Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

Post FA Mock
Goto page Previous  1, 2
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Chicago Bears
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Madmike90


Joined: 25 Jan 2009
Posts: 22521
Location: Scotland
PostPosted: Mon Mar 24, 2014 7:42 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

MemphisBear wrote:
Madmike90 wrote:
MemphisBear wrote:
I would be stoked on this draft. Although I don't think Desire will last until our 4th.


I think the CB class is so strong this year that even if a guy like Desir is gone there will still be plenty of talent on the board which is why we can hold off until the 4th to grab one.


Just out of curiosity, which corner(s) would you take there if he is gone?


I would go with Phillip Gaines…another big long press CB.
_________________
Adopt-a-Bear 2014…Lance Briggs
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
blkwdw13


Joined: 21 Aug 2009
Posts: 1684
PostPosted: Mon Mar 24, 2014 1:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Madmike90 wrote:
blkwdw13 wrote:
Madmike90 wrote:
blkwdw13 wrote:
Madmike90 wrote:
blkwdw13 wrote:
Madmike90 wrote:
blkwdw13 wrote:
I like this except I wouldn't sign Ford or Mannelly, I would just find their replacements and much cheaper ones in the draft or as UDFA's.


Ford would be a vet min pick up given that his market seems to have been pretty much so non-existent…Mannelly has been so good for so long that getting him back means we don’t have to worry about the spot.


Yes Ford would be a vet min salary but he has played 22 games in the last 3 seasons, and Mannelly is easily replaced and it has been shown multiple times now his vet minimum almost a million is over priced for the position.


There is no doubt Ford has had injury problems but he would come in here mainly for his return skills…not as a receiver so the limited reps would help keep him healthy…when it comes to Mannelly it’s a position that many see as easy but when a long snap goes wrong it goes badly wrong and usually leads to points for the other team…I just don’t like the risk attached to not having the best we can at that spot.


And everytime Mannelly has been injured he has been replaced just fine and by the likes of guys like Clutts. And what you just said about Ford you can find in the draft and Ellington who is in your draft would be good for that.


Clutts was never a full time LS…some of the guys we have brought in have done a solid job and if I thought we could get a longer term option I would take it but as I said it’s just a position where if it goes wrong it hurts so badly that having the best option is worth the extra money…Ellington would be our #3 WR…not so sure I want him playing on special teams too much given that we lined up in 3 receiver sets well over 50% of the time last year.


That is exactly the point, Clutts came in during the game and did just as good as Mannelly. And Ellington and Wilson would split the #3 WR duties along with M. Bennett so there is plenty of room for him on STs.


You can’t really compare a bit of a game to year after year of consistency…if we have the money remaining I would rather just pay Mannelly for the peace of mind…and yeah both Ellington & Wilson would take snaps as the #3 WR but I still don’t like the idea of having front line players playing on special teams.


Ok so every time he got injured and was reached with out a problem we have to throw out because he has been consistent over his 17 years. Yeah a million is too much for that position. And you don't want front line players who wouldn't even be front line players to play STs, I get it you want some o e that can only return kicks. Yep pass again I want some one that is going to contribute in both spots since they wouldn't be a front line player because Marshall and Jeffrey is taking those spots.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
AZBearsFan


Moderator
Joined: 04 Feb 2006
Posts: 10764
PostPosted: Mon Mar 24, 2014 1:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

blkwdw13 wrote:
Madmike90 wrote:
blkwdw13 wrote:
Madmike90 wrote:
blkwdw13 wrote:
Madmike90 wrote:
blkwdw13 wrote:
Madmike90 wrote:
blkwdw13 wrote:
I like this except I wouldn't sign Ford or Mannelly, I would just find their replacements and much cheaper ones in the draft or as UDFA's.


Ford would be a vet min pick up given that his market seems to have been pretty much so non-existent…Mannelly has been so good for so long that getting him back means we don’t have to worry about the spot.


Yes Ford would be a vet min salary but he has played 22 games in the last 3 seasons, and Mannelly is easily replaced and it has been shown multiple times now his vet minimum almost a million is over priced for the position.


There is no doubt Ford has had injury problems but he would come in here mainly for his return skills…not as a receiver so the limited reps would help keep him healthy…when it comes to Mannelly it’s a position that many see as easy but when a long snap goes wrong it goes badly wrong and usually leads to points for the other team…I just don’t like the risk attached to not having the best we can at that spot.


And everytime Mannelly has been injured he has been replaced just fine and by the likes of guys like Clutts. And what you just said about Ford you can find in the draft and Ellington who is in your draft would be good for that.


Clutts was never a full time LS…some of the guys we have brought in have done a solid job and if I thought we could get a longer term option I would take it but as I said it’s just a position where if it goes wrong it hurts so badly that having the best option is worth the extra money…Ellington would be our #3 WR…not so sure I want him playing on special teams too much given that we lined up in 3 receiver sets well over 50% of the time last year.


That is exactly the point, Clutts came in during the game and did just as good as Mannelly. And Ellington and Wilson would split the #3 WR duties along with M. Bennett so there is plenty of room for him on STs.


You can’t really compare a bit of a game to year after year of consistency…if we have the money remaining I would rather just pay Mannelly for the peace of mind…and yeah both Ellington & Wilson would take snaps as the #3 WR but I still don’t like the idea of having front line players playing on special teams.


Ok so every time he got injured and was reached with out a problem we have to throw out because he has been consistent over his 17 years. Yeah a million is too much for that position. And you don't want front line players who wouldn't even be front line players to play STs, I get it you want some o e that can only return kicks. Yep pass again I want some one that is going to contribute in both spots since they wouldn't be a front line player because Marshall and Jeffrey is taking those spots.

I disagree on Mannelly. I'd rather pay for the sure thing and never ever have to worry about it, even if that means paying him $500k more than a replacement level player. Why introduce additional variables into the equation? There's a reason that when teams get a rock solid guy like Mannelly that they never let them leave - that consistency adds value. One bad snap can literally derail a season.
_________________

GRRLacher wrote:
I told you guys AZ was awesome...he in fact makes triple the pay I get for moderating here.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Madmike90


Joined: 25 Jan 2009
Posts: 22521
Location: Scotland
PostPosted: Mon Mar 24, 2014 3:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

AZBearsFan wrote:
blkwdw13 wrote:
Madmike90 wrote:
blkwdw13 wrote:
Madmike90 wrote:
blkwdw13 wrote:
Madmike90 wrote:
blkwdw13 wrote:
Madmike90 wrote:
blkwdw13 wrote:
I like this except I wouldn't sign Ford or Mannelly, I would just find their replacements and much cheaper ones in the draft or as UDFA's.


Ford would be a vet min pick up given that his market seems to have been pretty much so non-existent…Mannelly has been so good for so long that getting him back means we don’t have to worry about the spot.


Yes Ford would be a vet min salary but he has played 22 games in the last 3 seasons, and Mannelly is easily replaced and it has been shown multiple times now his vet minimum almost a million is over priced for the position.


There is no doubt Ford has had injury problems but he would come in here mainly for his return skills…not as a receiver so the limited reps would help keep him healthy…when it comes to Mannelly it’s a position that many see as easy but when a long snap goes wrong it goes badly wrong and usually leads to points for the other team…I just don’t like the risk attached to not having the best we can at that spot.


And everytime Mannelly has been injured he has been replaced just fine and by the likes of guys like Clutts. And what you just said about Ford you can find in the draft and Ellington who is in your draft would be good for that.


Clutts was never a full time LS…some of the guys we have brought in have done a solid job and if I thought we could get a longer term option I would take it but as I said it’s just a position where if it goes wrong it hurts so badly that having the best option is worth the extra money…Ellington would be our #3 WR…not so sure I want him playing on special teams too much given that we lined up in 3 receiver sets well over 50% of the time last year.


That is exactly the point, Clutts came in during the game and did just as good as Mannelly. And Ellington and Wilson would split the #3 WR duties along with M. Bennett so there is plenty of room for him on STs.


You can’t really compare a bit of a game to year after year of consistency…if we have the money remaining I would rather just pay Mannelly for the peace of mind…and yeah both Ellington & Wilson would take snaps as the #3 WR but I still don’t like the idea of having front line players playing on special teams.


Ok so every time he got injured and was reached with out a problem we have to throw out because he has been consistent over his 17 years. Yeah a million is too much for that position. And you don't want front line players who wouldn't even be front line players to play STs, I get it you want some o e that can only return kicks. Yep pass again I want some one that is going to contribute in both spots since they wouldn't be a front line player because Marshall and Jeffrey is taking those spots.

I disagree on Mannelly. I'd rather pay for the sure thing and never ever have to worry about it, even if that means paying him $500k more than a replacement level player. Why introduce additional variables into the equation? There's a reason that when teams get a rock solid guy like Mannelly that they never let them leave - that consistency adds value. One bad snap can literally derail a season.


Exactly.
_________________
Adopt-a-Bear 2014…Lance Briggs
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MemphisBear


Joined: 11 Feb 2011
Posts: 266
Location: Memphis, TN
PostPosted: Mon Mar 24, 2014 4:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Or a Super Bowl.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
blkwdw13


Joined: 21 Aug 2009
Posts: 1684
PostPosted: Mon Mar 24, 2014 9:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

AZBearsFan wrote:
blkwdw13 wrote:
Madmike90 wrote:
blkwdw13 wrote:
Madmike90 wrote:
blkwdw13 wrote:
Madmike90 wrote:
blkwdw13 wrote:
Madmike90 wrote:
blkwdw13 wrote:
I like this except I wouldn't sign Ford or Mannelly, I would just find their replacements and much cheaper ones in the draft or as UDFA's.


Ford would be a vet min pick up given that his market seems to have been pretty much so non-existent…Mannelly has been so good for so long that getting him back means we don’t have to worry about the spot.


Yes Ford would be a vet min salary but he has played 22 games in the last 3 seasons, and Mannelly is easily replaced and it has been shown multiple times now his vet minimum almost a million is over priced for the position.


There is no doubt Ford has had injury problems but he would come in here mainly for his return skills…not as a receiver so the limited reps would help keep him healthy…when it comes to Mannelly it’s a position that many see as easy but when a long snap goes wrong it goes badly wrong and usually leads to points for the other team…I just don’t like the risk attached to not having the best we can at that spot.


And everytime Mannelly has been injured he has been replaced just fine and by the likes of guys like Clutts. And what you just said about Ford you can find in the draft and Ellington who is in your draft would be good for that.


Clutts was never a full time LS…some of the guys we have brought in have done a solid job and if I thought we could get a longer term option I would take it but as I said it’s just a position where if it goes wrong it hurts so badly that having the best option is worth the extra money…Ellington would be our #3 WR…not so sure I want him playing on special teams too much given that we lined up in 3 receiver sets well over 50% of the time last year.


That is exactly the point, Clutts came in during the game and did just as good as Mannelly. And Ellington and Wilson would split the #3 WR duties along with M. Bennett so there is plenty of room for him on STs.


You can’t really compare a bit of a game to year after year of consistency…if we have the money remaining I would rather just pay Mannelly for the peace of mind…and yeah both Ellington & Wilson would take snaps as the #3 WR but I still don’t like the idea of having front line players playing on special teams.


Ok so every time he got injured and was reached with out a problem we have to throw out because he has been consistent over his 17 years. Yeah a million is too much for that position. And you don't want front line players who wouldn't even be front line players to play STs, I get it you want some o e that can only return kicks. Yep pass again I want some one that is going to contribute in both spots since they wouldn't be a front line player because Marshall and Jeffrey is taking those spots.

I disagree on Mannelly. I'd rather pay for the sure thing and never ever have to worry about it, even if that means paying him $500k more than a replacement level player. Why introduce additional variables into the equation? There's a reason that when teams get a rock solid guy like Mannelly that they never let them leave - that consistency adds value. One bad snap can literally derail a season.


I don't see it that way since it has been proven that there isn't a drop off when he was out, and he has had bad snaps also anyone can have them.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
GOGRIESE


Joined: 04 Dec 2006
Posts: 18297
Location: Austin Texas
PostPosted: Mon Mar 24, 2014 10:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

^^^Name me the last time he had a bad snap
_________________

^^ props to Ty on the sig Smile

2013-Adopt A Bear- CB Tim Jennings #26
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
AZBearsFan


Moderator
Joined: 04 Feb 2006
Posts: 10764
PostPosted: Mon Mar 24, 2014 10:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

blkwdw13 wrote:
AZBearsFan wrote:
blkwdw13 wrote:
Madmike90 wrote:
blkwdw13 wrote:
Madmike90 wrote:
blkwdw13 wrote:
Madmike90 wrote:
blkwdw13 wrote:
Madmike90 wrote:
blkwdw13 wrote:
I like this except I wouldn't sign Ford or Mannelly, I would just find their replacements and much cheaper ones in the draft or as UDFA's.


Ford would be a vet min pick up given that his market seems to have been pretty much so non-existent…Mannelly has been so good for so long that getting him back means we don’t have to worry about the spot.


Yes Ford would be a vet min salary but he has played 22 games in the last 3 seasons, and Mannelly is easily replaced and it has been shown multiple times now his vet minimum almost a million is over priced for the position.


There is no doubt Ford has had injury problems but he would come in here mainly for his return skills…not as a receiver so the limited reps would help keep him healthy…when it comes to Mannelly it’s a position that many see as easy but when a long snap goes wrong it goes badly wrong and usually leads to points for the other team…I just don’t like the risk attached to not having the best we can at that spot.


And everytime Mannelly has been injured he has been replaced just fine and by the likes of guys like Clutts. And what you just said about Ford you can find in the draft and Ellington who is in your draft would be good for that.


Clutts was never a full time LS…some of the guys we have brought in have done a solid job and if I thought we could get a longer term option I would take it but as I said it’s just a position where if it goes wrong it hurts so badly that having the best option is worth the extra money…Ellington would be our #3 WR…not so sure I want him playing on special teams too much given that we lined up in 3 receiver sets well over 50% of the time last year.


That is exactly the point, Clutts came in during the game and did just as good as Mannelly. And Ellington and Wilson would split the #3 WR duties along with M. Bennett so there is plenty of room for him on STs.


You can’t really compare a bit of a game to year after year of consistency…if we have the money remaining I would rather just pay Mannelly for the peace of mind…and yeah both Ellington & Wilson would take snaps as the #3 WR but I still don’t like the idea of having front line players playing on special teams.


Ok so every time he got injured and was reached with out a problem we have to throw out because he has been consistent over his 17 years. Yeah a million is too much for that position. And you don't want front line players who wouldn't even be front line players to play STs, I get it you want some o e that can only return kicks. Yep pass again I want some one that is going to contribute in both spots since they wouldn't be a front line player because Marshall and Jeffrey is taking those spots.

I disagree on Mannelly. I'd rather pay for the sure thing and never ever have to worry about it, even if that means paying him $500k more than a replacement level player. Why introduce additional variables into the equation? There's a reason that when teams get a rock solid guy like Mannelly that they never let them leave - that consistency adds value. One bad snap can literally derail a season.


I don't see it that way since it has been proven that there isn't a drop off when he was out, and he has had bad snaps also anyone can have them.

The sample size without him is too small to draw any concrete conclusions though IMO. We have seen first hand games where bad snaps (meaning one that bounces or goes over a guys head) leads to a block or a safety or even just a bad punt. We won a game against MIN in 2010 largely because Kluwe had to receive two bad snaps leading to a block and another play where he couldn't even attempt a kick. The 49ers lost a playoff game several years back because their LS botched 2 FG snaps. I don't recall one time in the past 15 years that anything like that has happened with Mannelly, and a handful of incident-free games isn't going to outweigh 250 or so games without incident for me.
_________________

GRRLacher wrote:
I told you guys AZ was awesome...he in fact makes triple the pay I get for moderating here.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
blkwdw13


Joined: 21 Aug 2009
Posts: 1684
PostPosted: Tue Mar 25, 2014 10:28 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

GOGRIESE wrote:
^^^Name me the last time he had a bad snap


The green bay game a few years ago where he changed the call and snapped it to the up back and no one else heard it.

And the Bears also haven't had any bad snaps when his replacement has played. But I understand you guys don't want to get younger and keep the guy who has been in the league for 17 years. It's time to move on to some o e younger.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mudderfudder77


Joined: 14 Jan 2005
Posts: 1838
PostPosted: Tue Mar 25, 2014 10:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

blkwdw13 wrote:
GOGRIESE wrote:
^^^Name me the last time he had a bad snap


The green bay game a few years ago where he changed the call and snapped it to the up back and no one else heard it.

And the Bears also haven't had any bad snaps when his replacement has played. But I understand you guys don't want to get younger and keep the guy who has been in the league for 17 years. It's time to move on to some o e younger.


There is a hell of a lot more to a 'bad snap' than just 'did he catch it?'.

If it was so incredibly easy to fill the LS position with just any old guy - Mannely wouldn't still be snapping after 17 years, and teams wouldn't have a designated roster spot.

When teams find a good LS they hold on to them. That's why you have Long Snappers in the league 17, 13, 11 years and making north of a million dollars.

It doesn't make a whole hell of a lot of sense to just 'get younger' if you can't get better and cheaper. We aren't getting better than Mannely, and the allocation for LS is such that the cost difference won't make up for the incredible talent difference.
_________________


Adopt-a-Bear Lamarr Houston

Man-child. QB-killer. Defender of the run. Destroyer of worlds
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
blkwdw13


Joined: 21 Aug 2009
Posts: 1684
PostPosted: Tue Mar 25, 2014 5:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mudderfudder77 wrote:
blkwdw13 wrote:
GOGRIESE wrote:
^^^Name me the last time he had a bad snap


The green bay game a few years ago where he changed the call and snapped it to the up back and no one else heard it.

And the Bears also haven't had any bad snaps when his replacement has played. But I understand you guys don't want to get younger and keep the guy who has been in the league for 17 years. It's time to move on to some o e younger.


There is a hell of a lot more to a 'bad snap' than just 'did he catch it?'.

If it was so incredibly easy to fill the LS position with just any old guy - Mannely wouldn't still be snapping after 17 years, and teams wouldn't have a designated roster spot.

When teams find a good LS they hold on to them. That's why you have Long Snappers in the league 17, 13, 11 years and making north of a million dollars.

It doesn't make a whole hell of a lot of sense to just 'get younger' if you can't get better and cheaper. We aren't getting better than Mannely, and the allocation for LS is such that the cost difference won't make up for the incredible talent difference.


Except there is only 5 in the league that have more than 10 years and 10 that had 3 years or less of experience so that goes against your point. And the Bears don't need to get better than Mannelly they have to stay the same and they have proven to do that.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Chicago Bears All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2
Page 2 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group