2015 Bears Offseason (Foxy new Head Coach page 104)

[ctcf]

So what's the Bears payroll/cap situation for this off-season looking like?

 

http://overthecap.com/salary-cap/chicago-bears

 

And here's a calculator to play around with:

 

http://overthecap.com/calculator/chicago-bears/

 

Thanks! Looks like they're in pretty decent shape, cap-wise.

[rawaction]

A nice read on how the 49ers under Vic Fangio weren't strictly a 3-4 team and how they ran a 4-3 under with 3-4 personnel: http://www.ninersnation.com/2013/5/2/4294242/football-university-49ers-defensive-fronts-vic-fangio-3-4-nickel-4-3-under

 

John Fox is also a 4-3 under guy. I'm pretty interested in seeing what they do on defense, especially with so many edge rushers and Danny Shelton potentially available at the 7th pick.

 

I've played out this scenario a bunch in my head. Here's a quick rough draft of the way I would play it, if I were GM and moving to a hybrid or 3-4.

 

I really like Paea, but he wouldn't be a good fit, so I'd let him walk and spend the money I would've paid him in a 4-3 D, to Dan Williams the Arizona NT. Don't like Shelton at 7 for a bunch of reasons. Don't want a rookie NT in a scheme everyone is learning together. Still have Ego to develop at NT. Rather use 7 on a more important edge rusher. And I don't think Shelton is one of the 7 (or 15) best players in this draft.

 

I know it doesn't save the team any money, but I'd probably cut Jared Allen. I don't see him as a good fit, although I guess he could play the Cliff Avril role in a Seahawks-like hybrid.

 

The Bears wouldn't have to change much upfront to go hybrid or 1-gap 3-4 (which is what 9ers ran). Ratliff would still play the 3-technique. His responsibilities wouldn't change from last year. Williams would the NT who gives the Bears a better run defender than Paea, but they do lose in the pass rush. Houston would play the 5-technique, probably have to add about 10lbs from the 270 he was at last year, but he could certainly do it as he's played about everywhere in the 280-300 range in the last 5 years.

 

The Bears would almost certainly have to add 2 completely different types of LBs though. They would need a potential stud pass rusher and a stout run stopper. Young would actually be pretty versatile I think. He could be on the strong side and really help shut down the run game or he could be on the weak side as the best pass rusher. On the other side, McClellin or Jones could put their versatility to use and rush the passer, cover TEs and stop the run. Bostic would be one of the inside LBs, along with either Jones or a FA or a draft pick.

 

NT- D. Williams, Ferguson

DE (3-tech)- Ratliff, Sutton

DE (5-tech)- Houston

LOLB- McClellin, Jones, 1st pick (Shane Ray?)

ROLB- Young, Ray

WILB- Bostic, Greene

SILB- Jones, FA

 

Ratliff could play some 5 with Sutton at 3. But would probably need to add another DL. Guys like Bass/Washington could get some time at OLB. In the nickel, you can have any combo of Young, Ray, McClellin, Houston, Jones, Bass/Washington all rushing from the edge.

If you're plan is to have Ratliff as a 3T and not NT, not sure why you'd essentially choose him over Paea in that role. You could walk fully away from Ratliff and pay the younger Paea instead to play the 3T spot.

 

Because Ratliff is a better player. Ratliff is under contract for next year for a very affordable 1.8Mil. Paea is NOT under contract and would likely require a 3-4 year deal over 4Mil/year. Paea also has predominately played NT, not 3-tech as a Bear. Not saying he can't do it, but it's not worth that much money to see if he can, especially when him playing 3-tech may just be short term while Fangio gears up for a more traditional 3-4.

[Guest]

A nice read on how the 49ers under Vic Fangio weren't strictly a 3-4 team and how they ran a 4-3 under with 3-4 personnel: http://www.ninersnation.com/2013/5/2/4294242/football-university-49ers-defensive-fronts-vic-fangio-3-4-nickel-4-3-under

 

John Fox is also a 4-3 under guy. I'm pretty interested in seeing what they do on defense, especially with so many edge rushers and Danny Shelton potentially available at the 7th pick.

 

I've played out this scenario a bunch in my head. Here's a quick rough draft of the way I would play it, if I were GM and moving to a hybrid or 3-4.

