BWRiley585 Posted April 3, 2009 Share Posted April 3, 2009 I think everyone agrees that the Bears made a pretty bold move. However what threats at WR do the Bears have? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted April 3, 2009 Share Posted April 3, 2009 Olsen and Hester Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BWRiley585 Posted April 3, 2009 Author Share Posted April 3, 2009 Olsen and Hester  Well Olsen is a decent tight end but Hester has not proven himself as a dominant WR in the Nfl Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ans4e64 Posted April 3, 2009 Share Posted April 3, 2009 Olsen and Hester  And their 1st round pick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BWRiley585 Posted April 3, 2009 Author Share Posted April 3, 2009 And their 1st round pick. Â I could be missing something but did they not give up their 2009 1st rounder? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fingon Posted April 3, 2009 Share Posted April 3, 2009 The bears are relying on Pace to protect Cutler... which is very risky. They have no WR's either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
damj Posted April 3, 2009 Share Posted April 3, 2009 Who cares, besides Bears fans and fantasy football players? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted April 3, 2009 Share Posted April 3, 2009 And their 1st round pick. 2011 is a long time to wait Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DwightSchrute Posted April 3, 2009 Share Posted April 3, 2009 Hester often had corners beat deep, but Orton could never hit him in stride and would come up short...Cutler should help that a bit. But yes, they still need receiver help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SUNTANBILLSFAN2 Posted April 3, 2009 Share Posted April 3, 2009 The bears are relying on Pace to protect Cutler... which is very risky. They have no WR's either. Â I thought it was a great move to sign Pace on the same day. We tend to forget that Pace was the best LT for years till a rash of injuries cut two seasons short. He played well last year and 5 mil isn't bad if he continues to show great form. Seeing how our LT wants a vault full of money 5 mil a year doesn't sound bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFan-4-Ever Posted April 3, 2009 Share Posted April 3, 2009 I think everyone agrees that the Bears made a pretty bold move. However what threats at WR do the Bears have? Who CARES !!! Â He's not in the AFC where Buffalo plays him often. Â And if he did He's NOT that great. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hyphe23 Posted April 3, 2009 Share Posted April 3, 2009 The rumor I heard from my friends in Chicago is that they are going to try and go after Holt. Take it for what you will though because I dont keep up with Bears rumors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBuffaloBills Posted April 3, 2009 Share Posted April 3, 2009 Kenny Britt, in the second round? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted April 3, 2009 Share Posted April 3, 2009 Kenny Britt, in the second round? Maybe. If he's available then I could see them going after him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted April 3, 2009 Share Posted April 3, 2009 This guy. Another Commodore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffOrange Posted April 3, 2009 Share Posted April 3, 2009 I bet they find somebody for him to throw to before Denver finds somebody to throw to Marshall. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thurman#1 Posted April 3, 2009 Share Posted April 3, 2009 Torry Holt? Marvin Harrison? Amani Toomer? There are other possibilities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fingon Posted April 3, 2009 Share Posted April 3, 2009 I bet they find somebody for him to throw to before Denver finds somebody to throw to Marshall. WRs have the same (or higher) bust rate as QBs, and it's not as hard to get the game managing QB McDaniels wants. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffOrange Posted April 3, 2009 Share Posted April 3, 2009 WRs have the same (or higher) bust rate as QBs, and it's not as hard to get the game managing QB McDaniels wants. Â I don't know if that's true, but I guess it's possible that Moulds/Evans with no QB for so long gives me a tainted picture... Still if you want to talk bust rates DLmen are up there with anybody too. A game manager ain't gonna get it done with that defense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted April 3, 2009 Share Posted April 3, 2009 WRs have the same (or higher) bust rate as QBs, and it's not as hard to get the game managing QB McDaniels wants. Â Two problems with that: first, there is only one QB on the field at a time, not two or three to choose from. Second, the Broncos are so bad defensively, what good will a "game managing QB" be for them? Will a game mangager get them 4 TDs a game? Â Â Maybe the Bears WRs numbers are not impressive because their QBs....suck? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted April 3, 2009 Share Posted April 3, 2009 Two problems with that: first, there is only one QB on the field at a time, not two or three to choose from. Second, the Broncos are so bad defensively, what good will a "game managing QB" be for them? Will a game mangager get them 4 TDs a game?  Maybe the Bears WRs numbers are not impressive because their QBs....suck? And yet, even with a "game managing" QB like Kyle Orton, they managed to achieve a 9-7 winning record, with Devon Hester as their best WR, with the 21st ranked defense, losing 3 2nd half 10 point leads in a much tougher division. Oh and did I say, with a QB who "sucks"? hmmmm  no but you're right, "game managing QB's" are overrated Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fingon Posted April 3, 2009 Share Posted April 3, 2009 Two problems with that: first, there is only one QB on the field at a time, not two or three to choose from. Second, the Broncos are so bad defensively, what good will a "game managing QB" be for them? Will a game mangager get them 4 TDs a game?  Maybe the Bears WRs numbers are not impressive because their QBs....suck? The Broncos are so talented on the offensive side of the ball, that whatever QB they insert will have a tremendous advantage when he's developing. Also, it's likely that the Broncos will spend both 1sts on defensive players, and should improve their defense significantly. The Bears WR numbers are so terrible, because they let their only good one go... and they are full of #3s. There is no debating that besides Forte and Olson, the bears don't have much talent on O. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StupidNation Posted April 3, 2009 Share Posted April 3, 2009 They have a young guy named Lloyd who looks extremely good but was injured. He can burn CBs consistently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted April 3, 2009 Share Posted April 3, 2009 And yet, even with a "game managing" QB like Kyle Orton, they managed to achieve a 9-7 winning record, with Devon Hester as their best WR, with the 21st ranked defense, losing 3 2nd half 10 point leads in a much tougher division. Oh and did I say, with a QB who "sucks"? hmmmm  no but you're right, "game managing QB's" are overrated  28 points is a tall order for a game manager like Orton. He's not an accurate passer. The Bears only gave up 21.  9-7? Big deal. A "much tougher division?" Come on--the best team in that Div. was the Vikings. None of those teams would have had a winning record in the AFCW. The NFC blows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted April 3, 2009 Share Posted April 3, 2009 The other team? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EndZoneCrew Posted April 3, 2009 Share Posted April 3, 2009 TOM WADDLE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted April 3, 2009 Share Posted April 3, 2009 28 points is a tall order for a game manager like Orton. He's not an accurate passer. The Bears only gave up 21.  9-7? Big deal. A "much tougher division?" Come on--the best team in that Div. was the Vikings. None of those teams would have had a winning record in the AFCW. The NFC blows. ya the Raiders and Chiefs are really tough.  Oh ya and the Chargers have a great D  you're not going to win this argument  keep fooling yourself Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chandler#81 Posted April 3, 2009 Share Posted April 3, 2009 Maybe the Bears WRs numbers are not impressive because their QBs....suck? Â They don't call it the Windy City for nothing. Someone else posted that Chicago is where QB's go to die. It's almost impossible to fathom great QB play and an aerial passing attack @ Soldier Field. Maybe there's something to the fact the last great QB there was Sid Luckman, and the season ended before Christmas.. Â Anyway, I share some posters relief he's not in the AFC-E. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted April 3, 2009 Share Posted April 3, 2009 ya the Raiders and Chiefs are really tough. Oh ya and the Chargers have a great D  you're not going to win this argument  keep fooling yourself Tougher than the Lions, no?  And who would you rather face, the Chargers or the Vikes?  Fooling myself? Nah. I picked the easy side of this argument--that the Bears got the better deal.  You are "fooling yourself" if you think that simply saying "you're not going to win this argument" will persuade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted April 3, 2009 Share Posted April 3, 2009 Tougher than the Lions, no? And who would you rather face, the Chargers or the Vikes?  Fooling myself? Nah. I picked the easy side of this argument--that the Bears got the better deal.  You are "fooling yourself" if you think that simply saying "you're not going to win this argument" will persuade. The Lions and Chiefs are basically a wash.  I'd much rather face the Chargers than the Vikes, The Vikes are the better team.  And yes, Green Bay is better than the Raiders and Chiefs.  And just because you keep saying that the Bears got the better deal, doesn't make it so. I don't care how many times you say it, it wont change anything.  Anyway, The whole point of this argument is that you implied that "game managing" QB's don't have value. You also implied that Orton "sucks".  So, you have Orton, who has less offensive talent around him than what Cutler had, in a stronger division, without the guidance of Shanahan, a defense ranked 21st in the league, and a team that blew 3 10 point leads still managed to pull out a winning record.  I'm not saying that Orton is better than Cutler, because we all know that isn't the case. But you grossly misstated Orton's value. That's typical though, because misinformed fans really don't know too much and they usually make on the surface sort of comments like the one you had made. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted April 3, 2009 Share Posted April 3, 2009 The Lions and Chiefs are basically a wash. I'd much rather face the Chargers than the Vikes, The Vikes are the better team.  And yes, Green Bay is better than the Raiders and Chiefs.  And just because you keep saying that the Bears got the better deal, doesn't make it so. I don't care how many times you say it, it wont change anything.  Anyway, The whole point of this argument is that you implied that "game managing" QB's don't have value. You also implied that Orton "sucks".  So, you have Orton, who has less offensive talent around him than what Cutler had, in a stronger division, without the guidance of Shanahan, a defense ranked 21st in the league, and a team that blew 3 10 point leads still managed to pull out a winning record.  I'm not saying that Orton is better than Cutler, because we all know that isn't the case. But you grossly misstated Orton's value. That's typical though, because misinformed fans really don't know too much and they usually make on the surface sort of comments like the one you had made.  Vikes and SD both gave up about 21 per game. SD scored more than Vikes.  Anyway.  What I have said is that a "game managing QB" will not suffice in Denver----Orton, in particular, or otherwise, because it took a QB with Cutler's passing ability to overcome a terrible defense-which will not likely change much next year. You introduced the heroic work of Orton in Chicago to refute the reality in Denver. The "guidance of Shanahan", as you may not have taken into consideration, has been replaced by the "another coattail rider, now HC, of Bill Bellichick" Josh McDaniels.  I'm pretty sure the words "you grossly misstated Orton's value" have never appeared in print before, so spare me the "misinformed fans really don't know too much" attempt at a dig. You may be an "All Pro" at TBD, but it really doesn't make you more insightful than the rest of the posters here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3 left feet Posted April 3, 2009 Share Posted April 3, 2009 I could see the Bears signing Torry Holt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PushthePile Posted April 3, 2009 Share Posted April 3, 2009 The bears are relying on Pace to protect Cutler... which is very risky. They have no WR's either. They also have Chris Williams, coming off back surgery. He is a question mark but is a talented 2008 first rounder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bizell Posted April 3, 2009 Share Posted April 3, 2009 Forte is a very good pass-catcher @ running back.. so i think he's going to get a good deal of receptions this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lori Posted April 3, 2009 Share Posted April 3, 2009 The rumor I heard from my friends in Chicago is that they are going to try and go after Holt. Take it for what you will though because I dont keep up with Bears rumors. FWIW, I've heard the same rumor. Kennard McGuire represents both players, so I'm sure the possibility was mentioned when he hammered out Pace's deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts