the field and it's the Super Bowl, that's got to raise some eyebrows if you don't return to the game.

 

Not sure if I agree, because I believe these days the training staff on the sidelines can make a call of yea or nay and that's the end of the story. I have no idea what the training staff said, if anything.

[Magnetic Curses]

Linebackers will carry a franchise tag of $7.206 million and a transition tag of $6.493 million. - from the Boston Herald

 

That's important. If the Bears final offer to Briggs was, in fact, $5.5 mil/yr as reported, then it looks like Briggs is as good as gone.

 

Nah, I think he plays ONE MORE SEASON in Chicag. I know Angelo is hesitant on using it, but I believe Briggs is the one player (outside of maybe Kreutz/Harris and Urlacher) that warrants using the Franchise Tag atleast once. So, again, I think the Bears will franchise him.

 

using the franchise tag doesn't guarantee that briggs will play. knowing rosenhaus, i could see briggs holding out all year.

[Magnetic Curses]

the pattern that great teams use for building perrenial winners is centered on signing their great players long-term, not replacing them year in and year out, no team can do that.

 

briggs has not outlived his usefulness and cannot readily be replaced by someone who is likely to play as well or better for less money, nor are we likely to find another player like briggs in the near future. sign him.

 

sign harris long term as well.

 

harris, urlacher, briggs, the nucleus of the defense. i'd also like to see them bring mike brown back if it can be accomplished cheaply, there's no better option, currently.

 

vasher can do what he wants, he'll be replaceable.

 

just get briggs signed already.

[cubweiser03]

the pattern that great teams use for building perrenial winners is centered on signing their great players long-term, not replacing them year in and year out, no team can do that.

 

briggs has not outlived his usefulness and cannot readily be replaced by someone who is likely to play as well or better for less money, nor are we likely to find another player like briggs in the near future. sign him.

 

sign harris long term as well.

 

harris, urlacher, briggs, the nucleus of the defense. i'd also like to see them bring mike brown back if it can be accomplished cheaply, there's no better option, currently.

 

vasher can do what he wants, he'll be replaceable.

 

just get briggs signed already.

 

Im with you on everything here but Vasher and Harris. Ive heard a lot about signing Tommie long term. I dont see what the hurry is since he is signed through 2008. Of all the people on this team they need to build around it is him so they should tread carefully but keep in mind the cap is raised another $7M next year and im sure it will go up in 2009 when Tommie will be getting his big money. They can use the added cap space next year if they have to for signing Tommie to an extension then. If they need to make cuts they can dump Wale and his $6M+ salary after 2008 and use that money on Tommie (they could role the cap hit of dumping Wale in the year 2009). Making Tommie fit shouldnt be a problem. Also to consider is they could Franchise Tommie in 2009. If Tommie were a UFA this year it would actually be cheaper to franchise him than Briggs. Who is more valuable? Tommie. DT dont carry a huge franchise tags, which is good for the Bears.

 

Vasher needs to be signed. Ive been really impressed by his cornerbacking play this year. He fits this defense really well. Manning Jr. is very good in the slot but he is a drop off compared to Vasher. If you are going to pay Manning Jr. $4M+ year you better pay Vasher his money or they didnt budget well. Tillman needs to be signed to an extension too. Berrian is a RFA after this year so they dont need to worry about a huge pay raise until 2009. Grossman's performance in 2007 is the wrech, if he does well they might have problems (but if he does well they could drop Griese and his $3.5+ salary to offest his pay raise).

[Soul]

If I had to choose, I'd take Tillman over Vasher. Tillman had a good year, 81 tackles, 5 INTs. People just can't let the Smith thing go-----no cornerback can cover Steve Smith 1-on-1, unless we're planning on signing God to play CB it's time to let it go.

 

Vasher had a down year in 2006/2007, only 45 tackles, 3 INTs. I still think he's fine though.

 

I doubt we'll be put in the position of having to choose, because neither is considered an elite corner, so neither will break the bank.

 

Whenever our breakdowns occurred this year, it seemed to be the safeties blowing it. I really think we need to replace Harris, or Manning, or both.

[Magnetic Curses]

the pattern that great teams use for building perrenial winners is centered on signing their great players long-term, not replacing them year in and year out, no team can do that.

 

briggs has not outlived his usefulness and cannot readily be replaced by someone who is likely to play as well or better for less money, nor are we likely to find another player like briggs in the near future. sign him.

