rawaction

There are only three 8-2 teams. Packers beat the Jets in NY....who beat the Pats. None of them have played Atlanta yet. The team of the moment is the Eagles who the Packers beat in Philly, though that was pre-Vick taking over. Since the horrible loss at home vs. Miami (where they had major injury issues), they've won 4 straight, giving up an average of 3 points in the last 3. Granted Dallas and Minnesota probably quit, but neither game was anywhere near being in doubt (76-10 combined score). And you still have the impressive shutout in NY to give those wins merit. Maybe Atlanta should be #1, but Green Bay has just as good an argument as anyone.

I can't help but see him and think "Kordell Stewart". Maybe it's the similar size and the #10, but Kordell was a decent looking college passer too. He has a couple more years left, so I gotta see how he progresses. I havent' seen too much Baylor football as it is anyway.

Intangibles. He has a ton of them. Leadership, clock management, confidence. Also very mobile and can throw on the run very well. I take issue with the clock management idea. Not on my eye test. He led some late drives in last year's run, but he takes bad sacks by holding onto the ball and isn't very efficient with his decisions. And while those are the typical intangibles of a solid college QB (which he is) they generally don't land you on the top of draft boards. Teams generally spend a 6th or 7th on such players and hope they can develop into a backup. I would put him below Kyle Orton when he came out and nobody was talking about Kyle Orton when he came out (at least in my mind). he's also got a really slow release and terrible arm. Orton or Stanzi?

I didn't come away thinking Stanzi could throw the medium depth out route to the wide side of the field when I saw him play the last couple weeks. I think he can throw everything else though. He'll pick you apart in between the hashes and throws a pretty deep ball. Pro-style offense gets him a bump up, but I still think he's a 3rd round talent. Definitely like him more than I liked Orton coming out. Better deep ball. Much better mobility.

Intangibles. He has a ton of them. Leadership, clock management, confidence. Also very mobile and can throw on the run very well.

Kaepernick is definitely further along than Josh Freeman. Freeman couldn't complete a pass to save his life at K-State. Freeman completed 58.6% his last year, 63% the year before. Kaepernick's numbers are similar but reversed Jr. vs. Sr. year. Plus, theres' the level of competition thing. Texas, Oklahoma, Texas Tech, Mizzou, and Oklahoma St all finished top 20 that year. Kaepernick's SOS is a lot easier than that.

Doesn't Gabbert have another year left? Why would he come out early? Also, my (biased) sleeper QB is Ben Chappell out of IU. He's not an NFL starter, but he can make every single throw. He's not very mobile, but is probably as tough a QB as I have seen. Takes a crap load of hits vs. the likes of Iowa, Wisconsin, Ohio St, and this year, Illinois.

Kapernick is probably rawer than Newton. Kinda like a Josh Johnson in Tampa. Not quite as polished as even Josh Freeman.

I was a huge Matt Ryan fan when he was coming out. I will admit that I don't have much of a clue when evaluating QBs, but I really like Ryan for some reason. I like Luck about 20X more than I liked Ryan though. As has been stated, he's a smart, RS Sophomore who values getting his education, and as Bradford showed, if he's the #1 pick this year, he can almost do nothing next year and still be the #1 pick in a year. Nick Foles is the guy to look at if you want to fall in love with measurables. Can hold his own with Mallett in size and arm, but is much more athletic. Pretty raw though. I'd rate the QBs: Luck, Foles, Mallett, Newton, then Locker. I also really like Ricky Stanzi and Christian Ponder way more than I probably should.

Luck, and it's not even close. Luck is the #1 pick if he comes out. He has all the makings to be a Tom Brady or Matt Ryan type QB. He won't wow you with off the chart arm strength and measurables, but he is the best leader, most poised, and most cerebral QB that I have personally seen since Peyton Manning. And he has the ability to make every throw. Luck may not even come out though.

