Re: The Chicago Bears Offseason Thread

[RynoRules]

Booker huh? Meh.

 

I agree it is not exciting, but in terms of production, he might not be that far behind Berrian and will cost something like a third as much. Booker could easily have 70 catches for something like 800-ish yards. Berrian won't be that much better, and Booker is a better blocker in the running game (an underrated ability, IMO).

 

EDIT: Those nos. I predicted are a bit inflated. More realistic is the notion that he'll have 60-65 catches and 700-750 yards. Again, you get what you pay for.

[jersey cubs fan]

Booker huh? Meh.

 

I agree it is not exciting, but in terms of production, he might not be that far behind Berrian and will cost something like a third as much. Booker could easily have 70 catches for something like 800-ish yards. Berrian won't be that much better, and Booker is a better blocker in the running game (an underrated ability, IMO).

 

EDIT: Those nos. I predicted are a bit inflated. More realistic is the notion that he'll have 60-65 catches and 700-750 yards. Again, you get what you pay for.

 

I was going to reply to the original, but your edit took care of that. I think this is a smart sign. It's financially wise and cap friendly. Booker is more likely replacing Moose than Berrian, but either way, he's going to get a fair amount of catches.

 

I think 2008 Bradley, Booker, Hester, Draft Pick, Olsen, Clark should have no problem being as productive as 2007 Berrian, Moose, Davis, Hester, Bradley, Olsen, Clark.

 

Hester and Bradley are going to fight for deep opportunities, Booker is going to be a possession receiver who can get a few yards, and a draft pick should be able to do something out there. The key to the passing game is Olsen, followed closely by Hester emerging. And there's no reason why Hester can't improve this year. A lot of people pointed out that 2007 was going to be a learning experience for Hester the WR, and I think he showed more than enough to believe he learned on the job and will get better.

[cbbryan]

Booker huh? Meh.

 

I agree it is not exciting, but in terms of production, he might not be that far behind Berrian and will cost something like a third as much. Booker could easily have 70 catches for something like 800-ish yards. Berrian won't be that much better, and Booker is a better blocker in the running game (an underrated ability, IMO).

 

EDIT: Those nos. I predicted are a bit inflated. More realistic is the notion that he'll have 60-65 catches and 700-750 yards. Again, you get what you pay for.

 

I was going to reply to the original, but your edit took care of that. I think this is a smart sign. It's financially wise and cap friendly. Booker is more likely replacing Moose than Berrian, but either way, he's going to get a fair amount of catches.

 

I think 2008 Bradley, Booker, Hester, Draft Pick, Olsen, Clark should have no problem being as productive as 2007 Berrian, Moose, Davis, Hester, Bradley, Olsen, Clark.

 

Hester and Bradley are going to fight for deep opportunities, Booker is going to be a possession receiver who can get a few yards, and a draft pick should be able to do something out there. The key to the passing game is Olsen, followed closely by Hester emerging. And there's no reason why Hester can't improve this year. A lot of people pointed out that 2007 was going to be a learning experience for Hester the WR, and I think he showed more than enough to believe he learned on the job and will get better.

 

Hester just needs to improve on route running and play recognition. I don't know how many times he lined up and the QB had to move him because he didn't know where he was suppose to be.

 

Put him on a fly route and he's deadly though.

[apete6]

Do you guys think Turner will actually utilize the 2 TE set a lot this year? It almost seems like he has to considering that at the time, his 2 best pass catchers will be Olsen and Clark.

 

The main questions are:

Can Benson/Peterson/Mendenhall handle being in a 1 back set?

Will Hester or Bradley be able to be useful in a 1 WR set?

 

I think you'll see some 2 TE sets, but more than that, you'll see a lot of Olsen in the slot and working the middle because he can get off the line well and has solid speed. Plus, he's not much of a blocker from what I've seen/heard so having him on the end of the line isn't a real big benefit.

 

This is more along the lines of what I was thinking. So, essentially they will use Olsen as the 2nd WR and maybe run a "heavy" or "overload" formation to 1 side with Clark, Olsen, and the WR. They can still have 2 backs in the game and really vary who goes into the flat (Clark, FB, or RB).

 

Now let's just hope Turner can come up with some creative plays out of this package. Maybe a weakside screen to Wolfe or a strongside screen to WR (Hester). Maybe a fly route to Olsen while they are expecting Hester to be the one going long. Or let Olsen & Hester both go deep and have Clark fill in the sideline on an out/reverse post.

