| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
ChicagoAl
Joined: 10 Jan 2008
Posts: 7067
|
 Posted: Sat Mar 24, 2012 6:30 pm Post subject: Realistic Options at Nineteen |
 |
|
|
Barring some unforeseen development: arrest, loss of a limb, death, who could realistically be available at 19? The following appear to me to probably be there.
Hill WR(has shot to make it to 19 but it isn't certain)
Jeffery WR
Mercilous DE/LB
Kirkpatrick CB
Jenkins CB
Kuechly LB
Perry DL
Poe DL
Reiff OL
Adams OL
Wright WR
Ingram DL
Coples DL
Any others to consider?
Which one would you take?
Or would you trade down?
I would take Hill, or Mercilous in that order. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
VeniceBearsFan
Joined: 15 Feb 2010
Posts: 1818
Location: Venice, Florida
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 24, 2012 6:33 pm Post subject: Re: Realistic Options at Nineteen |
|
|
|
| ChicagoAl wrote: | Barring some unforeseen development: arrest, loss of a limb, death, who could realistically be available at 19? The following appear to me to probably be there.
Hill WR(has shot to make it to 19 but it isn't certain)
Jeffery WR
Mercilous DE/LB
Kirkpatrick CB
Jenkins CB
Kuechly LB
Perry DL
Poe DL
Reiff OL
Adams OL
Wright WR
Ingram DL
Coples DL
Any others to consider?
Which one would you take?
Or would you trade down?
I would take Hill, or Mercilous in that order. |
most of the options are real enticing. I would say reciever wise hill or jeffery would be it. and then mercilus for DE.
_________________
ADOPT A BEAR= CENTER ROBERTO GARZA
takeonme cred for the sig |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
UtahBear
Joined: 04 Aug 2009
Posts: 171
Location: Ogden, UT
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 24, 2012 6:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
For me.
Kuechly
Hill
Jeffery
Mercilous
In that order. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
WindyCity
Joined: 26 Jun 2009
Posts: 6831
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 24, 2012 6:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
At 19
WR Michael Floyd
WR Kendall Wright
OT Cordy Glenn
DE Whitney Mercilus
DE Nick Perry
LB Luke Keluchy
Trade Down
WR Stephen Hill
WR Rueben Randle
OT Mike Adams
OT Bobby Massie
OG Kevin Zeitler
C Peter Konz
DE Vinnu Curry
CB Dre Kirkpatrick
S Mark Barron
_________________
Thanks to chisox |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Madmike90
Joined: 25 Jan 2009
Posts: 18577
Location: Scotland
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 24, 2012 7:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Kuechly
DeCastro
Perry
Hill
Mercilus
Trade Down |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
AZBearsFan
Joined: 04 Feb 2006
Posts: 8907
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 24, 2012 8:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Kuechly makes a great deal of sense for the future but I don't see us taking him. Just think we have bigger needs than adding a guy who will be a 2-down SLB for us for the next few years.
_________________
| GRRLacher wrote: | | I told you guys AZ was awesome...he in fact makes triple the pay I get for moderating here. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Madmike90
Joined: 25 Jan 2009
Posts: 18577
Location: Scotland
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 24, 2012 8:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| AZBearsFan wrote: | | Kuechly makes a great deal of sense for the future but I don't see us taking him. Just think we have bigger needs than adding a guy who will be a 2-down SLB for us for the next few years. |
This will shock everyone...if we took Kuechly I would move him to the WLB position on passing downs and take Briggs off the field...Kuechly was a HS Safety and understands zone concepts really well...his range is a little better than Briggs at this stage and the extra couple of inches could help when cover TEs. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bkokot
Joined: 23 Apr 2008
Posts: 860
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 24, 2012 9:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Madmike90 wrote: | | AZBearsFan wrote: | | Kuechly makes a great deal of sense for the future but I don't see us taking him. Just think we have bigger needs than adding a guy who will be a 2-down SLB for us for the next few years. |
This will shock everyone...if we took Kuechly I would move him to the WLB position on passing downs and take Briggs off the field...Kuechly was a HS Safety and understands zone concepts really well...his range is a little better than Briggs at this stage and the extra couple of inches could help when cover TEs. |
As great as Briggs is, he can be a bit of a liability in pass coverage. I could see us putting him in as the 2nd LB with Urlacher when we play nickel. I think that people would want to see more from a 1st round pick, so I think he'd at least get considered for the SLB spot as well. I'd really like to see the bears play more nickel though, especially in passing situations. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
51to54
Joined: 29 Jun 2008
Posts: 1529
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 24, 2012 10:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| bkokot wrote: | | Madmike90 wrote: | | AZBearsFan wrote: | | Kuechly makes a great deal of sense for the future but I don't see us taking him. Just think we have bigger needs than adding a guy who will be a 2-down SLB for us for the next few years. |
This will shock everyone...if we took Kuechly I would move him to the WLB position on passing downs and take Briggs off the field...Kuechly was a HS Safety and understands zone concepts really well...his range is a little better than Briggs at this stage and the extra couple of inches could help when cover TEs. |
As great as Briggs is, he can be a bit of a liability in pass coverage. I could see us putting him in as the 2nd LB with Urlacher when we play nickel. I think that people would want to see more from a 1st round pick, so I think he'd at least get considered for the SLB spot as well. I'd really like to see the bears play more nickel though, especially in passing situations. |
Agree on Briggs being weak in coverage. The 'see more' for a 1st round pick brings up the question, what players/positions in the list are acceptable, at least for 2012-13 seasons or so, to be a development with a high upside type of guy?
