Week 1: Bears at Colts - 8:15 pm Eastern, NBC

[minnesotacubsfan]

I'm not making a judgment on Angelo, I'm saying I'd rather a team not pick in the top 5 if they aren't getting a surefire franchise QB or tackle.

 

I would agree, but I'd also make a judgement on Angelo. Regardless of the fact that he's only picked in the top 5 once, he's had 7 opportunities to pick in the first round and has not selected one impact offensive player. The closest thing he's picked to an impact offensive player anywhere is Hester, who has really only had an impact on special teams. And of those 7 opportunities, he's picked one impact player overall, with Harris on defense.

 

I think it's more than fair to doubt, if not completely disregard the chances of Angelo making the right pick in the top 5.

 

his overall track record is fair territory, especially 1st round. that being said, I would prefer a high 1st rd pick that he could trade and increase his odds.

 

or just get rid of him entirely and stop wasting draft picks.

 

The only possible way he's gone before the next draft is if this team is truly historically bad, and goes something like 2-14. That may be the only way the McCaskeys thinking about eating his contract. Trading high draft picks is not the same business it was 5-6 years ago. It's really hard to do and very hard to get value.

 

like I said, its what I would prefer him to do, not nec the actual outcome. I certainly dont trust him with a single mid-round 1st rounder unless someone drops to him ala Harris, and late round is just as iffy in his hands as #4.

[Soul]

to be fair, he's had much more practice in the late 1st then top 5

 

He's picked twice in the late first and once in the top five. And one of those late first picks was due to the team's record before he took over. His other times he's picked in the middle or traded out to the 2nd.

 

 

right, but to judge his record on top 1st round picks when he's had one top 4 pick is jumping the gun abit.

 

It was a horrible pick, one that much of Chicago anticipated he was going to make and was begging him to reconsider.

 

He would screw it up again, I feel certain of it.

 

The best pick he's had in the 1st round was Tommie Harris @ 14. That's what I'm basing it on.

[minnesotacubsfan]

to be fair, he's had much more practice in the late 1st then top 5

 

He's picked twice in the late first and once in the top five. And one of those late first picks was due to the team's record before he took over. His other times he's picked in the middle or traded out to the 2nd.

 

 

right, but to judge his record on top 1st round picks when he's had one top 4 pick is jumping the gun abit.

 

It was a horrible pick, one that much of Chicago anticipated he was going to make and was begging him to reconsider.

 

He would screw it up again, I feel certain of it.

 

The best pick he's had in the 1st round was Tommie Harris @ 14. That's what I'm basing it on.

 

Harris essentially fell into his lap.

 

I dont know, to argue which set of juggling pins to give to the jester is abit unnerving in itself. why cant we just get rid of the clown entirely?

[Soul]

to be fair, he's had much more practice in the late 1st then top 5

 

He's picked twice in the late first and once in the top five. And one of those late first picks was due to the team's record before he took over. His other times he's picked in the middle or traded out to the 2nd.

 

 

right, but to judge his record on top 1st round picks when he's had one top 4 pick is jumping the gun abit.

 

It was a horrible pick, one that much of Chicago anticipated he was going to make and was begging him to reconsider.

 

He would screw it up again, I feel certain of it.

 

The best pick he's had in the 1st round was Tommie Harris @ 14. That's what I'm basing it on.

 

Harris essentially fell into his lap.

 

I dont know, to argue which set of juggling pins to give to the jester is abit unnerving in itself. why cant we just get rid of the clown entirely?

LOL, nicely said.

 

I'm coming to that conclusion myself. I'm resisting it a bit.......he did somehow assemble a pretty good ballclub a couple years back. Was it just a mirage? It was 2 straight years of playoff football, that's got to count for something right? Or should it? Blah.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

He gambled that he could get by on an aging offensive line several years in a row and won.

 

I'm going to give him at least this year and next to turn this downswing around before I completely lose faith in him.

[Soul]

He gambled that he could get by on an aging offensive line several years in a row and won.

 

I'm going to give him at least this year and next to turn this downswing around before I completely lose faith in him.

 

I'm with you, but I'm also like..."DAMN Jerry, start turning this thing around enough already."

[jersey cubs fan]

why cant we just get rid of the clown entirely?

LOL, nicely said.

 

I'm coming to that conclusion myself. I'm resisting it a bit.......he did somehow assemble a pretty good ballclub a couple years back. Was it just a mirage? It was 2 straight years of playoff football, that's got to count for something right? Or should it? Blah.

