Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 106 of 170 FirstFirst ... 65696104105106107108116156 ... LastLast
Results 1,576 to 1,590 of 2542
  1. #1576
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    1,067
    I get Howard not being a pass catcher, but at the same time you need someone that can establish the run game and he does exactly that. If Howard's lack of pass catching is a big enough issue in your offense, you probably didn't do a good enough job putting talent at other skill positions.

  2. #1577
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Las Vegas
    Posts
    1,726
    Quote Originally Posted by Kyben36 View Post
    I don't expect hin to make it there. In Fact i think he goes #1 right now. I think some of you dont realize he is a better prospect than elliot. And i get the love for howard. But his glaring weekness of an inability to be an outlet doesn't help Mitch. And to me. Helping mitch is way more important.

    I mean you guys saw what Kamarra and Mccafrey did out of the backfield this year. It makes every play harder to stop... And gives mitch a pass catching outlet on broken plays.

    I mean i know we need receivers for Mitch (why my sugestion has us trading howard for one) but getting a RB who can be a 700-1000 yard receiver out of thr backfield really helps the offense.
    Quote Originally Posted by The ChILL View Post
    Howard is bad at catching the ball.

    32 targets; credited with 6 drops for a 19% drop rate.

    For RBs w/ >10 targets on the season that was 4th worst in the NFL.

    This RB class is loaded. Have no issue taking an RB although would shy away at taking one #8 overall.
    Then what is Cohen doing on our roster? Kamara has ingram. McCaffery has stewart. I understand the talent that barkley is PROJECTED to have is unusually high. But ill take howard, cohen, and the 8th overall pick over giving up picks to trade up to 1-3 range to get barkley.
    You want to help Mitch? Get him some WRs. You cite kamara and mcaffery’s production in thr passing game but you fail to mention both the saints and the panthers have great to good passing attacks, which opens up opportunities cor their RBs.
    Last edited by Full-Size Ditka; 01-12-2018 at 03:51 PM.

  3. #1578
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Los Angeles County, CA
    Posts
    41,639
    Quote Originally Posted by turnaround3 View Post
    Cool because I eyebrowed your whole post too. You insinuate we have SO many holes and only 7 picks to fill them with. You don't think Pace is going to have most of those holes filled with FA?

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Tapatalk

  4. #1579
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Milwaukee, WI for some reason.
    Posts
    19,426
    Quote Originally Posted by shorvath721 View Post
    Also, wouldn’t every single players our team, let alone in the league, be available for an offer too good to refuse?
    Yes?

    The caveat there being that certain players are available for *only* those types of offers, whereas many other players can of course be had for much less. Not a tough concept to grasp.


  5. #1580
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    1,330
    One other limitation to consider with Howard is that he also simply isn't a home run threat in addition to his poor catching ability.... That's not a large issue in a Fox run, archaic offense designed to pound the rock...... but I'd wager that IS a bigger problem the more spread concepts we incorporate, since one of the main facets to spreading a defense so thin is that faster players end up chunking significantly bigger yardage. Barkley is massively bettter in the passing game, and would be massively better at getting points out of plays that Howard would merely get solid-big gains out of.

    That said, Kareem Hunt is hardly a burner either, and KC was doing fine with him this year. Furthermore, as much as I like Barkley as a prospect, he's also a complete pipe dream as I really don't see any situation where a miracle Howard trade materializes that makes moving on remotely worthwhile. Especially since we'd have to wait to do the trade until after the draft (in order to garuntee Barkley), and once we drafted him, people would know we basically would be forced to trade Howard and lowball us.

  6. #1581
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Los Angeles County, CA
    Posts
    41,639
    Players aren't entirely oblivious.

    The Jaguars - of all glorious franchises - were able to go 3-13 and, yet, land Calais and Bouye, despite having Bortles at the helm. Why? Because they saw the new sheriff in charge and a team ready to be aggressive.

    The players know that the Bears have

    A history everyone wants to be a part of
    A top defense not loaded with old vets about to expire
    A new think tank that has been assembled to develop a top young QB
    A strong OL and running game

    I fully expect that Pace will be able to lure about anyone he targets

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Tapatalk

  7. #1582
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Milwaukee, WI for some reason.
    Posts
    19,426
    Quote Originally Posted by WOwolfOL View Post
    You insinuate we have SO many holes and only 7 picks to fill them with.
    I surely did not.

    I asserted that we have lots of holes. I also asserted that we only have 7 draft picks. The point is not and never was that we only have the draft with which to fill those, I'm not sure where you grabbed that notion from and I suspect that internally you knew that wasn't at all my contention.

