The Bears offseason

[BigbadB]

I'm all in on that one. Geez that would be one hell of a late offseason snag.

[Butterscup]

this absolutely has to happen.

 

not in a "if they dont this offseason was shitty they dropped the ball when they couldve made a big splash" kind of way

 

more like "holy horsefeathers this team could be a super bowl contender next year" kind of way

[minnesotacubsfan]

Eh, wouldn't go that far

[Bobson Dugnutt]

Eh, wouldn't go that far

 

With a strong enough draft, I could see it.

[WrigleyField 22]

I guess their "true" cap available is in the 13.5M range. Rolle is an easy way to increase that another 2M. Still with Norman looking for 16m+ it won't necessarily be an easy deal to fit in, I'm sure half needs to be guaranteed.

[David]

jay cutty continues to be a bad man

 

[tweet]

[/tweet]

[raw]

Norman's not happening. I still think the Wilkerson move has a slight chance of happening. Norman is 28, great CB, but they can go from elite to not that great in a hurry. Wilkerson is 25, I believe and would do wonders for the front 7. If the Bears are going to make a big splash before the season, I don't think it will come in the form of Josh Norman. Love Norman's game though.

[David]

[tweet]

[/tweet]

 

[tweet]

[/tweet]

[Brian]

jay cutty continues to be a bad man

 

now all i want to see is what Jay's disinterested bat flip and home run trot would be.

[jersey cubs fan]

[tweet]

[/tweet]

 

others framed it as dan asking which team was in love with him and Elliott said "probably the bears".

[Derwood]

Can't see them trading up to get him

[JonJayCutler]

Would be fun watching Elliott but yeah, only if he fell to 11. Looks like that probably won't happen though.

 

Hoping one of Buckner/Jack falls to us.

[David]

I would really hate drafting a RB in the first round. I just don't like it.

[Banedon]

I would really hate drafting a RB in the first round. I just don't like it.

 

Agree. Too easy to find RB's later on.

[WrigleyField 22]

I would really hate drafting a RB in the first round. I just don't like it.

 

Agree. Too easy to find RB's later on.

Elliott isn't really a normal RB though. He could be a top 5 RB which is still worth a first rounder, and a top 10 pick.

 

The one thing I would say is next year is supposed to be a great RB year. You could try and committee it and see if Langford proves his worth as the top dog this year. If not you have a good opportunity to fill the hole next draft.

 

I definitely wouldnt trade up for him thoigh, and taking him at 11 depends on who else is there.

[Tim]

I would really hate drafting a RB in the first round. I just don't like it.

 

Agree. Too easy to find RB's later on.

Elliott isn't really a normal RB though. He could be a top 5 RB which is still worth a first rounder, and a top 10 pick.

 

The one thing I would say is next year is supposed to be a great RB year. You could try and committee it and see if Langford proves his worth as the top dog this year. If not you have a good opportunity to fill the hole next draft.

 

I definitely wouldnt trade up for him thoigh, and taking him at 11 depends on who else is there.

I just think there are bigger needs than RB. I'd much rather improve the line, which can make an average rb look like a great one.

[UMFan83]

I would really hate drafting a RB in the first round. I just don't like it.

 

Me too. I am not 100% sold on Langford at all (but not necessarily down on him either), but I think that drafting a RB in the first round is risky and is not close to our biggest area of need.

[UMFan83]

I would really hate drafting a RB in the first round. I just don't like it.

 

Agree. Too easy to find RB's later on.

Elliott isn't really a normal RB though. He could be a top 5 RB which is still worth a first rounder, and a top 10 pick.

 

The one thing I would say is next year is supposed to be a great RB year. You could try and committee it and see if Langford proves his worth as the top dog this year. If not you have a good opportunity to fill the hole next draft.

 

I definitely wouldnt trade up for him thoigh, and taking him at 11 depends on who else is there.

 

I feel like after QB, RB has the biggest miss rate at the top of the draft. If they are a great RB, you get amazing production over a 5-6 year period if there are no injuries, but the risk of having the next Cedric Benson/Curtis Enis is there and the Bears cannot afford to miss badly on a 1st rounder right now (I guess no team can really afford to but with the pieces starting to come together for the Bears it would be great time to hit on your 1st)

[WrigleyField 22]

 

Agree. Too easy to find RB's later on.