 

I'm disappointed with where the team is right now, but I can't call Jerry a clown. He is a horrible judge of offensive talent. What he needs to do is hire an offensive guru, even if that means forcing him upon Lovie as an offensive coordinator. He needs to revamp the scouting department to find people who can find offensive players. Jerry ignored the line for too long and completely screwed the pooch on last year's draft. However, he's not imcompetent, and it's not out of the realm of possibility that he'll be able to turn things around.

[BigbadB]

They've been pretty clueless drafting offensive players. By the time they actually fix the offense, the defense will be old and decrepid.

[jersey cubs fan]

He gambled that he could get by on an aging offensive line several years in a row and won.

 

How so? He got by in 2005 and 2006 with an aging offensive line. That's it. But up until those years he was constantly tinkering and adding to it. It was not several years in a row of winning that gamble. They started to decline during the 2006 season, it did not come up out of nowhere as some Bears beat writers try and pretend. The gamble was ignoring the line going into 2007 and again in 2008, and he lost bad.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

They've been pretty clueless drafting offensive players. By the time they actually fix the offense, the defense will be old and decrepid.

 

That's why I hated when he started drafting offense, beginning with Olson. Defenses age very, very fast and need constant new blood.

 

I believe the Bears can win with a defense/special teams philosophy, but it will require constant drafting of top defensive talent.

[minnesotacubsfan]

why cant we just get rid of the clown entirely?

LOL, nicely said.

 

I'm coming to that conclusion myself. I'm resisting it a bit.......he did somehow assemble a pretty good ballclub a couple years back. Was it just a mirage? It was 2 straight years of playoff football, that's got to count for something right? Or should it? Blah.

 

I'm disappointed with where the team is right now, but I can't call Jerry a clown. He is a horrible judge of offensive talent. What he needs to do is hire an offensive guru, even if that means forcing him upon Lovie as an offensive coordinator. He needs to revamp the scouting department to find people who can find offensive players. Jerry ignored the line for too long and completely screwed the pooch on last year's draft. However, he's not imcompetent, and it's not out of the realm of possibility that he'll be able to turn things around.

 

his inability to judge offensive talent and/or hire someone who can is a strong sign of imcompetence. Granted, I am dismissing the possible contributions of Forte, Williams, and (WR from Vanderbilt whos name escapes me), until recently he has been entirely imcompetent on O. and to let Turner linger around as long as he has is absolutely inexcusable.

 

Maybe he had a good draft and all will turn around. Maybe I am jumping the gun on getting rid of him. But i just have a hard time seeing him turn it around as fast as he needs to.

Edited September 4, 2008 by minnesotacubsfan

[Hairyducked Idiot]

He gambled that he could get by on an aging offensive line several years in a row and won.

 

How so? He got by in 2005 and 2006 with an aging offensive line. That's it. But up until those years he was constantly tinkering and adding to it. It was not several years in a row of winning that gamble. They started to decline during the 2006 season, it did not come up out of nowhere as some Bears beat writers try and pretend. The gamble was ignoring the line going into 2007 and again in 2008, and he lost bad.

 

Okay, he gambled on an aging offensive line two years in a row and won. He lost the third year, and he tried in the 2008 but it was too late.

 

I call a division title and a super bowl appearance "winning" the gamble.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Maybe he had a good draft and all will turn around. Maybe I am jumping the gun on getting rid of him. But i just have a hard time seeing him turn it around as fast as he needs to.

 

Everything happens fast in the NFL.

[jersey cubs fan]

They've been pretty clueless drafting offensive players. By the time they actually fix the offense, the defense will be old and decrepid.

 

That's why I hated when he started drafting offense, beginning with Olson. Defenses age very, very fast and need constant new blood.

 

I believe the Bears can win with a defense/special teams philosophy, but it will require constant drafting of top defensive talent.

 

I disagree with the bolded. He drafted Olsen in the 1st, but he wasted a 2nd and 3rd on crap defensive players that year. He was all about defense and special teams in the 2006 draft. He got cocky with his ability to get away with overdrafting. What he should have been doing was drafting QBs and OLine every year in the 2-4 rounds.

 

Yes, defenses age fast and it was important to keep restocking with fresh young bodies. But, while the notion that they can win on defense alone may be true, it's stupid to live by that rule. They need to keep restocking the defense with bodies, while also building the offense. Instead, they let the offense stay as mediocre as ever, and failed to restock the defense.