    Rather, with only 7 draft picks and no shortage of positions at which we're in need ranging from some to dire - I'm ardently against spending one of those 7 selections on what happens to be one of the only spots at which we're not in any real need whatsoever.

    Of course we'll load up in free agency, we have the money - there's no reason not spend it. That said, I certainly wouldn't label us *the* landing spot this off-season however, or really anywhere close to it. Put another way, I don't expect anybody is giving the Bears, as currently constructed, the proverbial "hometown discount." We're coming off 5-11 with a coach who's as respected as he is unproven, and ownership that's been a laughingstock across the league for years. Doesn't quite scream premiere free agent destination to me, but I'm not an NFL player. Maybe they'll see something I don't.


  8. #1583
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Milwaukee, WI for some reason.
    Posts
    19,426
    Quote Originally Posted by WOwolfOL View Post
    Players aren't entirely oblivious.

    The Jaguars - of all glorious franchises - were able to go 3-13 and, yet, land Calais and Bouye, despite having Bortles at the helm. Why? Because they ***almost certainly paid them the most money***
    Tidied that one up.


  9. #1584
    MGB's Avatar
    MGB is offline mundayne ejaculation man
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    12,543
    Quote Originally Posted by WOwolfOL View Post
    Players aren't entirely oblivious.

    The Jaguars - of all glorious franchises - were able to go 3-13 and, yet, land Calais and Bouye, despite having Bortles at the helm. Why? Because they saw the new sheriff in charge and a team ready to be aggressive.

    The players know that the Bears have

    A history everyone wants to be a part of
    A top defense not loaded with old vets about to expire
    A new think tank that has been assembled to develop a top young QB
    A strong OL and running game

    I fully expect that Pace will be able to lure about anyone he targets

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Tapatalk
    Don’t overlook the 49ers. They also have a ton of cap room and an equal need for WR. They are likely a preferred destination for any top WR.

  10. #1585
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    San Antonio
    Posts
    8,390
    According to the Bears Blog ... The Bears are not the laughingstock of the league. That is a product of the ridiculous Chicago media, just saying. I am a life long Bears fan, have lived all over the country and overseas and nowhere else have I seen the Bears referred to as such.
    1985 Bears
    2005 White Sox
    2010 Blackhawks
    1991 Bulls

    1981 Sting

  11. #1586
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    A city in the United States.
    Posts
    3,721
    Quote Originally Posted by MGB View Post
    Don’t overlook the 49ers. They also have a ton of cap room and an equal need for WR. They are likely a preferred destination for any top WR.
    They have to re-sign Jimmy G. before they can address the WR.
    Screw sabermetics.

  12. #1587
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Milwaukee, WI for some reason.
    Posts
    19,426
    Quote Originally Posted by Muttman73 View Post
    According to the Bears Blog ... The Bears are not the laughingstock of the league. That is a product of the ridiculous Chicago media, just saying. I am a life long Bears fan, have lived all over the country and overseas and nowhere else have I seen the Bears referred to as such.
    Well you need to be specific, it's the ownership that's a laughingstock. I have no reason to believe that Pace, Nagy, or any of the players weren't/aren't respected.

    The McCaskeys are the McCaskeys though. Everyone knows the score.


  13. #1588
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    San Antonio
    Posts
    8,390
    Quote Originally Posted by turnaround3 View Post
    Well you need to be specific, it's the ownership that's a laughingstock. I have no reason to believe that Pace, Nagy, or any of the players weren't/aren't respected.

    The McCaskeys are the McCaskeys though. Everyone knows the score.
    Maybe they are not the best owners as defined by you and some others (mostly in Chicago) but they are far from the worst. Jerry Jones comes to mind, the guy in Carolina also has some issues, whoever owns the Browns surely leaves much to be desired. I wonder about the owners in Cincinnati, trotting out Marvin Lewis year after year, what are they thinking? Mark Davis in Oakland, he of the $100 million dollar coaching hire. I don't know, the McCaskey's don't seem so bad to me when you actually compare them, with the exception of Michael McCaskey-he was a fool.
    1985 Bears
    2005 White Sox
    2010 Blackhawks
    1991 Bulls

    1981 Sting

  14. #1589
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    San Antonio
    Posts
    8,390
    http://thebiglead.com/2016/01/20/wor...-stan-kroenke/

    Not sure how reputable this website is but ...
    1985 Bears
    2005 White Sox
    2010 Blackhawks
    1991 Bulls

    1981 Sting

  15. #1590
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Milwaukee, WI for some reason.
    Posts
    19,426
    It's all subjective but the McCaskeys are bad. I never said they were the worst. But they're objectively bad.


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •