Chicago Bears Offseason 2012

[SouthSideRyan]

Let's have the argument about only spending on the best of the best for every sport.

[SpongeWorthy]

I don't like spending money on a WR.

 

If they figured out a way to make the line dominant, instead of barely passable, I'd agree with you.

 

I should have clarified that I don't like spending 30-40 Mil guaranteed on a WR. The Bears need to bring in a FA WR, regardless of if they draft one in the first round like they should. I just don't see VJackson as that big of a difference maker to justify paying him 20-30 more guaranteed than the typical player, in a league where guys like Jabar Gaffney and Laurent Robinson are putting up big numbers off the scrap heap.

 

The big majority of guys claimed off the scrap heap never make waves. That's why they're on the scrap heap.

 

If we get some great personnel guy that can sniff the right reclamation projects out, then yeah. I'd be all for signing a proven WR, drafting one, AND taking a flier or two.

[jersey cubs fan]

Let's have the argument about only spending on the best of the best for every sport.

 

At least in a salary cap sport there is merit to it.

[Magnetic Curses]

Let's have the argument about only spending on the best of the best for every sport.

 

At least in a salary cap sport there is merit to it.

 

the bears have a lot of room, though, and even if they're up against it, they're going to make a lot of money. why should we even care how the money is spent if #1. it's not our money, and #2. the contracts they sign players to aren't keeping them from competing.

[jersey cubs fan]

Let's have the argument about only spending on the best of the best for every sport.

 

At least in a salary cap sport there is merit to it.

 

the bears have a lot of room, though, and even if they're up against it, they're going to make a lot of money. why should we even care how the money is spent if #1. it's not our money, and #2. the contracts they sign players to aren't keeping them from competing.

 

Because it's a salary cap league and spending big in one area means you can't spend as much in another. Cutler and Forte are due big raises, and they are going to have to spend for help somewhere on defense. Chris Williams is going to get more money soon as well. Also, since we know the Bears will spend, but won't spend like Jerry Jones or Snyder, I'd rather not have them waste money.

[Magnetic Curses]

Let's have the argument about only spending on the best of the best for every sport.

 

At least in a salary cap sport there is merit to it.

 

the bears have a lot of room, though, and even if they're up against it, they're going to make a lot of money. why should we even care how the money is spent if #1. it's not our money, and #2. the contracts they sign players to aren't keeping them from competing.

 

Because it's a salary cap league and spending big in one area means you can't spend as much in another. Cutler and Forte are due big raises, and they are going to have to spend for help somewhere on defense. Chris Williams is going to get more money soon as well. Also, since we know the Bears will spend, but won't spend like Jerry Jones or Snyder, I'd rather not have them waste money.

 

hence #2. they've been known to go up against the cap, i'm just saying that they're so far under the cap that it will be reasonably difficult to actually hurt themselves by overspending, either cap-wise or profit-wise

Edited January 5, 2012 by Stannis

[jersey cubs fan]

how is that hence #2?

[Magnetic Curses]

ugh, you are disagreeable, aren't you?

 

don't say no

[Magnetic Curses]

if you spend "big in one area", i mean, enough to hurt you in another, you're hurting your team. i don't see the bears being able to spend enough to hurt themselves, short of buying a pudding factory for a thousand million dollars.

[Guest]

Any good McDonald's locations around Soldier Field?

[jersey cubs fan]

if you spend "big in one area", i mean, enough to hurt you in another, you're hurting your team. i don't see the bears being able to spend enough to hurt themselves, short of buying a pudding factory for a thousand million dollars.

 

In a salary cap league it's certainly possible to get there in a hurry. I'm not completely against the Jackson idea by any stretch. I said it has merit to talk about an unwillingness to spend big on certain positions, because you can't spend big on them all. The Bears spend on LB and DE, they will be spending big on QB shortly and will go from a low RB cap hit to a high RB cap hit. The fact that they can fit a guy into the cap with ease today doesn't necessarily mean it makes sense to sign him when there are other needs.

