Jehrico

Something tells me there was more to the story of him being released than his poor performance too. Who knows...

I wouldn't make any decision on who I'd like to see them get based on Mike and Mike. That said, I'd be all over getting Lance Moore too if he didn't cost too much. I don't see that happening though.

Hopefully opposing defenses will feel the same. I won't complain if they do. Also, Forte was one of the top receiving running backs in the league too.

Yes, because many people consider it demeaning to mentally challenged people. You could call Turner a moron instead.We filter out ret@rd, but we allow slant, [expletive], [expletive], and a whole plethora of other insults? Seems like a pretty inconsistent policy. Ret@rd is a stupid place to draw the line.

The only way they could have done that would be if he first cleared waivers. I think some pitching-starved non-contender (e.g. Pittsburgh or San Diego) would have claimed him and kept him on the roster with the hope he'd contribute in the future. No, they could've sent something to Colorado to get his full rights. Incorrect. He would have to pass through waivers BEFORE Colorado could trade him. We got him in the rule 5, right? If so, then this isnt' a question of waivers, as he has options. We can't send him down without offering him back to Colorado for half of the 50k or whatever it costs to claim him. They own his rights unless we keep him on the 25 man roster the entire year. Think Andy Sisco when KC picked him up. Either that, or we could send something to Colorado for his full rights, and they would let us keep him and send him down instead forcing us to keep him on the 25 man roster.

I don't know about that. He held on to Chavez too long (and still does), and let Zito walk instead of trading him a year earlier when he could have gotten something great for him. He's pretty mediocre IMO in that regard. I think he's better at the scouting and player development piece. Whenever the As have done well, it's generally been due to the success of guys that that are pretty much completely home grown.

Good observation....I hope we have some guys who are open to the DL and rehab assignments if they struggle...

I think we've gotten the better of Billy Beane trades in the past. This is probably the first time he got the better of us as far as I can recall. Whether Beane got the best of the Cubs is still open to question at this point. Gallagher has gone from No. 2 starter to out of the rotation for Oakland, as his velocity dropped as spring training went on. Eric Patterson is in the minor leagues, as is Murton, with Colorado. If Harden stays healthy and makes 25 starts and most of them are of the quality variety, then I think the Cubs get the better of this deal. But it's too early to judge now. I was talking of all of our past trades with him. We certainly got the better end of the (albeit indirect) Miller for Barrett swap, we got a great year out of Bellhorn for basically nothing, etc... I think he might get the better of us on the Wuertz deal though.

Man, looking at Angelos last seven drafts, it's amazing how few offensive linemen he's taken. In 2002, he took Columbo in the 1st and Metcalf in the 3d round. In 2003, he took Bryan Anderson in the 7th round. In 2004 and 2005, he took no offensive linemen. In 2006, he took Tyler Reed in the 6th. In 2007, he took Beekman in the 4th and Grant in the 7th. In 2008, he took Chris Williams in the 1st, and a couple of no names in the 7th. Over 7 years, that's a grand total of 9 offensive lineman. That's two first rounders, two guys between rounds 3 and 5, and the rest are 6th and 7th rounders. Both of his first rounders started their careers with injury problems. The other two he took in the middle of the draft (3d through 5th rounds) haven't been super starts but have been more than justified their picks. In the 6th or 7th rounds, he hasn't done well on offense or defense (but then again, what GM is good at landing picks in those rounds?), with the lone notable pick being Chris Harris in the 6th in 2005. I still think that there's on reason to be concerned about 2010 and beyond for the line...there's plenty of time to fix it, and like it was mentioned earlier, this is a great year to draft offensive linemen.

The positive, though, is that this draft is very deep on interior offensive linemen. If Angelo chooses to address it in this draft, he should have a multitude of strong options even in the third and fourth rounds. And, as history has proven, Angelo is better at plucking quality guys in the 3-5th rounds than he is in the first round. On defense yes, but he hasnt proven he can find offensive talent in the later rounds of the draft. He's never really focused much on the OLine in the 3-5 rounds.

I think we've gotten the better of Billy Beane trades in the past. This is probably the first time he got the better of us as far as I can recall.

I'm surprised we released Gaudin. I thought he'd at least have PTBNL trade value.

I don't think you are looking deep enough. There are clearly a lot of areas that need upgrades. Still need a better pass rushing DE. Still need 1 more DT since you can't count on Dusty to help. Still need a FS worthy of an NFL roster. Still need an SLB upgrade. And that's just the defense. Offensively, the team needs 2 WRs and a FB at the least, and are weak at RG. Marinelli and Lovie aren't going to make these guys better simply by their presence. And no, the defense didn't "suddenly" get old. It's been getting old since 2006, the last time they were even in the top 20 in defense in the league. Urlacher has gone from an elite MLB, to just a good one. Hillenmeyer has gone from underrated to a possible training camp cut. Mike Brown has gone from pro-bowl caliber S to unemployed and possibly retiring before the season starts. Tillman is 28, past the prime for a CB. Vasher is young, but an injury risk. Same with Tommie. Both starting DEs are over 30. There are 2 ways to look at the defense. One is that this is the same defense (save for Tank and the safeties) that played 2 Superbowls ago. The other is that the Bears got a great defense by bringing in fresh, young, hungry talent in a system that maximized their abilities. Now if you look at the fact that many of the D doesn't have the same ability they had before due to being 2-3 years older and the only young talent they brought in has been Harrison and Payne....then things get very shaky on defense. I still say the Bears need to find at least 2 players that can contribute on defense in this draft (DL, DB) and still need the couple young guys they do have to step up in order to be any better defensively. I agree with what you said and in my next post after the one you quoted I acknowledged there are areas that need upgraded. However the guys we have here on our D should be able to form at least an average group on D if not slightly above average. I trust ANgelo enough to find some players in the draft for the D. Maybe I'm wrong, but I thought a big reason for the dropoff on D last year was Babich. Hopefully he figures out how to best use the guys we have.

The positive, though, is that this draft is very deep on interior offensive linemen. If Angelo chooses to address it in this draft, he should have a multitude of strong options even in the third and fourth rounds. And, as history has proven, Angelo is better at plucking quality guys in the 3-5th rounds than he is in the first round.

No, that's an easy argument to win. Show me where they ever put any emphasis into trying to shore up the OL in recent drafts. They haven't because they thought they were going to get more time out of the guys that they lost, so they focused on other areas. All they've drafted in the last couple of years was Beekman (who will replace Kruetz when his time comes), Grant in the 7th Round of 2007, and Chris Williams (who they knew was hurt last year when they drafted him but should be ready to go this year) last year. Beekman is on track, and they think Williams will be a major contributor. That's 2 out of 3 guys in two years coming along. They underestimated their future needs on the line a little bit, but that doesn't mean they can't fix it next year if need be. We shouldn't have to waste any picks on RB, QB, TE, or CB in the early rounds the next year or two barring any unforeseen circumstances.

No, but it's ridiculous to think the Cutler move was a bad move just because the team had numerous needs. I don't think anyone was expecting them to turn what they had last year into a sure-bet superbowl team in one season. Getting Cutler was the single biggest move they could make to upgrade the team. The line can be addressed in the draft if needed (I don't think it's as bad as some are making it out to be). The defensive questions were going to exist regardless (although I think it's more a question of Babich not being a good coordinator than aging). Criticizing the Cutler move because Cutler can't improve the defense (at least not directly...if he can increase our time of possession he'll help) or other such things is kind of ridiculous.

I don't understand the concern about the line in 2010 or 2011. The line is about the easiest thing to shore up in the draft, it won't be hard to address that hole when the time comes.

HAHA bitter Packer fan face, I LOVE IT! I realize I am really late in reading this, but after being called a Packer fan I have never been so offended. Well with that ridiculous comment I could only assume you were a Packer fan. If thats not the case, then it must just be that you dont know much about the Bears or football. Really? Is it that ridiculous to be concerned that the upgrade at quarterback might not help enough to offset the poor group of receivers, questionable offensive line, and average and aging defense? It is also reasonable to doubt that Cutler will be a perennial All Pro with the Bears. I hope it happens, but I don't think it's the slam dunk like most seem to think. Considering we have a [expletive] for an O-Coordinator and had a not a very good passing QB, it's hard to say how good or bad our WR corp is. We can make a pretty good guess on Lloyd (loads of unfulfilled potential, probably never going to get anywhere close to reaching it), but that was Hester's first year at WR (with a good QB he could be a great deep thread), and Bennet and Davies could be decent. Plus, you never know who they'll get in the draft. I'm not saying our WR corps will be good, bad or mediocre next year...just that it's not really fair to declare it one way or another at this point. It's an unknown, and that's about all you can say. edit: You have to be kidding me...ret@rd is filtered out above? Come on now...

In the Packers universe. :twisted:

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/149210-jacque-jones-released-by-reds-i-blame-the-cubs All I can say is wow. The internet has achieved a new record level of stupid.

I've seen a site selling Cutler Jersey's with the number one, but the link above says #6. What's his number going to be?

I'm excited about the deal. However, I don't think you can really evaluate whether this was a smart deal or not for 2-3 years. All of these blowhards in the media already declaring this a great or horrible move are all just being sensationalist for their job security. We'll see how the draft picks that the Broncos get end up panning out. Plus, as I think someone previously mentioned, the Bears have a better track record finding gems after the 2d round than in the first round. Angelo is actually one of the better GMs in the league finding good talent in the second half of the draft. Too bad he never could draft as well at the top. Overall, my prediction is that both teams will be content with this deal in 3 years.

Schlereth is a known moron and a homer. He's always been bears hater. I don't know why this dolts remarks are surprising anyone.

I think Cutler will make Brandon Lloyd look like Eddie Royal.

Florida is looking genius for packaging him with Miggy.