DivineBovine

I can't understand how people can so confidently claim that the Bears receivers are crap and make comparisons with other receivers on teams with real passing offenses. Hester, Knox, and Aromashodu are young players who have never played on a team with a real passing game. There are tons of examples of receivers who have been different players in different systems. Moss with the Raiders and then Moss with the Patriots. Wes Welker pre and post Patriots. Any receiver that has ever played on Peyton Manning's Colts. So fitting that Wes Welker and Deion Branch are brought up in this thread. Deion Branch was a way better receiver than Welker in 2005 when he played on the Patriots and Welker didn't. Look at the stats. It's simply not fair to call out any receiver that played under Ron [expletive] Turner. Give them another year at least before calling them horrible.

USC and Cal fans should rejoice. The man who sold out his team saying they needed time to learn his offense is about to coach college kids who have to go to class and have 4 years max. It's not like he's ever been successful at any level, doubt this will change now. If Harbaugh gives him any control, they are in trouble.

I'm also pretty sick of hearing it about the Bears WRs being so terrible. The team must be so unlucky not to have had a good WR for 20 years, when the Colts seem to get so lucky with WR's all the time. Whomever they draft seems to turn to a stud. Geez. What terrible luck and terrible scouting the Bears have had. And man, that Colts GM must be amazing. I love how these so called football experts, many of whom have never played anything beyond nerf touch football, are so quick to point out how the Bears WR's can't run routes, don't make good reads, etc. etc. Let's see what happens. I know that coaching is pretty damn important in football. If Ron Turner was the fool that many people think he is (and his record supports this), then the offense should get much better this year.

You're kidding, right?

I agree with this statement. I lived in NY when the Knicks were decent, when the Yankees were winning championships, when the Giants won, and there is no place like it. Chicago probably has better and more loyal fans, but New York is New York. No egomaniac like LeBron would pass up the opportunity to rule NY if he could. Sorry Cleveland. And sorry Chicago. So my guess is that there's a good chance LeBron ends up in NY. He loves the bright lights. He's going to love hanging with JayZ and getting high fives from Spike Lee courtside. He's even a Yankee fan. The only question is whether he can win rings in NY. Because if he doesn't even win a championship, his legacy is tainted forever.

Why would a guy who's getting a max deal no matter what care about how crowded the free agent market is? It would be dumb for him to throw away guaranteed 9 figures of cash and play out 1 more year.

The thing that excites me most about Martz, besides the fact that he's is not Ron Turner, is that his receivers have traditionally gotten yards after the catch. The Bears have some guys that are pretty damn fast and elusive that could be pretty exciting if put in an offense where they caught the ball on the run. I was so sick of seeing our 4.3-40 guys catching jump balls in traffic.

I think he can develop into a pretty good NFL QB, but it'll take time (like 2-3 years minimum). He'll be optimized as a Kordell Stewart/slash type player, though, I think. Maybe so. I can't see how any team takes him any higher than the 4th round though. Somebody will fall in love with the intagibles and college production and take him in the first 3 rounds, I think. If nobody else, Jacksonville will just for the ticket sales. Depending on how they planned to use him, I'd have no problem with the Titans considering him with their 3rd round pick (other than I think we have bigger needs). How he does at the combine will be big, though, I think. What a mistake it will be. I heard some guy on the radio say he's not dropping past the late first round. I'm not sure why anyone thinks he can be a decent NFL player. He has shown very little in terms of being able to pass the ball. There are tons of guys in the draft that are better passers. Sure he's a decent runner, but that's as a QB. Not as a RB or receiver. So I don't understand the people who think he can be an NFL QB, and I don't understand the people who think he can be a decent NFL player at another position. Personally, I think he's a waste of a pick unless he's taken as a project in the late rounds, knowing a lot of late rounders don't even make the team.

Amazing. =D> I'm dumbfounded.

Just a week ago, they lost to the Clippers and Warruirs, so no. Yeah, just enjoy it while it lasts. But that said, a lot of us thought they were considerably better than a .500 team before the season started.

What's going on? This team hasn't been able to string together road wins in years. 4-0 against winning teams in the West? I'm dumbfounded. Let's keep it going! Hey, what happened to the Fire VDN talk?

Oh my. Has it gotten so bad that OC candidates are choosing to work with Al Davis over the Bears? A senile and crazy old man and an offense that has millions tied in to two of the biggest early round flops in recent memory. Jamarcus Russell might be the biggest flop of all time.