 

I really like Paea, but he wouldn't be a good fit, so I'd let him walk and spend the money I would've paid him in a 4-3 D, to Dan Williams the Arizona NT. Don't like Shelton at 7 for a bunch of reasons. Don't want a rookie NT in a scheme everyone is learning together. Still have Ego to develop at NT. Rather use 7 on a more important edge rusher. And I don't think Shelton is one of the 7 (or 15) best players in this draft.

 

I know it doesn't save the team any money, but I'd probably cut Jared Allen. I don't see him as a good fit, although I guess he could play the Cliff Avril role in a Seahawks-like hybrid.

 

The Bears wouldn't have to change much upfront to go hybrid or 1-gap 3-4 (which is what 9ers ran). Ratliff would still play the 3-technique. His responsibilities wouldn't change from last year. Williams would the NT who gives the Bears a better run defender than Paea, but they do lose in the pass rush. Houston would play the 5-technique, probably have to add about 10lbs from the 270 he was at last year, but he could certainly do it as he's played about everywhere in the 280-300 range in the last 5 years.

 

The Bears would almost certainly have to add 2 completely different types of LBs though. They would need a potential stud pass rusher and a stout run stopper. Young would actually be pretty versatile I think. He could be on the strong side and really help shut down the run game or he could be on the weak side as the best pass rusher. On the other side, McClellin or Jones could put their versatility to use and rush the passer, cover TEs and stop the run. Bostic would be one of the inside LBs, along with either Jones or a FA or a draft pick.

 

NT- D. Williams, Ferguson

DE (3-tech)- Ratliff, Sutton

DE (5-tech)- Houston

LOLB- McClellin, Jones, 1st pick (Shane Ray?)

ROLB- Young, Ray

WILB- Bostic, Greene

SILB- Jones, FA

 

Ratliff could play some 5 with Sutton at 3. But would probably need to add another DL. Guys like Bass/Washington could get some time at OLB. In the nickel, you can have any combo of Young, Ray, McClellin, Houston, Jones, Bass/Washington all rushing from the edge.

If you're plan is to have Ratliff as a 3T and not NT, not sure why you'd essentially choose him over Paea in that role. You could walk fully away from Ratliff and pay the younger Paea instead to play the 3T spot.

 

Because Ratliff is a better player. Ratliff is under contract for next year for a very affordable 1.8Mil. Paea is NOT under contract and would likely require a 3-4 year deal over 4Mil/year. Paea also has predominately played NT, not 3-tech as a Bear. Not saying he can't do it, but it's not worth that much money to see if he can, especially when him playing 3-tech may just be short term while Fangio gears up for a more traditional 3-4.

Not sure there's evidence to say Fangio will be gearing up to a traditional 3-4 two gap scheme with two 5T ends. I imagine his schemes will continue to include a 3T guy for which Paea has the skillset.

[jersey cubs fan]

I don't see how the Bears are in a position where they can benefit from letting talented young defensive players walk.

[Guest]

So what's the Bears payroll/cap situation for this off-season looking like?

 

http://overthecap.com/salary-cap/chicago-bears

 

And here's a calculator to play around with:

 

http://overthecap.com/calculator/chicago-bears/

Also of note, the Bears draft pool should be about 5.7

http://overthecap.com/draft/

[Guest]

I don't see how the Bears are in a position where they can benefit from letting talented young defensive players walk.

Yea. Until Paea's cost creeps towards 5M I think you should make every effort keep him. Especially when Ratliff is a short term aging player himself. We have a 4-3 head coach and Fangio isn't a strict 2 gap guy. Let's just keep the good young players we have and fit the scheme to them.

[rawaction]

I don't see how the Bears are in a position where they can benefit from letting talented young defensive players walk.

 

You also failed to see that the Bears are getting a slightly superior player of the same age in lieu of Paea in my scenario.

[jersey cubs fan]

I don't see how the Bears are in a position where they can benefit from letting talented young defensive players walk.

 

You also failed to see that the Bears are getting a slightly superior player of the same age in lieu of Paea in my scenario.

 

Bird in hand.

 

It seems a lot easier to keep your slightly inferior player rather than bet you can go out and get somebody else to replace him. That plan most likely results in you coming away with neither guy.

[rawaction]

A nice read on how the 49ers under Vic Fangio weren't strictly a 3-4 team and how they ran a 4-3 under with 3-4 personnel: http://www.ninersnation.com/2013/5/2/4294242/football-university-49ers-defensive-fronts-vic-fangio-3-4-nickel-4-3-under

 

John Fox is also a 4-3 under guy. I'm pretty interested in seeing what they do on defense, especially with so many edge rushers and Danny Shelton potentially available at the 7th pick.