[rawaction]

Bears only have an estimated 20-25Mil next year. 6-8 of that will go to Forte, whether he is franchised or signed long-term. And the Bears are either going to need to give pay increases to their current starters at CB, TE, and DE....or they are going to have to spend more to upgrade each position. And probably should upgrade SS and SLB. And most want to upgrade backup QB and TE.

 

I'm a fan of signing guys who are under-utilized on their current, pass oriented offenses. I wanted Malcom Floyd and/or James Jones last year. This year, I'm looking at guys like Robert Meachem, Mario Manningham (now that Victor Cruz has taken off), and Pierre Garcon (was under-used when Manning/Collie/Clark was healthy). I think you can get guys like that pretty cheap, increase their targets by 30-40 and watch them produce. They're all better than what the Bears currently have. And guaranteeing one of these guys 10Mil is a lot better than guaranteeing an older V Jack 2-3 times as much to be marginally better. The Bears are still going to have to get a WR along with Jackson, if he were to be brought in. Jackson isn't that much of a difference maker that he comes in here and all the WR woes are solved anyway.

 

The Bears are still going to need to develop a WR eventually. If you sign Jackson, probably aren't going WR in the first couple rounds. And if you don't go WR in Rounds 1 or 2, then you probably have a long shot to get anyone even as good as Earl Bennett...the current best WR.

[jersey cubs fan]

The Bears are still going to need to develop a WR eventually. If you sign Jackson, probably aren't going WR in the first couple rounds. And if you don't go WR in Rounds 1 or 2, then you probably have a long shot to get anyone even as good as Earl Bennett...the current best WR.

 

Good front offices with a good offensive line and a good QB should be able to turn 3rd - 5th round WR picks into viable options, especially when they have quality receivers lining up with them.

[rawaction]

The Bears are still going to need to develop a WR eventually. If you sign Jackson, probably aren't going WR in the first couple rounds. And if you don't go WR in Rounds 1 or 2, then you probably have a long shot to get anyone even as good as Earl Bennett...the current best WR.

 

Good front offices with a good offensive line and a good QB should be able to turn 3rd - 5th round WR picks into viable options, especially when they have quality receivers lining up with them.

 

Even when the Bears get a good front office. Don't have a good OL. Don't have quality WRs lining up. I think that's a whole helluva lot to come together in 1 offseason. If we had the OL or a WR like Jackson in place, then sure a 3rd round WR would be fine. But that's my issue. Jackson is a quality WR, but he's not that good that he would fix the problem enough to ease a 3rd-5th round WR into the offense. I think even with Jackson you still need a 1 or 2 pick in. And I think Jackson makes that less likely than a cheaper option, that may only be marginally less productive.

[SpongeWorthy]

Bears only have an estimated 20-25Mil next year. 6-8 of that will go to Forte, whether he is franchised or signed long-term. And the Bears are either going to need to give pay increases to their current starters at CB, TE, and DE....or they are going to have to spend more to upgrade each position. And probably should upgrade SS and SLB. And most want to upgrade backup QB and TE.

 

I'm a fan of signing guys who are under-utilized on their current, pass oriented offenses. I wanted Malcom Floyd and/or James Jones last year. This year, I'm looking at guys like Robert Meachem, Mario Manningham (now that Victor Cruz has taken off), and Pierre Garcon (was under-used when Manning/Collie/Clark was healthy). I think you can get guys like that pretty cheap, increase their targets by 30-40 and watch them produce. They're all better than what the Bears currently have. And guaranteeing one of these guys 10Mil is a lot better than guaranteeing an older V Jack 2-3 times as much to be marginally better. The Bears are still going to have to get a WR along with Jackson, if he were to be brought in. Jackson isn't that much of a difference maker that he comes in here and all the WR woes are solved anyway.

 

The Bears are still going to need to develop a WR eventually. If you sign Jackson, probably aren't going WR in the first couple rounds. And if you don't go WR in Rounds 1 or 2, then you probably have a long shot to get anyone even as good as Earl Bennett...the current best WR.

 

You sign a Garcon type to be your #1 receiver and you've still got one of the worst receiving corps in the league. I could get on board with getting a Garcon AND a Manningham. And I don't see why signing Jackson would preclude getting a WR early in the draft.

 

And "only" 20-25 million? That's gotta put you at or near the top for available cap room among all franchises.

[jersey cubs fan]

The Bears are still going to need to develop a WR eventually. If you sign Jackson, probably aren't going WR in the first couple rounds. And if you don't go WR in Rounds 1 or 2, then you probably have a long shot to get anyone even as good as Earl Bennett...the current best WR.

 

Good front offices with a good offensive line and a good QB should be able to turn 3rd - 5th round WR picks into viable options, especially when they have quality receivers lining up with them.

 

Even when the Bears get a good front office. Don't have a good OL. Don't have quality WRs lining up. I think that's a whole helluva lot to come together in 1 offseason. If we had the OL or a WR like Jackson in place, then sure a 3rd round WR would be fine. But that's my issue. Jackson is a quality WR, but he's not that good that he would fix the problem enough to ease a 3rd-5th round WR into the offense. I think even with Jackson you still need a 1 or 2 pick in. And I think Jackson makes that less likely than a cheaper option, that may only be marginally less productive.

 

But you seem to be complaining about the notion that if they sign Jackson they won't spend a 1st or 2nd on a WR, when in fact, if they do sign Jackson, then a 3rd or 4th round WR mixed into the rest of the group should actually be a good thing.

[jersey cubs fan]

And "only" 20-25 million? That's gotta put you at or near the top for available cap room among all franchises.

 

But not every team has a QB and a RB due for a raise.

[jersey cubs fan]

I'm of the opinion that the Bears shouldn't be ruling out any of these guys, Jackson included. If they spend big on him, they can still sign help somewhere else and draft d-line, o-line, secondary, WR and LB as needed in the first 4 rounds (5 picks).

[rawaction]

Bears only have an estimated 20-25Mil next year. 6-8 of that will go to Forte, whether he is franchised or signed long-term. And the Bears are either going to need to give pay increases to their current starters at CB, TE, and DE....or they are going to have to spend more to upgrade each position. And probably should upgrade SS and SLB. And most want to upgrade backup QB and TE.

 

I'm a fan of signing guys who are under-utilized on their current, pass oriented offenses. I wanted Malcom Floyd and/or James Jones last year. This year, I'm looking at guys like Robert Meachem, Mario Manningham (now that Victor Cruz has taken off), and Pierre Garcon (was under-used when Manning/Collie/Clark was healthy). I think you can get guys like that pretty cheap, increase their targets by 30-40 and watch them produce. They're all better than what the Bears currently have. And guaranteeing one of these guys 10Mil is a lot better than guaranteeing an older V Jack 2-3 times as much to be marginally better. The Bears are still going to have to get a WR along with Jackson, if he were to be brought in. Jackson isn't that much of a difference maker that he comes in here and all the WR woes are solved anyway.

 

The Bears are still going to need to develop a WR eventually. If you sign Jackson, probably aren't going WR in the first couple rounds. And if you don't go WR in Rounds 1 or 2, then you probably have a long shot to get anyone even as good as Earl Bennett...the current best WR.

 

You sign a Garcon type to be your #1 receiver and you've still got one of the worst receiving corps in the league. I could get on board with getting a Garcon AND a Manningham. And I don't see why signing Jackson would preclude getting a WR early in the draft.

"Only" 20-25 million? That's gotta put you at or near the top for available cap room.

 

You sign a Garcon and draft a Michael Floyd....then you're in business, though.

 

I think Jackson precludes you from getting a WR early in the draft, because you're talking about 20-30MIl guaranteed invested into the position with Jackson. I know 1st rounders don't get paid like they used to, but that's still a lot invested into the WR position for a team that still needs plenty of help on the OL, starters at DE, TE, CB; and soon to invest more money into RB and LB.

[rawaction]

The Bears are still going to need to develop a WR eventually. If you sign Jackson, probably aren't going WR in the first couple rounds. And if you don't go WR in Rounds 1 or 2, then you probably have a long shot to get anyone even as good as Earl Bennett...the current best WR.