Three in a row on the road! Phoenix, Houston, SA. Not bad.

why? I'd like anyone who hit .308/.386/.445, 122 OPS+ with great defense over the course of 13 years for us. I didn't dislike Grace, but he never hit for the power he should have. And we ended up trading away HOF-level production because of him (and Cindy). I liked him, but always wanted better. Are you referring to Palmeiro? Because if you are, its ironic that his name comes up in the thread about roids. If Grace never used steroids, which I'm going to assume, then it was the right decision to get rid of Raffy and not him. He was a better player when clean. Palmeiro had Grace-like power prior to steroids. Before reading this thread, I had no idea how many Cub fans seem to dislike Grace. Maybe I've been oblivious because I haven't lived in Chicago for a long time. I always liked him and I was happy to see him win a WS with the D backs. Honestly, I can't blame Grace for being somewhat upset jealous of the steroids era. If he was in fact clean, he might have become an amazing player with steroids. Look what they seemed to do for Palmeiro. He went from hitting 8 homers in 600+ AB's to a 30-40 home run guy. Instead, he will always be known as a decent player without enough power.

McGwire was better than Kingman, and would have been regardless. He had plate discipline and great raw power from the beginning. McGwire had a better season as a rookie than Kingman ever had in his career. Mac vs. Kong is not a good comparison, but it is reasonable to think he may have hit a hundred less homers over the course of his career and been more on the periphery of HOF discussion if not for the roids. Steroids didn't make Sammy a .300 hitter (at least solely). They helped him hit 60 homers, but there was also a clear shift in his approach that helped a lot. Roids don't help you make contact or be patient at the plate. They help you hit the ball harder and farther. There plenty of physical specimens in the the steroid era who still stank out loud. All that said, Mac's confession was a joke. Again, I don't particularly care that he used, but coming with a litany of rationalizations, excuses and half truths just makes he and the era look even more sketchy, and insults the intelligence of everyone who hears it. OK, maybe not Kingman. How about Adam Dunn. Adam Dunn in no HOFer. He might be if he has been juicing for 10 years. Regarding your arguments regarding contact or plate discipline: I used to share your thoughts. But history has clearly proven them wrong. Because roids have clearly helped both. If you are bigger and stronger and have a quicker bat, you can wait on the ball and make better contact. Bonds hit a lot of balls 50 feet over the wall in the toughest park in baseball. Are you telling me that those balls would've all been just 10 feet over the wall without the roids? It's clearly more complicated than that. The fact is, we have no idea what all the affects of testosterone is on athleticism. We don't know if it just makes you stronger, or even helps coordination or reflexes. We can argue about the affects when we don't have great medical studies. I'm just going by what you see from the statistics. It has clearly helped average and plate discipline.

How is admitting that he used steroids for over a decade, including 1998 when he broke the single season HR record, not coming completely clean? because he's pretending it didn't help his performance. it's embarrassing. What does it matter? He admitted using them. Maybe he honestly thinks it didn't help his performance. Maybe he's really that stupid. What really annoys me is that he acts as if he generally regrets the steroid era because it ADVERSELY affected his career, when in reality, it benefitted him more than perhaps anyone else. I really believe those tears he shed are genuine. But he shed those tears because he honestly believes that he would have been just as good without the steroids, and nobody else believes it. He acts like he thinks that if steroids never existed, he would've hit all those home runs, broken the record, and all the other guys that were juicing would've had their pedestrian numbers. Say what you want about Barry, but if it weren't for McGwire and Sosa, he might never have touched the stuff. He was an [expletive], yes, but he had more talent than both of them combined. McGwire was the godfather of the steroid era. Nobody doubts he had natural power. But so did Dave Kingman. He should never get into the hall, because he might've put up Dave Kingman numbers without the juice. If steroids can turn Sammy Sosa into a 300 hitter who hits 60 home runs multiple times, Barry Bonds into a guy who put up an OPS of 1.42 at age 40, then they can turn a guy with Dave Kingman talent into a .260 career hitter who hits 580 homers. Sorry Mark, you just weren't that good. Get over yourself. Cry to someone else. You only made millions of dollars for yourself as a result of the steroid era which you helped found. And it's not like you would've even sniffed the Hall of Fame without the roids.

It seems as if the Bears keep looking to Quarterbacks coaches. Another QB coach who has had success with other NFL QB's. I'm certainly no expert on football, and probably don't know what being a "QB coach" entails. But I sure hope that if they actually bring one of these "QB coaches", he can do more than teach Cutler how to throw a better spiral and have better footwork. I sure hope that he can actually design an offensive play, call it, and coach and offensive line.

Haha, Canseco is hilarious. He's saying LaRussa knew about McGwire. http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=4819250 I demand Albert's blood! The man can't be natural! :-))

McGwire is an fool. He had a golden opportunity to come completely clean, and pulls this crap. He deserves all the crap he's getting. I can't believe that he honestly thinks that it was his swing and the spin he put on the ball that made him hit all those home runs. I used to be one of those guys who said- "Hey, getting bigger isn't necessarily going to help you hit more home runs. You still need the hand-eye coordination. Making solid contact is more important." What an ass I was to think that. It has been clearly proven now that steroids make you hit more home runs and make you a better hitter. Maybe McGwire honestly took roids to help him recover from injury. I don't know. But if he honestly thinks it didn't help him hit any more homers or improve his performance even when he was healthy, he's an idiot. I'd vote for Barry Bonds to go into the Hall of Fame. He was clearly a HOF worthy player, even if you take steroids completely out of the equation. But McGwire (or Sosa for that matter), is a big fat no. Maybe McGwire gets HOF worthy numbers without roids, but I highly doubt it. And he doesn't get the benefit of the doubt. He probably had more natural power than Bonds or Sosa, but so did Dave Kingman. And McGwire very well might have retired with Dave Kingman's stats. It's funny that he says he regrets having played in the steroid era, when he might've benefitted more from steroids than anyone of the era.