 

I've played out this scenario a bunch in my head. Here's a quick rough draft of the way I would play it, if I were GM and moving to a hybrid or 3-4.

 

I really like Paea, but he wouldn't be a good fit, so I'd let him walk and spend the money I would've paid him in a 4-3 D, to Dan Williams the Arizona NT. Don't like Shelton at 7 for a bunch of reasons. Don't want a rookie NT in a scheme everyone is learning together. Still have Ego to develop at NT. Rather use 7 on a more important edge rusher. And I don't think Shelton is one of the 7 (or 15) best players in this draft.

 

I know it doesn't save the team any money, but I'd probably cut Jared Allen. I don't see him as a good fit, although I guess he could play the Cliff Avril role in a Seahawks-like hybrid.

 

The Bears wouldn't have to change much upfront to go hybrid or 1-gap 3-4 (which is what 9ers ran). Ratliff would still play the 3-technique. His responsibilities wouldn't change from last year. Williams would the NT who gives the Bears a better run defender than Paea, but they do lose in the pass rush. Houston would play the 5-technique, probably have to add about 10lbs from the 270 he was at last year, but he could certainly do it as he's played about everywhere in the 280-300 range in the last 5 years.

 

The Bears would almost certainly have to add 2 completely different types of LBs though. They would need a potential stud pass rusher and a stout run stopper. Young would actually be pretty versatile I think. He could be on the strong side and really help shut down the run game or he could be on the weak side as the best pass rusher. On the other side, McClellin or Jones could put their versatility to use and rush the passer, cover TEs and stop the run. Bostic would be one of the inside LBs, along with either Jones or a FA or a draft pick.

 

NT- D. Williams, Ferguson

DE (3-tech)- Ratliff, Sutton

DE (5-tech)- Houston

LOLB- McClellin, Jones, 1st pick (Shane Ray?)

ROLB- Young, Ray

WILB- Bostic, Greene

SILB- Jones, FA

 

Ratliff could play some 5 with Sutton at 3. But would probably need to add another DL. Guys like Bass/Washington could get some time at OLB. In the nickel, you can have any combo of Young, Ray, McClellin, Houston, Jones, Bass/Washington all rushing from the edge.

If you're plan is to have Ratliff as a 3T and not NT, not sure why you'd essentially choose him over Paea in that role. You could walk fully away from Ratliff and pay the younger Paea instead to play the 3T spot.

 

Because Ratliff is a better player. Ratliff is under contract for next year for a very affordable 1.8Mil. Paea is NOT under contract and would likely require a 3-4 year deal over 4Mil/year. Paea also has predominately played NT, not 3-tech as a Bear. Not saying he can't do it, but it's not worth that much money to see if he can, especially when him playing 3-tech may just be short term while Fangio gears up for a more traditional 3-4.

Not sure there's evidence to say Fangio will be gearing up to a traditional 3-4 two gap scheme with two 5T ends. I imagine his schemes will continue to include a 3T guy for which Paea has the skillset.

 

Hence, the word "may". FYI, he ran both in SF. I think he ran mixed in the 1-gap because he had an undersized NT the last couple years and Justin Smith can do everything. If he runs some 3-4, he's going to likely run some 2-gap, because he always has.

[Guest]

I don't see how the Bears are in a position where they can benefit from letting talented young defensive players walk.

 

You also failed to see that the Bears are getting a slightly superior player of the same age in lieu of Paea in my scenario.

Probably at a more than slight cost increase no?

[rawaction]

I don't see how the Bears are in a position where they can benefit from letting talented young defensive players walk.

 

You also failed to see that the Bears are getting a slightly superior player of the same age in lieu of Paea in my scenario.

 

Bird in hand.

 

It seems a lot easier to keep your slightly inferior player rather than bet you can go out and get somebody else to replace him. That plan most likely results in you coming away with neither guy.

 

Don't have the bird in the hand though. Paea is just as available as Williams is. Granted, you can sign Paea before you can Williams, but you are then gambling on Paea's fit. And again, he's not a good 3-4 fit based on lack of length. And despite his skillset suggesting he can, he hasn't played 3-tech nearly enough to show he can be a full-time, long-term option there.

[jersey cubs fan]

I don't see how the Bears are in a position where they can benefit from letting talented young defensive players walk.