I'd assume WR, especially Hill would be worth the wait. If we go DE or CB or Oline, I expect that pick to start. DT I could live with a 3rd rotation guy if he had a big upside. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mochalman
Joined: 31 Jan 2009
Posts: 513
Location: Cedar Rapids, Iowa
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 24, 2012 10:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Madmike90 wrote: | Kuechly
DeCastro
Perry
Hill
Mercilus
Trade Down |
Agreed.
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bkokot
Joined: 23 Apr 2008
Posts: 860
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 24, 2012 11:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| 51to54 wrote: | | bkokot wrote: | | Madmike90 wrote: | | AZBearsFan wrote: | | Kuechly makes a great deal of sense for the future but I don't see us taking him. Just think we have bigger needs than adding a guy who will be a 2-down SLB for us for the next few years. |
This will shock everyone...if we took Kuechly I would move him to the WLB position on passing downs and take Briggs off the field...Kuechly was a HS Safety and understands zone concepts really well...his range is a little better than Briggs at this stage and the extra couple of inches could help when cover TEs. |
As great as Briggs is, he can be a bit of a liability in pass coverage. I could see us putting him in as the 2nd LB with Urlacher when we play nickel. I think that people would want to see more from a 1st round pick, so I think he'd at least get considered for the SLB spot as well. I'd really like to see the bears play more nickel though, especially in passing situations. |
Agree on Briggs being weak in coverage. The 'see more' for a 1st round pick brings up the question, what players/positions in the list are acceptable, at least for 2012-13 seasons or so, to be a development with a high upside type of guy?
I'd assume WR, especially Hill would be worth the wait. If we go DE or CB or Oline, I expect that pick to start. DT I could live with a 3rd rotation guy if he had a big upside. |
If we can't resign Okoye we need a backup/rotation guy behind Melton. So it would end up being the #2 3 tech. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Superman(DH23)
Joined: 03 Jan 2008
Posts: 16423
Location: Abdi on the sick sig
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 25, 2012 12:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| 51to54 wrote: | | bkokot wrote: | | Madmike90 wrote: | | AZBearsFan wrote: | | Kuechly makes a great deal of sense for the future but I don't see us taking him. Just think we have bigger needs than adding a guy who will be a 2-down SLB for us for the next few years. |
This will shock everyone...if we took Kuechly I would move him to the WLB position on passing downs and take Briggs off the field...Kuechly was a HS Safety and understands zone concepts really well...his range is a little better than Briggs at this stage and the extra couple of inches could help when cover TEs. |
As great as Briggs is, he can be a bit of a liability in pass coverage. I could see us putting him in as the 2nd LB with Urlacher when we play nickel. I think that people would want to see more from a 1st round pick, so I think he'd at least get considered for the SLB spot as well. I'd really like to see the bears play more nickel though, especially in passing situations. |
Agree on Briggs being weak in coverage. The 'see more' for a 1st round pick brings up the question, what players/positions in the list are acceptable, at least for 2012-13 seasons or so, to be a development with a high upside type of guy?