[Soul]

Yeah, you guys are thinking about the Marty Booker that was here years ago. He's not the same guy anymore. Still, I don't think it's a bad signing, but it's woefully inadequate.

 

We better get some road plows on that line and try to ram the ball down people's throats this year. I fear for our passing game.

[Derwood]

I think Booker could be a good possession, 3rd down type receiver like Bobby Engram, but he's not a deep ball threat anymore (if he ever was)

[jersey cubs fan]

Yeah, you guys are thinking about the Marty Booker that was here years ago. He's not the same guy anymore. Still, I don't think it's a bad signing, but it's woefully inadequate.

 

We better get some road plows on that line and try to ram the ball down people's throats this year. I fear for our passing game.

 

I think you are grossly exaggerating what people are saying about Booker. Nobody is talking about a 1000 yard season. I think it's fair to expect a 50-60 reception, 600-700 yard season. I think he's more than capable of replacing what Muhammed gave the Bears, which, admittedly, wasn't much. However, it's a stable presence in the passing game who can catch some passes in traffic, at a reasonable salary.

 

The key is still the offensive line.

[Magnetic Curses]

He's definitely fast, but in the NFL the defenders are much, much faster than Wisconsin's (or anyone else's in the Big Ten). What I want to see in a college back is both speed and elusiveness. Mendenhall runs very upright and doesn't really make people miss. He runs straight ahead as fast as he can. That's great in college, but just doesn't work well in the NFL.

 

where do you get that? it's worked fine in the nfl, from eddie george to larry johnson to shaun alexander.

 

what doesn't play well is garrett wolfe-type backs, or, rather on donw which aren't 3rd. mendenhall will be just fine.

 

Ummm... yeah. Shaun Alexander never makes people miss. And Eddie George never cut back. Oh, that LJ guy runs at full speed without utilizing his blockers properly. You picked three guys who make people miss and miss consistently. If running over people worked, Cedric Benson would be the best.

 

are you suggesting that mendenhall can't cut back, never makes people miss, and doesn't use his blockers properly? because he does, if you watched the video, you'll see what i mean. he's probably one of the top players in the country in terms of understanding how to use blockers. furthermore, illinois utilizes the pitch and option, you don't excel in the spread offense without knowing how to cut back.

 

Speed and elusiveness are critical (size is also a healthy asset, of course).

 

well, this explains why i made the potemkin argument, doesn't it? 8-)

[Soul]

Yeah, you guys are thinking about the Marty Booker that was here years ago. He's not the same guy anymore. Still, I don't think it's a bad signing, but it's woefully inadequate.

 

We better get some road plows on that line and try to ram the ball down people's throats this year. I fear for our passing game.

 

I think you are grossly exaggerating what people are saying about Booker. Nobody is talking about a 1000 yard season. I think it's fair to expect a 50-60 reception, 600-700 yard season. I think he's more than capable of replacing what Muhammed gave the Bears, which, admittedly, wasn't much. However, it's a stable presence in the passing game who can catch some passes in traffic, at a reasonable salary.

 

The key is still the offensive line.

 

Alright. Well, I suppose if you look at it in terms of replacing Moose's non-production, it sounds better. There probably won't be a need to feel like you have to declare Booker the #1, too. Which is a plus, because Moose was never good enough with us to really be a #1 and we probably suffered for having to have him in that role.

[Magnetic Curses]

and for the record, i am against the bears taking mendenhall.

[Soul]

I'd be less upset with taking Mendenhall than I was when Angelo took Benson though. But yea, I'd rather get the best OL available first, then look at other needs.

[jersey cubs fan]

Alright. Well, I suppose if you look at it in terms of replacing Moose's non-production, it sounds better. There probably won't be a need to feel like you have to declare Booker the #1, too. Which is a plus, because Moose was never good enough with us to really be a #1 and we probably suffered for having to have him in that role.

 

While I agree there should be no need to label him the #1 (writers have already referred to him as such), I don't really think that matters. This isn't like picking your opening day starter, or who pitches the first playoff game. The Bears were hurt by Muhammed constantly getting away with drops and other things no young player would ever get away with. You want your best players to lead and Muhammed was not the best player, and I don't think much of a leader (at least this past year). Booker should just be an option in the passing game. Whether he starts or not doesn't matter. He can be the primary target on certain passing plays, but he should be just another receiver. Bradley, Hester and Olsen should be the most prominent big play threats, but Booker should emerge as a go-to guy when you need a first down.

[GoCubsGo1679625768]

If both stud OT's are off the board(Clady, Williams) and Mendenhall is still on it, who should the Bears take besides Rashard?

