Tuesday Night Rodeo

Bears Receivers Bracing For Worst
Unless something bizarre happens on Thursday night against the Browns, I think the Bears are pretty set with their receiving corps and my final guess is that Brandon Rideau will be the odd man out.  I think the club keeps six on the roster.  Hester and Bennett are the starters.  Iglesias and Knox are the rookies.  Davis is the special teams ace.  Aromashodu has developed a clear rapport with Cutler.  That leaves Rideau, a player the Bears might be able to convince to re-join the club on the practice squad with promises of future playing time.  I reiterate my past point by saying that I'd cut Iglesias over Rideau.  But I don't see it.

Playing Time Thursday Night
Good news: Zack Bowman and Danieal Manning are set to see some exhibition action against Cleveland - essential for half the starting defensive backfield.

Bad news: For some inane reason, Lovie Smith believes playing other starters is warranted.  If Jay Cutler or Matt Forte or Greg Olsen or Devin Hester or a linebacker or a defensive end or ANY STARTER leave the field with an injury under these - the most meaningless football circumstances possible - I will quit my career to launch a full-time letter writing campaign to get Smith fired.

Comments

Leave a comment
  • Why the hell would you risk putting Cutler, Forte, Olsen or any other starter in the game? Orton almost broke his goddamn finger in half on a silly play where he wasn't even sacked. We have survived 3 games with no serious injuries to our starters while other teams have starters dropping like flies. Once again, i feel like i'm in the twilight zone. a fucking grade school coach wouldn't be this stupid.

  • In reply to hollywood1:

    oh, first...

  • In reply to hollywood1:

    i think Rideau and DA both make the team and Davis is out. Special teams are important but TD's and big targets for Cutler are more so.

  • In reply to hollywood1:

    I think you're right about the WR battle - in my mind it's going to come down to DA vs. Rideau for that last position. While I'd like to see Rideau finally get his chance to start for the Bears after all the years he spent waiting on the practice squad for an opportunity, I think the staff will give DA the nod because of his rapport with Cutler.

    Jeff I have a few questions for you:

    Do you think Iglesias could be a better WR than DA or Rideau a few years from now?

    Do you think Iglesias would clear waivers to end up on the PS?

    Would you really be willing to lose our 3rd round draft pick for a guy who will primarily play special teams anyway?

    I guess I'm asking because I think sending DA or Rideau to the PS makes much more sense than risking a rookie with potential out on the waiver wire.

  • In reply to hollywood1:

    There is no way I send DA anywhere but into the slot on opening day and I think that's what the Bears are going to do.

    I am not a go-down-with-the-draft-picks guy. Sure, Iglesias may be fine but Rideau is not an old man and if he's got a better future with the quarterback - who'll be here a decade - I keep him.

  • In reply to hollywood1:

    Ultimately, I think we're going to see Iglesias sticking around solely because of where he was drafted. I'd be surprised if he makes it on the 2010 roster, however. After this season, I think there are going to be calls (likely from JC himself) for a legit game-breaking No.1 wideout, and I don't see anyone (outside of Hester and Bennett) really playing an important role beyond this year.

  • In reply to hollywood1:

    If Rideau or D.A get cut I'll puke. Cut tall receivers with good hands, yeah. All I've heard about Iglesias is the word 'drop' used in sentences relating to him. If we cut Rideau or D.A. for Rashied "Ooh I made a tackle on special teams, pick me ! pick me !" Davis, I'll double-puke. Jeeeesuzz. They're the only receivers we have over 4'5" ...

  • In reply to hollywood1:

    Iglesias has left no impression at all. It would really suck if Rideau has to sit out again that account.

  • In reply to hollywood1:

    I'm betting Dave Toub will lobby to keep Rash. I would find it a bit of a stunner if they DON'T keep Iglesias because of his draft position but, then again, they stunned us back in April, didn't they?

  • In reply to hollywood1:

    They won't get rid of a draft pick so soon. Really, not much a reason to debate it. Looks like Rash will stay and BR will go...with Aroma getting a shot. I don't think it is too terrible. If Rash continues to shine on special teams, all the better...this team needs to excel at the third phase yet again if it wants to truly contend for a Super Bowl.

  • In reply to hollywood1:

    Hester, Bennet, Iglesias, Aromashadu, Knox, Davis. You can't justify keeping a WR who has done nothing to distinguish himself in the Preseason (Rideau) who can't play special teams...practice squad again. As long as Davis only sees spot duty at wideout, I want him on the team. He's clearly not a starting slot guy, but I want our special teams where they were last year. Cutler + field position = wins. Iglesias probably won't develop into anything, but draft status... what can you do. 6 WR, 3 QB, 4 RB, 1 FB, 3 TE, 8 OL, 1 FB (McKie again). If we go w/two QBs, we can keep Gaimes and K. Davis. Gaines is a great blocker/H-back style player. I think if we cut K. Davis, he gets picked up in an instant. No way he clears waivers.