Elliott isn't really a normal RB though. He could be a top 5 RB which is still worth a first rounder, and a top 10 pick.

 

The one thing I would say is next year is supposed to be a great RB year. You could try and committee it and see if Langford proves his worth as the top dog this year. If not you have a good opportunity to fill the hole next draft.

 

I definitely wouldnt trade up for him thoigh, and taking him at 11 depends on who else is there.

I just think there are bigger needs than RB. I'd much rather improve the line, which can make an average rb look like a great one.

A great RB can also make up for a lines weaknesses. I really wouldn't complain about any position at 11, but I think RB is a bigger overall need than OL at this point, though neither are true Round 1 needs, IMO. If we're going true need based, 11 can only be a defensive pick.

[jersey cubs fan]

I would really hate drafting a RB in the first round. I just don't like it.

 

Agree. Too easy to find RB's later on.

the only reason he would even be close to available for the Bears at 11 is because of the anti-RB in the first round sentiment. But a truly elite RB is absolutely worthy of the pick. Getting the best RB in the draft at 11 could be much better than getting the 4th linebacker.

 

 

I think it would be a great use of resources and excellent value to get Elliot at 11. I wouldn't trade up to get him, but this team needs help on offense and they need dynamic players. The likelihood of getting a truly impactful defensive player at 11 seems very low. But if you can get the best skill position player in the draft at 11. Boy howdy, that's good pickin.

[WrigleyField 22]

 

Agree. Too easy to find RB's later on.

Elliott isn't really a normal RB though. He could be a top 5 RB which is still worth a first rounder, and a top 10 pick.

 

The one thing I would say is next year is supposed to be a great RB year. You could try and committee it and see if Langford proves his worth as the top dog this year. If not you have a good opportunity to fill the hole next draft.

 

I definitely wouldnt trade up for him thoigh, and taking him at 11 depends on who else is there.

 

I feel like after QB, RB has the biggest miss rate at the top of the draft. If they are a great RB, you get amazing production over a 5-6 year period if there are no injuries, but the risk of having the next Cedric Benson/Curtis Enis is there and the Bears cannot afford to miss badly on a 1st rounder right now (I guess no team can really afford to but with the pieces starting to come together for the Bears it would be great time to hit on your 1st)

Well I imagine QB has the biggest miss rate in general.

 

RB, I don't know. Even your example with Benson, who only went that high because it was a shitty draft, ended up being a fairly productive lead back when put in a better situation than Chicago. Definitely have a point about their shelf life though. If they can produce through their entire second contract like Forte did, you are in the 90th percentile of results.

[jersey cubs fan]

. If we're going true need based, 11 can only be a defensive pick.

 

that's just crazy talk

 

 

 

 

 

why are people pretending the offense doesn't have glaring needs? Alshon is the only thing resembling an offensive difference maker and he's as unreliable as such a player gets.

[WrigleyField 22]

. If we're going true need based, 11 can only be a defensive pick.

 

that's just crazy talk

 

 

 

 

 

why are people pretending the offense doesn't have glaring needs? Alshon is the only thing resembling an offensive difference maker and he's as unreliable as such a player gets.

I wouldn't call any of the offensives needs glaring. They can't ignore it, but they have pretty sufficient coverage everywhere but TE, which obviously has no one worthy at 11. A day two pick at a skill position and some day three depth would be sufficient as coverage for 2016 and development pieces beyond that.

 

That said, I'm not really a needs type. Give me BPA, offense or defense. Either can be improved still.

[jersey cubs fan]

. If we're going true need based, 11 can only be a defensive pick.

 

that's just crazy talk

 

 

 

 

 

why are people pretending the offense doesn't have glaring needs? Alshon is the only thing resembling an offensive difference maker and he's as unreliable as such a player gets.

I wouldn't call any of the offensives needs glaring. They can't ignore it, but they have pretty sufficient coverage everywhere but TE, which obviously has no one worthy at 11. A day two pick at a skill position and some day three depth would be sufficient as coverage for 2016 and development pieces beyond that.

 

That said, I'm not really a needs type. Give Mr BPA, offense or defense. Either can be improved still.

I'm not a need person either, but this team needs offensive improvement in a big way. Sufficient coverage doesn't win football games.

[David]

kevin white resembles an offensive difference maker, especially behind one of the best WR in the league.

 

i don't know if he is one, but he definitely resembles one about as much as a rookie with zero snaps can