 

sign harris long term as well.

 

harris, urlacher, briggs, the nucleus of the defense. i'd also like to see them bring mike brown back if it can be accomplished cheaply, there's no better option, currently.

 

vasher can do what he wants, he'll be replaceable.

 

just get briggs signed already.

 

Im with you on everything here but Vasher and Harris. Ive heard a lot about signing Tommie long term. I dont see what the hurry is since he is signed through 2008. Of all the people on this team they need to build around it is him so they should tread carefully but keep in mind the cap is raised another $7M next year and im sure it will go up in 2009 when Tommie will be getting his big money. They can use the added cap space next year if they have to for signing Tommie to an extension then. If they need to make cuts they can dump Wale and his $6M+ salary after 2008 and use that money on Tommie (they could role the cap hit of dumping Wale in the year 2009). Making Tommie fit shouldnt be a problem. Also to consider is they could Franchise Tommie in 2009. If Tommie were a UFA this year it would actually be cheaper to franchise him than Briggs. Who is more valuable? Tommie. DT dont carry a huge franchise tags, which is good for the Bears.

 

for the record, i didn't mean sign harris this year, i agree with you that we should weigh our cap options. he doesn't need to be locked up until after next season.

 

Vasher needs to be signed. Ive been really impressed by his cornerbacking play this year. He fits this defense really well. Manning Jr. is very good in the slot but he is a drop off compared to Vasher. If you are going to pay Manning Jr. $4M+ year you better pay Vasher his money or they didnt budget well. Tillman needs to be signed to an extension too. Berrian is a RFA after this year so they dont need to worry about a huge pay raise until 2009. Grossman's performance in 2007 is the wrech, if he does well they might have problems (but if he does well they could drop Griese and his $3.5+ salary to offest his pay raise).

 

if the price is right, yes. but i'd argue that vasher can be replaced. tillman is better, and needs to be retained, but reasonably as well.

 

they're good players, but if a similar player can be found at a much lower price, then bye-bye. imo, this is where angelo earns his keep, by shuffling in good, cheap players at a constant rate through the draft. every once in a while, he'll come across a great player if he does his job right. mark anderson may be a great player, so he might have to be signed long-term in the future.

 

but if he can surround urlacher, harris, and briggs (if re-signed) with good, cheap talent, then the defense will always be a strength regardless of whether or not the good players are signed beyond their rookie deals.

[CaliforniaRaisin]

Whenever our breakdowns occurred this year, it seemed to be the safeties blowing it. I really think we need to replace Harris, or Manning, or both.

 

For the most part, you're right. I'd like to see Mike Brown brought back but after his contract has been re-negotiated. I think D. Manning will make a step forward next season but I'd like to see one safety brought in all the same.

[CubColtPacer]

If I had to choose, I'd take Tillman over Vasher. Tillman had a good year, 81 tackles, 5 INTs. People just can't let the Smith thing go-----no cornerback can cover Steve Smith 1-on-1, unless we're planning on signing God to play CB it's time to let it go.

 

Vasher had a down year in 2006/2007, only 45 tackles, 3 INTs. I still think he's fine though.

 

I doubt we'll be put in the position of having to choose, because neither is considered an elite corner, so neither will break the bank.

 

Whenever our breakdowns occurred this year, it seemed to be the safeties blowing it. I really think we need to replace Harris, or Manning, or both.

 

Teams don't throw at Vasher nearly as much as Tillman-I've heard that Tillman got thrown at twice as much as Vasher this year-in fact, Tillman was one of the league leaders at balls thrown his way. Because of this, it seems to reason that Tillman's stats would be a lot better than Vasher's, but he's not necessarily better.

 

Edit: Here's the quote, from Football Outsider's Superbowl Preview:

 

Wayne and Harrison were equal partners during the regular season, but the same can’t be said for Vasher and Tillman. According to the Football Outsiders game charting project, opposing quarterbacks throw at Tillman nearly twice as often as they throw at Vasher. In fact, though the data is not yet complete, we’ve charted more passes at Tillman than any other defender in the league in 2006. Lest you think this is a one-year phenomenon, last year Tillman was thrown at 50 percent more often than Vasher, and was second in the league in pass targets behind Ike Taylor.

 

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/2007/02/01/ramblings/game-previews/4913/