[minnesotacubsfan]

They've been pretty clueless drafting offensive players. By the time they actually fix the offense, the defense will be old and decrepid.

 

That's why I hated when he started drafting offense, beginning with Olson. Defenses age very, very fast and need constant new blood.

 

I believe the Bears can win with a defense/special teams philosophy, but it will require constant drafting of top defensive talent.

 

I disagree with the bolded. He drafted Olsen in the 1st, but he wasted a 2nd and 3rd on crap defensive players that year. He was all about defense and special teams in the 2006 draft. He got cocky with his ability to get away with overdrafting. What he should have been doing was drafting QBs and OLine every year in the 2-4 rounds.

 

Yes, defenses age fast and it was important to keep restocking with fresh young bodies. But, while the notion that they can win on defense alone may be true, it's stupid to live by that rule. They need to keep restocking the defense with bodies, while also building the offense. Instead, they let the offense stay as mediocre as ever, and failed to restock the defense.

 

while I can't rule out an epiphany on Angelo's part, I fear this is going to be the trend forward .....

[Hairyducked Idiot]

They've been pretty clueless drafting offensive players. By the time they actually fix the offense, the defense will be old and decrepid.

 

That's why I hated when he started drafting offense, beginning with Olson. Defenses age very, very fast and need constant new blood.

 

I believe the Bears can win with a defense/special teams philosophy, but it will require constant drafting of top defensive talent.

 

I disagree with the bolded. He drafted Olsen in the 1st, but he wasted a 2nd and 3rd on crap defensive players that year. He was all about defense and special teams in the 2006 draft. He got cocky with his ability to get away with overdrafting. What he should have been doing was drafting QBs and OLine every year in the 2-4 rounds.

 

Yes, defenses age fast and it was important to keep restocking with fresh young bodies. But, while the notion that they can win on defense alone may be true, it's stupid to live by that rule. They need to keep restocking the defense with bodies, while also building the offense. Instead, they let the offense stay as mediocre as ever, and failed to restock the defense.

 

You can't do it all. You have a cap and seven draft picks each year. If you want to have an elite defense, you are going to do it at the expense of the offense.

 

Edit to add: Unless they ever get around to having a true franchise QB.

[jersey cubs fan]

You can't do it all. You have a cap and seven draft picks each year. If you want to have an elite defense, you are going to do it at the expense of the offense.

 

Edit to add: Unless they ever get around to having a true franchise QB.

 

It's not about having an elite defense and an elite offense. But, an elite defense and an offense anchored by a solid offensive line can be a great team. I'm fine with being a defensive-oriented team. But you don't do that by ignoring offense. You claimed they "started drafting offense" with Olsen. They still picked defensive players on the first day that year, and wasted the picks. There is nothing wrong with picking offense early and often, even as a defensive-oriented team. It wasn't the Olsen pick that weakened the defense, it had a lot more to do with Bazuin and Okwo. Those selections should have easily brought in, at least one, if not two, solid contributors to the defense going into 2008 - especially as a defensive oriented team that specializes in finding defensive bodies.

 

But they still need to pick offense. You can't win with a great defense and a completely inept offense. You need to build the line first and foremost. Even if you don't find a true franchise QB, a line will keep you afloat and allow an elite defense to dominate.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

So the argument is that he whiffed on the last two year's picks? I agree with that, but I'm inclined to give him one more draft.

[jersey cubs fan]

So the argument is that he whiffed on the last two year's picks? I agree with that, but I'm inclined to give him one more draft.

 

I don't think there is any argument that he whiffed on 2007's picks. It's clear he did. 2008 is unclear. He also whiffed early in 2002, 2003 and 2005. I'm inclined to give him another draft, possibly only because I know it's inevitable that he will still be here. But also because he hasn't been completely incompetent.

 

 

But enough about Jerry's screw-ups, this is a game thread. I'm convinced they will lose and lose big. This has been penciled in as a loss from everybody, from those picking 4-6 wins or those thinking 7-9 wins is possible. The only way people could have been thinking this is a potential win are those holding out hope for 10 or more wins, and I think if this team pulls out the win, 10+ would not be out of the question.

[minnesotacubsfan]

So the argument is that he whiffed on the last two year's picks? I agree with that, but I'm inclined to give him one more draft.