  • In reply to hollywood1:

    Brandon R. the new Mike H.

  • In reply to hollywood1:

    I think it will be Bennett, Hester, and Aroma with Iglesias and Knox held for rooks and you may see Rideau and Davis both on the chopping block. Think about it say they cut BR and some team out there cuts a WR we like a lot on Saturday, we bring them in and cut Davis for the spot. I just really think with an elite QB back there, the time is past to look at the #3 wideout as a ST guy.

    Iglesias won't go anywhere and no he sure as heck wouldn't clear waivers. Guy was like the 2nd leading kick returner in college football last year and the #1 WR for the Heisman winning QB. Plus he is one of only 3 of our WRs over 6 foot tall and we will cut one of the other 2. He will be fine, probably by midseason definately by next season.

    Rideau had his chances; one of them notably a great pass that he didn't secure, it will be his own fault this season if he misses out.

  • In reply to hollywood1:

    It would be crazy to cut Iglesias over Rideau, too much invested in the draft pick that hasn't had a chance to develop. I agree with your assessment that Rideau will again be the odd man out, but I think they give Rideau and Davis tons of time in the game and let them make that decision for themselves. Special teams isn't truly 1/3 of the game anyways, more like 1/7.

  • In reply to hollywood1:

    I'm not even sure I believe that much about Rash as "special team ace" - surely we have others. I remember last preseason how much Rideau excelled - has he been that bad in preseason? I say Rash goes. I will be repeating myself, but there's no way in hell Iglesias doesn't make the team. A guy picked in the third round doesn't lose his job in the preseason, and they know he doesn't last a New York minute on the practice squad. I also agree that Knox stays around, he was 140th picked in draft and I think that means something to the Bears, plus he shows a lot of great speed potential. I guess bottom line is I don't care whether they keep Rideau or Rash, as long as it isn't one of the other guys, and I vote to drop Rash. He's not good enough on special teams to be only that guy, and I don't see Cutler wanting to throw to him.

  • In reply to hollywood1:

    Phil, Rash and AP are terrific on special teams. They have been for a long time.

    I also think, even with his history of drops, it is strange how little activity Rash has gotten with the first team offense. I'm wondering if the Bears simply expect him to start and had more interest in seeing the other guys.

  • In reply to hollywood1:

    I really feel like I'm missing something here. I've watched all three fake games pretty closely, and I haven't seen any obvious difference between Rideau and Iglesias --- in fact, the one drop I can remember from either guy was Rideau's on Sunday. But the consensus here seems to be that Rideau has vastly outplayed Iglesias, and that Iglesias will only make the team because of his draft status.

    Was Rideau unbelievable in 7-on-7 drills or something?

  • In reply to hollywood1:

    anybody seen this yet from the 4-letter network? http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/preview09/team?team=chi

    personally, i think it's a bunch of bullshit for them to place us at 3rd (even though we're going to win the division, i would've been fine w/ 2nd).

  • In reply to hollywood1:

    Sports Illustrated has us in the Super Bowl. So, really, who cares?

  • In reply to JeffHughes:

    wow fearless leader...put the claws away lol. just posting it as an observation...

    word? where's the article at? is it online?

  • In reply to JeffHughes:

    The the good old S.I. curse. Those guys are wrong so often that when you look up "wrong" in the dictionary you see their picture.

    Had the pleasure of watching Mr. McCallister strut his stuff here in Tucson as an Arizona Wildcat years ago. He was a very studly playmaker as a corner AND a punt returner. But, stealing an analogy from Steve Rosenloom, McAllister's been livin' on "Mike Brown Boulevard" for at least the last 2, maybe 3 seasons.
    Seems to me if he had anything left in the tank he'd have generated
    a lot more interest before this. The Ravens just lost Sammari Rolle for several games but I haven't heard that they want Chris Mac back.

  • In reply to hollywood1:

    ESPN 1000: Brad Biggs reporting interest in Chris McAllister, former Ravens CB. Love it. He was a stud for quite a few years. Good tackler too, if I remember. Goodbye McBride!

  • In reply to BearsTransplant:

    Chris McCallister has to be on this team. he is vasher from a couple years ago. McCallister was the reason Rod Woodson was asked to move to Safety. He still has game. If he is on the Bears we gain instant credibilty with him and Hood, Payne, Afalava, Bowman and eventually Tillman. Too good to be true so i don't think it will happen.

  • In reply to hollywood1:

    It's not that we desperately need a 32 year old CB but we need to have anyone out there instead of Trumaine. he is now a liability. They obviously don't have a lot of faith in Graham. A couple vets in here while the boys heal wouldn't be the worst thing in the world.

  • In reply to hollywood1:

    Peter King picked the Bears to lose to the Pats in the Big One. I have to say I'm shocked, I always thought he had something against the Bears from years of reading MMQ, but to pick them as a Super Bowl contender is complete 180 on his part...especially with his man crush now in Minnesota.

    http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/football/nfl/09/01/main/index.html?bcnn=yes

Leave a comment