I'd assume WR, especially Hill would be worth the wait. If we go DE or CB or Oline, I expect that pick to start. DT I could live with a 3rd rotation guy if he had a big upside. |
Umm LB55 has been a top 3 cover LB for like the last 6 years. You mite want to research before you say somethin like "let's take out a 7 time pro-bowler for this untested rookie"
_________________
| OneBadCat wrote: | | Ahah Okay first of all Gamble was lost to IR this year but when healthy he proved to be 2nd only to Revis last season. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Madmike90
Joined: 25 Jan 2009
Posts: 18577
Location: Scotland
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 25, 2012 7:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Superman(DH23) wrote: | | 51to54 wrote: | | bkokot wrote: | | Madmike90 wrote: | | AZBearsFan wrote: | | Kuechly makes a great deal of sense for the future but I don't see us taking him. Just think we have bigger needs than adding a guy who will be a 2-down SLB for us for the next few years. |
This will shock everyone...if we took Kuechly I would move him to the WLB position on passing downs and take Briggs off the field...Kuechly was a HS Safety and understands zone concepts really well...his range is a little better than Briggs at this stage and the extra couple of inches could help when cover TEs. |
As great as Briggs is, he can be a bit of a liability in pass coverage. I could see us putting him in as the 2nd LB with Urlacher when we play nickel. I think that people would want to see more from a 1st round pick, so I think he'd at least get considered for the SLB spot as well. I'd really like to see the bears play more nickel though, especially in passing situations. |
Agree on Briggs being weak in coverage. The 'see more' for a 1st round pick brings up the question, what players/positions in the list are acceptable, at least for 2012-13 seasons or so, to be a development with a high upside type of guy?
I'd assume WR, especially Hill would be worth the wait. If we go DE or CB or Oline, I expect that pick to start. DT I could live with a 3rd rotation guy if he had a big upside. |
Umm LB55 has been a top 3 cover LB for like the last 6 years. You mite want to research before you say somethin like "let's take out a 7 time pro-bowler for this untested rookie" |
http://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2011/12/20/re-focused-seahawks-bears-week-15/
| Quote: | Before I get any hate mail on this one let me start by saying Lance Briggs (-0.7) has had a great season and I’m absolutely not calling time on the back of one mediocre showing. However, what I will say is this: In the last five weeks, this is the third time we’ve graded him as -2.1 or lower in coverage. The way that he plays dictates he gets from sideline to sideline quickly, cover backs, tight ends, and generally move well. At times here he looked slow off the mark and lacking in acceleration. This led to all five passes into his coverage being completed with one going for a touchdown. On the Pass to Forsett (mentioned above) look how labored and hesitant he looks getting through traffic to track a player he had in man coverage.
All that said, if you want to see the reason this is just so much conjecture try 10:24 left in the fourth. The game is slipping, but watch the way he reads the play, destroys Robert Gallery and tackles Marshawn Lynch for a 4-yard loss. |
Briggs is obviously still an elite all round defender and quality in zone coverage but he can't cover new age TEs...with the way our D played last year having some man coverage skills is important. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
51to54
Joined: 29 Jun 2008
Posts: 1529
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 25, 2012 11:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Madmike90 wrote: | | Superman(DH23) wrote: | | 51to54 wrote: | | bkokot wrote: | | Madmike90 wrote: | | AZBearsFan wrote: | | Kuechly makes a great deal of sense for the future but I don't see us taking him. Just think we have bigger needs than adding a guy who will be a 2-down SLB for us for the next few years. |
This will shock everyone...if we took Kuechly I would move him to the WLB position on passing downs and take Briggs off the field...Kuechly was a HS Safety and understands zone concepts really well...his range is a little better than Briggs at this stage and the extra couple of inches could help when cover TEs. |
As great as Briggs is, he can be a bit of a liability in pass coverage. I could see us putting him in as the 2nd LB with Urlacher when we play nickel. I think that people would want to see more from a 1st round pick, so I think he'd at least get considered for the SLB spot as well. I'd really like to see the bears play more nickel though, especially in passing situations. |
Agree on Briggs being weak in coverage. The 'see more' for a 1st round pick brings up the question, what players/positions in the list are acceptable, at least for 2012-13 seasons or so, to be a development with a high upside type of guy?