[bukie]

If both stud OT's are off the board(Clady, Williams) and Mendenhall is still on it, who should the Bears take besides Rashard?

 

Otah.

[YearofDaCubs]

I really wonder what the Bears have up their sleeve with the 1st and 2nd pick. I can see them going QB, Line but I don't see them going for a RB, not in this draft when it's really deep. We have a lot of holes to fill, I don't know how Angelo will pull a rabbit out of his arse to get us back to the playoffs.

[YearofDaCubs]

If both stud OT's are off the board(Clady, Williams) and Mendenhall is still on it, who should the Bears take besides Rashard?

 

Otah.

Or maybe Brohm?

[GoCubsGo1679625768]

If both stud OT's are off the board(Clady, Williams) and Mendenhall is still on it, who should the Bears take besides Rashard?

 

Otah.

His stock has been tumbling since the combine. Many suggest now he will have to play guard in the NFL.

[BigbadB]

I think the Bears will be okay with the passing game. I've always wanted to see them utilize the TE's more because both are very good pass catchers and Clark still has the edge on Olson running routes, but Olson appears to be improving in that regard. Booker is a good possession receiver. Between Bradley, Hester and maybe a later round draft pick for a Wesley Welker type receiver and I think the passing game will be okay, especially if they can grab a running back with good receiving skills.

 

If you look at San Diego, they made due with Chris Chambers, who is a lot like Booker, and Vince Jackson. San Diego's strength receiver is Antonio Gates.

 

I'm not so sure Mendenhall will be available when the Bears pick, but if he is, I'd definitely grab him. If not, take a lineman. But, I would also be shopping the free agent wire to improve the line anywhere I could. I have major concerns with the current running game. The only way to improve the passing game is to have a running back that can keep the defense guessing. I'm tired of 3rd and 9. If Grossman is going to be taking snaps, we need possession receivers for short range gains.

 

Right now, a deep threat is the biggest question mark, but one the Bears seem to always have a problem with. Of course, the Bears have always been more of a ball control offense, anyway. While it was very nice to see Berrian get behind the defense as often as he did in 2006, once teams started playing him differently and put more pressure on Grossman, the deep game pretty much went to hell, making Berrian a non factor.

 

It's a lot of holes to fill on offense. Not sure if they can fill them all. But, because Grossman is back for another year, they need to fill the holes to Grossman's strengths and hides the Bears weaknesses, which will mostly be on the line. Shorter pass routes and possession receivers and a potential break away running back is what I think it will take to get this team back to the playoffs.

 

Waiting for the big play receivers to get open is Grossman's weakness. He's pathetic sitting in the pocket and he has tunnel vision. With Grossman at QB, you might as well take all the deep routes out of the play book. Heck, Hester might just be the Wesley Welker type receiver the Bears are looking for. He has the elusiveness to get a lot of yards after the catch off of short pass plays.

[jersey cubs fan]

It's a lot of holes to fill on offense. Not sure if they can fill them all. But, because Grossman is back for another year, they need to fill the holes to Grossman's strengths and hides the Bears weaknesses, which will mostly be on the line. Shorter pass routes and possession receivers and a potential break away running back is what I think it will take to get this team back to the playoffs.

 

Waiting for the big play receivers to get open is Grossman's weakness. He's pathetic sitting in the pocket and he has tunnel vision. With Grossman at QB, you might as well take all the deep routes out of the play book. Heck, Hester might just be the Wesley Welker type receiver the Bears are looking for. He has the elusiveness to get a lot of yards after the catch off of short pass plays.

 

I couldn't disagree more. You can't take deep routes out of the play book and turn Grossman into and dinker and dunker. Grossman's biggest strength is the 15-20 yard pass. And he needs to throw the occasional deep ball as well. What they need is to do a better job blocking. I think the problem is the Bears idea of a passing game was often either throw a bomb or dump it off. They need to work on that intermediate game, but keep the deep game as a threat as well.

[YearofDaCubs]

At the same time I think having Ron Turner as the coordinator also hurts our offense. The guy was outright bad last year. I'm truly shocked he wasn't fired.

[jersey cubs fan]

At the same time I think having Ron Turner as the coordinator also hurts our offense. The guy was outright bad last year. I'm truly shocked he wasn't fired.

 

I agree he was bad (although I was slow to come around on this one), but I'm not shocked he wasn't fired. The Bears never do everything I wish they'd do in the offseason, and other than replacing Turner, they've done most of what I wished so far.