 

I don't think there is any argument that he whiffed on 2007's picks. It's clear he did. 2008 is unclear. He also whiffed early in 2002, 2003 and 2005. I'm inclined to give him another draft, possibly only because I know it's inevitable that he will still be here. But also because he hasn't been completely incompetent.

 

 

But enough about Jerry's KIDS, this is a game thread. I'm convinced they will lose and lose big. This has been penciled in as a loss from everybody, from those picking 4-6 wins or those thinking 7-9 wins is possible. The only way people could have been thinking this is a potential win are those holding out hope for 10 or more wins, and I think if this team pulls out the win, 10+ would not be out of the question.

 

sorry..I saw an opportunity there.

 

I agree. I just hold out to eternal pre-season optimism. go bears.

[BigbadB]

The key to winning this game, in my mind, is the ability of the QB to hit his possession receivers. Marty Booker, Olson, Clark and Peterson in 3rd down situations make for pretty good targets. Especially if they can get someone like Hester to tie up a corner and a safety on deep patterns. That and the defense forcing a few turnovers and keep the running game in control.

 

I'd also like to see a lot of blitzing on Manning. Being out of game situations for as long as he has, it would be nice to see him on his back early and often to shorten his ridiculous pocket presence.

 

The defense has a lot to prove after the poor showing in preseason.

[jersey cubs fan]

I'd also like to see a lot of blitzing on Manning. Being out of game situations for as long as he has, it would be nice to see him on his back early and often to shorten his ridiculous pocket presence.

 

I would not. This defense cannot blitz. They suck at it. Whether it is scheme or ability of the linebackers, when they rush 5 or 6, the only thing I see is guys running right into blockers. I would much rather they force Manning and the Colts to take their time and move up and down the field methodically, increasing the chances that they will make a mistake, rather than gambling on blitzes.

[Guest]

Angelo's first rounders:

 

2002: OT Marco Colombo (29)

2003: DE Michael Haynes (14)

2003: QB Rex Grossman (22)

2004: DT Tommie Harris (14)

2005: RB Cedric Benson (4)

2007: TE Greg Olsen (31)

2008: OT Chris Williams (14)

 

:(

 

5 of 7 first rounders were offensive players. I completely forgot about Haynes, what an awful pick. He got really lucky that Harris fell but that's part of drafting. And there's something about injury-riddled first round o-linemen, granted Colombo got hurt after being drafted.

[CubColtPacer]

The key to winning this game, in my mind, is the ability of the QB to hit his possession receivers. Marty Booker, Olson, Clark and Peterson in 3rd down situations make for pretty good targets. Especially if they can get someone like Hester to tie up a corner and a safety on deep patterns. That and the defense forcing a few turnovers and keep the running game in control.

 

I'd also like to see a lot of blitzing on Manning. Being out of game situations for as long as he has, it would be nice to see him on his back early and often to shorten his ridiculous pocket presence.

 

The defense has a lot to prove after the poor showing in preseason.

 

I agree the possession receivers are the biggest key to this game for the Bears. The Colts zone can be exploited. I would add Forte out of the backfield as a big key in the receiving game for the Bears. They need to do short passes a lot on first down. Running the ball might work for a while, but especially for a team like the Bears to want to have offensive success the whole game, it would be much smarter to come out passing with short passes, then work in the run game. The Colts are going to be crashing their gaps hard early expecting the run and fueled by the new stadium. A run could be broken for deep yardage, but it's more likely just going to be stuffed.

 

As for their defensive strategy, as a Colts fan I would beg the Bears to try to blitz a lot on Manning. That would be the dream scenario for Colts fans. It would be like the reactions of Bears fans if the Colts decided to go ahead and test their special teams against Hester (which Dungy better not overrule the special teams coach on that like he did in the Super Bowl). There is a ton of uncertainty on the Colts offensive line right now. They have 3 new starters in the middle. Letting Manning find open receivers by blitzing would be a huge mistake IMO.

[minnesotacubsfan]

I'd also like to see a lot of blitzing on Manning. Being out of game situations for as long as he has, it would be nice to see him on his back early and often to shorten his ridiculous pocket presence.

 

I would not. This defense cannot blitz. They suck at it. Whether it is scheme or ability of the linebackers, when they rush 5 or 6, the only thing I see is guys running right into blockers. I would much rather they force Manning and the Colts to take their time and move up and down the field methodically, increasing the chances that they will make a mistake, rather than gambling on blitzes.

 

this defense is fast enough and has enough playmakers to play straight up. Idk about blitzing, unless its obvious how they can do it