I'd assume WR, especially Hill would be worth the wait. If we go DE or CB or Oline, I expect that pick to start. DT I could live with a 3rd rotation guy if he had a big upside. |
Umm LB55 has been a top 3 cover LB for like the last 6 years. You mite want to research before you say somethin like "let's take out a 7 time pro-bowler for this untested rookie" |
http://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2011/12/20/re-focused-seahawks-bears-week-15/
| Quote: | Before I get any hate mail on this one let me start by saying Lance Briggs (-0.7) has had a great season and I’m absolutely not calling time on the back of one mediocre showing. However, what I will say is this: In the last five weeks, this is the third time we’ve graded him as -2.1 or lower in coverage. The way that he plays dictates he gets from sideline to sideline quickly, cover backs, tight ends, and generally move well. At times here he looked slow off the mark and lacking in acceleration. This led to all five passes into his coverage being completed with one going for a touchdown. On the Pass to Forsett (mentioned above) look how labored and hesitant he looks getting through traffic to track a player he had in man coverage.
All that said, if you want to see the reason this is just so much conjecture try 10:24 left in the fourth. The game is slipping, but watch the way he reads the play, destroys Robert Gallery and tackles Marshawn Lynch for a 4-yard loss. |
Briggs is obviously still an elite all round defender and quality in zone coverage but he can't cover new age TEs...with the way our D played last year having some man coverage skills is important. |
Through the years, my eyeball test has always seen Briggs as a guided missile against the run game and weak in coverage. Doesn't mean he's not an all pro level LB, just that you don't want the game to come down to him having to cover somebody. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Madmike90
Joined: 25 Jan 2009
Posts: 18577
Location: Scotland
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 25, 2012 11:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| 51to54 wrote: | | Madmike90 wrote: | | Superman(DH23) wrote: | | 51to54 wrote: | | bkokot wrote: | | Madmike90 wrote: | | AZBearsFan wrote: | | Kuechly makes a great deal of sense for the future but I don't see us taking him. Just think we have bigger needs than adding a guy who will be a 2-down SLB for us for the next few years. |
This will shock everyone...if we took Kuechly I would move him to the WLB position on passing downs and take Briggs off the field...Kuechly was a HS Safety and understands zone concepts really well...his range is a little better than Briggs at this stage and the extra couple of inches could help when cover TEs. |
As great as Briggs is, he can be a bit of a liability in pass coverage. I could see us putting him in as the 2nd LB with Urlacher when we play nickel. I think that people would want to see more from a 1st round pick, so I think he'd at least get considered for the SLB spot as well. I'd really like to see the bears play more nickel though, especially in passing situations. |
Agree on Briggs being weak in coverage. The 'see more' for a 1st round pick brings up the question, what players/positions in the list are acceptable, at least for 2012-13 seasons or so, to be a development with a high upside type of guy?
I'd assume WR, especially Hill would be worth the wait. If we go DE or CB or Oline, I expect that pick to start. DT I could live with a 3rd rotation guy if he had a big upside. |
Umm LB55 has been a top 3 cover LB for like the last 6 years. You mite want to research before you say somethin like "let's take out a 7 time pro-bowler for this untested rookie" |
http://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2011/12/20/re-focused-seahawks-bears-week-15/
| Quote: | Before I get any hate mail on this one let me start by saying Lance Briggs (-0.7) has had a great season and I’m absolutely not calling time on the back of one mediocre showing. However, what I will say is this: In the last five weeks, this is the third time we’ve graded him as -2.1 or lower in coverage. The way that he plays dictates he gets from sideline to sideline quickly, cover backs, tight ends, and generally move well. At times here he looked slow off the mark and lacking in acceleration. This led to all five passes into his coverage being completed with one going for a touchdown. On the Pass to Forsett (mentioned above) look how labored and hesitant he looks getting through traffic to track a player he had in man coverage.
All that said, if you want to see the reason this is just so much conjecture try 10:24 left in the fourth. The game is slipping, but watch the way he reads the play, destroys Robert Gallery and tackles Marshawn Lynch for a 4-yard loss. |
Briggs is obviously still an elite all round defender and quality in zone coverage but he can't cover new age TEs...with the way our D played last year having some man coverage skills is important. |
Through the years, my eyeball test has always seen Briggs as a guided missile against the run game and weak in coverage. Doesn't mean he's not an all pro level LB, just that you don't want the game to come down to him having to cover somebody. |
I wouldn’t even say weak in coverage…just not great and as you said he is elite in other areas which makes him a great LB…last year was his lowest total of PBUs & INTs combined in seasons where he has started 16 games…as we all know the NFL is changing and getting a guy who is a little better against the pass for the future wouldn’t be a bad thing…I reckon that’s why we are looking at Keenan Robinson out of Texas. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
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
|
FAQ
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