They blitzed him though, and hit him hard a bunch of times. He did miss some throws, but I think they got into his head a little bit and forced him to make hot reads and get rid of the ball quickly. Those rushed throws are the ones he missed.

I think it's on the defense because I don't see the offense winning a shootout. They've scored 27 only twice. Philly has done so 6 times. Philly's defense has given up some points in shootouts, but they are a top ten defense for yardage, tough against the pass and run. I can't see this Bears offense scoring 28 points against them. Agreed. I think Asante Samuel is off limits this game. Whoever he's covering, doesn't get a pass to him. Samuel is a better version of DeAngelo Hall. Great at jumping routes and baiting QBs to make ill-advised throws. Throw in the Eagles exotic blitzes, and the Bears O will have some trouble. The Eagles can be beaten on defense, though I don't know if the Bears have the firepower to do so consistently enough for 24+ points. If the Bears are going to win, it's going to be because the defense and special teams.

If there was any team as a Bears fan you wanted to see the Eagles face a week before coming to Chicago, it's the Giants. Fewell was offered the Bears DC position. He runs a very similar style defense. The Bears need to take what the Giants did and take a step forward with it. The Giants were able to get some hits on Vick, and keep his run game contained. They were able to bring the blitz and force him to throw quick and hot. They were able to keep contain with the front 4 and force Vick to his right when he left the pocket. The Bears DL compares decently to the Giants DL, though the Giants are deeper. Tuck was great last night, and Peppers is a better player. The Bears LBs are better than the Eagles LBs. The key will be the safeties. The Giants DBs overall are better, but the safeties have to keep everything in front of them and come up and make tackles on the short passes.

Greg Olsen has been a better blocker than Manu this year. Problem with that is Olsen is actually a decent receiver too and can't do both at the same time. I honestly think Manumaleuna could get cut this offseason, he's been that bad. I think he should. There is no reason to keep an expensive blocking tight end on the roster when he doesn't block at an elite level. He never should have been signed, or praised as a great signing, in the first place. They keep putting him out there over Desmond Clark though. So, I'm guessing he will be brought back. I'd like to draft a TE (6th round or later) or sign an undrafted FA.

The NFC 5th and 6th seed is going to be an interesting battle. Could be a matter of going to Chicago, Green Bay, New York, or Philly in the first round vs. going to Seattle or St Louis. Not to mention facing probably an 11-win team vs. a likely 8 win team.

Greg Olsen has been a better blocker than Manu this year. Problem with that is Olsen is actually a decent receiver too and can't do both at the same time. I honestly think Manumaleuna could get cut this offseason, he's been that bad.

That's a good one. But you're still talking about a C vs. a 1B. Maybe I'm giving Hendry too much credit, but he can't be dumb enough to put Davis at 1B and be done with it.

First of all, none of those guys were unproven when the Cubs acquired them. They all had ML experience with no upside, and all were proven to suck. Hendry just didn't realize that they all sucked because he was enamored with their ability to play multiple positions, sometimes very poorly. Secondly, those guys were all intended to be bench players when they were acquired. Them getting as much playing time as they did was due to injuries and bad managers. Granted, Davis could continue to suck at the plate. He could also get a ton more ABs than he should if the Cubs signed someone else to start ahead of him. But Davis is an entirely different situation. Aaron Miles was acquired to start at 2B the majority of the time. Cesar Izturis was acquired to be the starting SS. Freddie Bynum had less playing time than Davis does already, and Macias was just a little more. It's not like Davis hasn't had significant major league experience. Parts of three seasons and 872 PA. He's not untested. Different situations though. As was stated, Miles was in no way acquired to start at 2B. I will give you Izturis though. But again, I think all those guys came with a "you know what you are going to get" tag. Miles could "play" all the IF spots and switch hit. Neifi could play all the IF spots and play good defense. Macias could "play" 6 spots and could switch hit. Same with Bynum. Izturis was a guy that could catch the ball, when Hendry had that fetish. Those are all guys Hendry targeted for the specific reasons of ignorantly overating versatility and guys that could catch the ball. Davis you don't know what you are going to get. He's a young guy with upside to be an everyday player. That doesn't mean he should be an everyday player off the bat though, and I think Hendry knows that. Hendry knew what he was getting with those other guys, the problem is he valued what he was getting way more than any normal human would.