 

Good front offices with a good offensive line and a good QB should be able to turn 3rd - 5th round WR picks into viable options, especially when they have quality receivers lining up with them.

 

Even when the Bears get a good front office. Don't have a good OL. Don't have quality WRs lining up. I think that's a whole helluva lot to come together in 1 offseason. If we had the OL or a WR like Jackson in place, then sure a 3rd round WR would be fine. But that's my issue. Jackson is a quality WR, but he's not that good that he would fix the problem enough to ease a 3rd-5th round WR into the offense. I think even with Jackson you still need a 1 or 2 pick in. And I think Jackson makes that less likely than a cheaper option, that may only be marginally less productive.

 

But you seem to be complaining about the notion that if they sign Jackson they won't spend a 1st or 2nd on a WR, when in fact, if they do sign Jackson, then a 3rd or 4th round WR mixed into the rest of the group should actually be a good thing.

 

No. I'm saying that Jackson's not good enough with the rest of the group. And I'm saying a 3rd or 4th round WR, probably won't be a factor in 2012.

[Magnetic Curses]

Bears only have an estimated 20-25Mil next year. 6-8 of that will go to Forte, whether he is franchised or signed long-term. And the Bears are either going to need to give pay increases to their current starters at CB, TE, and DE....or they are going to have to spend more to upgrade each position. And probably should upgrade SS and SLB. And most want to upgrade backup QB and TE.

 

I'm a fan of signing guys who are under-utilized on their current, pass oriented offenses. I wanted Malcom Floyd and/or James Jones last year. This year, I'm looking at guys like Robert Meachem, Mario Manningham (now that Victor Cruz has taken off), and Pierre Garcon (was under-used when Manning/Collie/Clark was healthy). I think you can get guys like that pretty cheap, increase their targets by 30-40 and watch them produce. They're all better than what the Bears currently have. And guaranteeing one of these guys 10Mil is a lot better than guaranteeing an older V Jack 2-3 times as much to be marginally better. The Bears are still going to have to get a WR along with Jackson, if he were to be brought in. Jackson isn't that much of a difference maker that he comes in here and all the WR woes are solved anyway.

 

The Bears are still going to need to develop a WR eventually. If you sign Jackson, probably aren't going WR in the first couple rounds. And if you don't go WR in Rounds 1 or 2, then you probably have a long shot to get anyone even as good as Earl Bennett...the current best WR.

 

vincent jackson and earl bennett are a pretty good 1-2. i'd be happy with that.

[jersey cubs fan]

No. I'm saying that Jackson's not good enough with the rest of the group. And I'm saying a 3rd or 4th round WR, probably won't be a factor in 2012.

 

There's no guarantee any rookie WR will be a factor in 2012.

[Formerly Snayke]

VJax was targeted 105 times in '08, 115 times in '09, 20 (in 5 games) in '10 and 110 times in 2011.

 

Fitzgerald has been targeted no fewer than 151 times since '08.

 

C. Johnson has been targeted no fewer than 131 times since '08.

 

Roddy White's low has been 152.

 

So, basically....he's not as good as them. If he was, he would be getting that many targets. Yet, he's going to get paid like he is as good as them. Plus, he turns 29 next week, and has 2 strikes from the NFL and is 1 more DUI away from a year long suspension.

 

I think I agree. Of the 29 players who had 100+ targets, VJax's catch rate was only higher than Brandon Lloyd, Greg Little and Fitzgerald (whose percentage is probably skewed by bad quarterbacking). A 54 percent catch rate just can't justify a No. 1 receiver salary.

[Guest]

Earl Bennett is a lock for one of the top 3 receiver positions, and I suppose Hester could still be listed as an option as a 4th or 5th receiver, but Vincent Jackson and one more solid pick up/draft guy could turn a huge weakness into a strength. Expanding pass plays to include the TE a little bit more should spread the field a bit more, also.

[minnesotacubsfan]

VJ isn't going to get #1 money from anyone