 

You also failed to see that the Bears are getting a slightly superior player of the same age in lieu of Paea in my scenario.

 

Bird in hand.

 

It seems a lot easier to keep your slightly inferior player rather than bet you can go out and get somebody else to replace him. That plan most likely results in you coming away with neither guy.

 

Don't have the bird in the hand though. Paea is just as available as Williams is. Granted, you can sign Paea before you can Williams, but you are then gambling on Paea's fit. And again, he's not a good 3-4 fit based on lack of length. And despite his skillset suggesting he can, he hasn't played 3-tech nearly enough to show he can be a full-time, long-term option there.

 

It is always easier to bring back your own guy rather than go out and get somebody else's guy.

[Guest]

the bears have a good and versatile line. Paea can play up front on a 3-4 either outside or inside.

[jersey cubs fan]

Lance is openly campaigning for a job with the Bears and while I was disgusted by his blatant nonbuyin of trestman I will admit I'd be all for bringing him back on a cheap deal. The Bears are too thin at LB to rule him out and a rejuvenated Briggs would reinforce just how poorly trestman and tucker did their jobs.

[Butterscup1679666578]

if he's mostly healthy and not 800 pounds next year i'm down with it as well

[Smack]

Lance is openly campaigning for a job with the Bears and while I was disgusted by his blatant nonbuyin of trestman I will admit I'd be all for bringing him back on a cheap deal. The Bears are too thin at LB to rule him out and a rejuvenated Briggs would reinforce just how poorly trestman and tucker did their jobs.

 

He seems like the type of guy that wouldn't take a cheap one year deal. I think his ego is too big.

[rawaction]

Lance is openly campaigning for a job with the Bears and while I was disgusted by his blatant nonbuyin of trestman I will admit I'd be all for bringing him back on a cheap deal. The Bears are too thin at LB to rule him out and a rejuvenated Briggs would reinforce just how poorly trestman and tucker did their jobs.

 

Yep. Especially inside in a 3-4. I think he'd be an asset and rejuvenated.

[rawaction]

Lance is openly campaigning for a job with the Bears and while I was disgusted by his blatant nonbuyin of trestman I will admit I'd be all for bringing him back on a cheap deal. The Bears are too thin at LB to rule him out and a rejuvenated Briggs would reinforce just how poorly trestman and tucker did their jobs.

 

He seems like the type of guy that wouldn't take a cheap one year deal. I think his ego is too big.

 

Nah. He saw what happened to Urlacher and almost to Tillman. Good chance if he's not a Bear he's not an NFL player anymore.

[jersey cubs fan]

Lance is openly campaigning for a job with the Bears and while I was disgusted by his blatant nonbuyin of trestman I will admit I'd be all for bringing him back on a cheap deal. The Bears are too thin at LB to rule him out and a rejuvenated Briggs would reinforce just how poorly trestman and tucker did their jobs.

 

He seems like the type of guy that wouldn't take a cheap one year deal. I think his ego is too big.

I think he saw that he shot himself in the foot in terms of post playing career. He's not a big enough star to go out in an ugly manner and maintain stature. And he never won a super bowl. It's pretty obvious he sees fox and the staff as a huge upgrade and a chance to win, or at least go out on a much more positive note.

[ctcf]

From Adam Schefter's article this morning on ESPN.com:

 

3. Which team will land potential free-agent-to-be Ndamukong Suh? Many around the league do not expect the Lions to use their franchise tag on Suh because it would cost them $26.87 million -- just too steep a price. Assuming Suh is not tagged, he will be free to leave, and he probably would be the most desirable unrestricted free agent on the market. Those who know Suh believe that playing in New York, Dallas or Chicago always has appealed to him. The four teams in those cities certainly have the need; then again, any team could use Suh.

[minnesotacubsfan]

Suh in Dallas would be insane.

[Cubswin11]

Suh in Dallas would be insane.

I think they'd have to do some pretty creative/crazy things to fit his salary in. Like let both Dez and Demarco walk and re-structure/cut guys.

[minnesotacubsfan]

given that thought process, both Dallas and NYG would need some cap help.

[Cubswin11]

given that thought process, both Dallas and NYG would need some cap help.

I think the Giants actually have some decent cap space

[minnesotacubsfan]

not according to the link above, well not nearly as good as the Bears

 

question is, with all our holes, do you spend it all on one position?