[Banedon]

At the same time I think having Ron Turner as the coordinator also hurts our offense. The guy was outright bad last year. I'm truly shocked he wasn't fired.

 

I agree he was bad (although I was slow to come around on this one), but I'm not shocked he wasn't fired. The Bears never do everything I wish they'd do in the offseason, and other than replacing Turner, they've done most of what I wished so far.

 

I'm not shocked, because they wanted Grossman back, so that meant Turner coming back. They aren't gonna try to have Grossman learn a whole new system. If the Grossman-Turner combo crashes and burns this season, and they have a newly drafted QB waiting in the wings, I wouldn't be surprised if they sent them both packing after this season.

 

But that's getting way ahead of ourselves.

[jersey cubs fan]

At the same time I think having Ron Turner as the coordinator also hurts our offense. The guy was outright bad last year. I'm truly shocked he wasn't fired.

 

I agree he was bad (although I was slow to come around on this one), but I'm not shocked he wasn't fired. The Bears never do everything I wish they'd do in the offseason, and other than replacing Turner, they've done most of what I wished so far.

 

I'm not shocked, because they wanted Grossman back, so that meant Turner coming back. They aren't gonna try to have Grossman learn a whole new system. If the Grossman-Turner combo crashes and burns this season, and they have a newly drafted QB waiting in the wings, I wouldn't be surprised if they sent them both packing after this season.

 

But that's getting way ahead of ourselves.

 

But then that rookie QB has to relearn a whole new NFL system, delaying his development......

 

It's a vicious cycle.

[apete6]

It's a lot of holes to fill on offense. Not sure if they can fill them all. But, because Grossman is back for another year, they need to fill the holes to Grossman's strengths and hides the Bears weaknesses, which will mostly be on the line. Shorter pass routes and possession receivers and a potential break away running back is what I think it will take to get this team back to the playoffs.

 

Waiting for the big play receivers to get open is Grossman's weakness. He's pathetic sitting in the pocket and he has tunnel vision. With Grossman at QB, you might as well take all the deep routes out of the play book. Heck, Hester might just be the Wesley Welker type receiver the Bears are looking for. He has the elusiveness to get a lot of yards after the catch off of short pass plays.

 

I couldn't disagree more. You can't take deep routes out of the play book and turn Grossman into and dinker and dunker. Grossman's biggest strength is the 15-20 yard pass. And he needs to throw the occasional deep ball as well. What they need is to do a better job blocking. I think the problem is the Bears idea of a passing game was often either throw a bomb or dump it off. They need to work on that intermediate game, but keep the deep game as a threat as well.

 

Agreed on part. Like you say, Rex is actually a very good deep passer. He hit Berrian in stride several times over the past few years. He has a strong arm and knows when to air it out.

 

However, I think the 15-20 yard pass is where a lot of his INTs come. He has the arm strength to make the pass and when he is in rhythm, he is very good at hitting the open guy. But when he has to change off of his primary receiver on those medium-distance throws, he is putrid. Generally you can get away with gambling on a very deep throw and flat passes are usually not too much trouble (save the Dolphins game 2 years ago), but that 15-20 yard area is a busy place to throw and Rex can get eaten up back there.

 

I would say that they should go deep to Hester/Bradley a lot, run a lot of screens to the backs, short to the TEs, and occasionally the deep outs/reverse posts to the TE/WR. The deep ins/posts will only work if his primary guy is open, and that scares me.

[David]

It's a lot of holes to fill on offense. Not sure if they can fill them all. But, because Grossman is back for another year, they need to fill the holes to Grossman's strengths and hides the Bears weaknesses, which will mostly be on the line. Shorter pass routes and possession receivers and a potential break away running back is what I think it will take to get this team back to the playoffs.

 

Waiting for the big play receivers to get open is Grossman's weakness. He's pathetic sitting in the pocket and he has tunnel vision. With Grossman at QB, you might as well take all the deep routes out of the play book. Heck, Hester might just be the Wesley Welker type receiver the Bears are looking for. He has the elusiveness to get a lot of yards after the catch off of short pass plays.

 

I couldn't disagree more. You can't take deep routes out of the play book and turn Grossman into and dinker and dunker. Grossman's biggest strength is the 15-20 yard pass. And he needs to throw the occasional deep ball as well. What they need is to do a better job blocking. I think the problem is the Bears idea of a passing game was often either throw a bomb or dump it off. They need to work on that intermediate game, but keep the deep game as a threat as well.

 

 

Yea, I was scratching my head on that one too. Take out the deep routes with Grossman in? Huh?