Packers say no to Bears. Tom Clements not a candidate for OC job. As if that was ever going to happen. http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/football/bears/chi-12-bears-fewell-chicago-jan12,0,3366773.story

Well he is a free agent. And he is their best back, but hasn't gotten the carries like it. He splits pretty substantial time with two other backs in Bell and Bush. So if you could make a good sales pitch with enough money attached, you could always try luring him away. I've constantly mentioned Norwood or Washington as more likely scenarios though. It's a pipe dream. He's not going anywhere. He's gotten more carries as the year has gone on after starting the year as a part time back. He's the featured back in a potent offense. Bush is a third down type guy and Bell has been a guy they've given the ball to primarily on short yardage situations recently. To think the Bears are going to dish out millions on him when they have Forte, and to think that Thomas would even think that the Bears with Forte are more appealing than the Saints with Bush and Bell is crazy. We might as well start talking about Albert Pujols signing with the Cubs because that's more likely.

Every team AI ever played for. Fine what team allows a 36% shooter with little scoring ability, no ability to slash or draw contact, and negative respect from referees, a history of failing in clutch situations, oh and white to get anywhere near the ball for your team in crunch time? Now I'm drawing a blank. Umm, I'm not. The 03-04 Bulls had both Jamal Crawford and Jalen Rose shooting under 40%. I remember it way too well.

Like it or not, the Bears success in the next few years is going to live and die by Cutler's success or lack thereof. It behooves the Bears to build this offense around him, and what works for him. Bates called plays while Cutler was in Denver, so there's a familiarity there, and at least some experience there as well. It's clear you're not a Cutler fan, and that's fine. But to pretend that taking some kind of hardline "you'll get along with whoever we pick, and you'll like it" stance with him is going to lead to anything positive is just fooling yourself. It's going to lead to more drama, and less wins. Why would you say that? I actually give Cutler a lot more credit than all the media-types who seem to think he's a whiny, fragile-minded, high maintenance, little crybaby who can only work with certain offensive coordinators. I'm the one who gives him a little credit for being more professional than that. In the article, Michael Lombardi says Cutler "accepts what he says as coaching." What an absurd statement. As if he wouldn't listen to another offensive coordinator that he doesn't like? They say that Ron Turner and Cutler had a cool relationship. I've never heard or seen Cutler act unprofessionally when it came to Turner. The problem they had was that Turner proved to be a fool when it came to running an offense. Not that Cutler didn't listen to the fool. Of course Cutler should be a consideration in choosing an offensive coordinator, but not so he can approve of a guy who he "likes" and "accepts what he says as coaching". First and foremost, they need an offensive coordinator who can design an offense and run it. If they have a successful offense, Cutler will certainly "accept what he says as coaching".

me, too. but not as a backup. he'd be great to split carries 50/50. I think any of Thomas/Norwood/Washington could go ahead and split carries with Forte. I suggested all those guys with that in mind. If we're just looking for a strict backup and keeping Forte as a guy who get 80% or more of the carries, might as well just have Bell fill that role. But that would be stupid, so I hope we get a player that we can at least give Forte a 60/40 role with, if not 50/50 or even 40/60 if the player is good enough. Edit- just some Matt Forte stats: Only four times did he get more than 75 yards: Detroit (twice), St. Louis, Cleveland. Only four TDs: Detroit (twice), St. Louis, Cleveland. I added more to this in the last game thread. Forte only had 3 runs over 16 yards all year, and all 3 were against Detroit. Did I miss something? Where did this Pierre Thomas talk come from? He's the number 1 RB for the #1 seed in the NFC. Why is he being mentioned in a Bears thread? There's no way he's going to be a Bear.

Oh, apparently something thinks Bates would be good because Cutler "likes" him. http://www.chicagobreakingsports.com/2010/01/bates.html I'm so sick of the media's talk about Cutler this, Cutler that, Cutler needs to get along with the OC. How about this for a thought? How about getting someone who can DESIGN A DAMN PLAY? or CALL A DAMN PLAY? I could care less about whether Cutler "likes" a guy or not. If the offense is scoring points, I'm sure they will get along just fine. USC wasn't very good this year. And this dude was a QB coach in Denver. How about a guy who can run an offense?