Huh? That was regarding Pie and Patterson. They started without being proven on the ML level because they were top prospects. There's really not much of a choice (Hendry point of view) but to start guys like that without previous ML success.

If we're talking about wildcard, I don't think it matters that much Giants or Eagles. You only have to beat out 1 of them or the Saints. You'll have a game lead on the loser this week, and even w/ the Saints.

I think the Wildcat would be more effective against a team like the Bears that likes to shoot up the field at the first sign of run. The wildcat I thought would give the Dolphins a chance to get linemen out on Urlacher and Briggs and allow the RB a slight delay to read his blockers. Of course, you were playing 2nd/3rd string interior linemen too. Still, I thought at least the Bears would see designed rollouts w/ a mobile QB. Didn't really try that either.

He started a season with Murton in LF and no safety net. He purposefully went into a season with Todd Hollandsworth and Burnitz as his corner outfielders. He handed the keys to Corey Patterson, Ryan Theriot and Felix Pie. And this is the first time in his tenure that he is not getting the benefit of an expanding payroll to fill holes. This is a guy with nearly 1000 major league PA, not some random kid. I have a feeling that the emphasis is on pitching this offseason and that he is going to go cheap at 1B. So if he trades for somebody with power and absolutely no patience he might be satisfied. That's my fear, and I really don't see it as unfounded. Jim Hendry sucks at being a GM and I fear what he will do with this team. Murton and Theriot (and Soto) all put up .900 OPS's in limited time the year BEFORE they were thrown in as full-time starters. Pie and Patterson were were both homegrown #1 prospects when they were thrown in there. The Cubs' long term success was heavily dependant in them having success (same with Castro last year).

First of all, none of those guys were unproven when the Cubs acquired them. They all had ML experience with no upside, and all were proven to suck. Hendry just didn't realize that they all sucked because he was enamored with their ability to play multiple positions, sometimes very poorly. Secondly, those guys were all intended to be bench players when they were acquired. Them getting as much playing time as they did was due to injuries and bad managers. Granted, Davis could continue to suck at the plate. He could also get a ton more ABs than he should if the Cubs signed someone else to start ahead of him. But Davis is an entirely different situation.

If the guy is strictly a bench player, fine with me. But I really fear that's how Hendry would go cheap at 1B for the starter. And that would be a bad idea. This is pretty much how I feel. I fear that Hendry's tunnel vision will prohibit him from seeing some of the other, better options out there and he'll pursue Davis at any cost. I doubt he will pursue him at any cost, my fear is he thinks he might be good enough to allow him to not worry anymore about 1B and just get more mediocre pitching. I don't know why you would think that. I'm sure Jim Hendry knows that Chris Davis was benched and sent to the minors a couple times this year. I'm sure he knows that his numbers have stunk for the last 2 years. I don't know why you think a guy that has been hesitant to even have unproven guys in key roles on the roster will all of a sudden be ok with Davis at a key position. That's not to say Hendry won't do something stupid like a 3-year deal to Paul Konerko, but he's never really thrown a player with no proven success in the fire unless it was a big-time prospect from his own farm system.

http://www.312sports.com/images/stories/Bears/ManningHit.jpg Look at that form! Everybody that was whining about how don't lead with your head rules takes away hitting in football need to look at that form. He led with the shoulder, his arms are wrapped. If that was a cheapshot the arms would be tucked in and/or down by the side and his helmet would be in the guy's chest, not off to the side. This is football 101, yet people don't understand what actual tackling is. I agree 100%. And the rules didn't change, just being reinforced stronger. A lot of people didn't get that either.