The Jake Dilemma: Should Bears Consider LT Long

The Jake Dilemma: Should Bears Consider LT Long

Jake Long is reportedly asking for $11 million a season as he enters the free agency pool in a few weeks. Nobody is going to pay Jake Long $11 million a season. Based on most of the reliable and reputable grading systems across the NFL, Long is on the decline  and I'd be surprised if he draws anywhere near double-digits from an offensive line hungry team. Long was a great player for the Miami Dolphins and at times the most dominant left tackle in the sport. But injuries and time have taken their toll on him, leading to a 2012 season where the label of "mediocre" might actually be too generous.

Is Jake Long still a viable left tackle? Yes. Pete Prisco, Peter King and Omar Kelly have each written on the subject of Long's demise being overstated.

Is Long capable of overcoming the injuries which have plagued him the last few seasons and returning to his previous form? Doubtful. Players don't fall from greatness and return to it in the NFL. The league gets too young too fast and the human body can only take so many snaps.

Is Long worth the financial risk for the Chicago Bears? Maybe.

At his worst in 2012, Long graded out by Pro Football Focus as the 21st best pass protector in the NFL. This was devastating news for Long but it essentially means only 20 tackles in football protected their quarterback more effectively. J'Marcus Webb was 53rd. Gabe Carimi was 63rd. Think about that. 63rd? (For you non-math wizards, there are only 32 teams in the NFL and subsequently 64 starting tackles.) If one believes 2012 Long is a precursor of 2013 Long, the Bears would still be improving their edge protection by a significant amount.

The downside of signing Long is the 2012 version. The upside is he regains his health and provides a veteran anchor to the Bears offensive line for a few years the way Fred Miller did in the mid 2000s.  But Miller was never Long, never an elite NFL player and never capable of dominating a pass rusher the way Long is.

There are questions arising from the Long option.

  1. Can the Bears afford him? My belief is now and will continue to be that with Cliff Stein managing your salary cap a team can afford any player they'd like to sign. If the Bears want Long, Long will be a Bear.
  2. Would the signing preclude Phil Emery from taking an OT with the 20th pick? No. The Bears could sign Long and draft a Lane Johnson or DJ Fluker and enter the summer with the J'Marcus Webb and Gabe Carimi battling for backup spots. (I continue to say the oft-maligned Webb is an incredible asset as a flex tackle with his experience on both edges.)
  3. Are Long's health risks too risky? Maybe in baseball but not the NFL. Unless the Bears were to guarantee Long some absurd amount of money his contract would essentially be structured as a series of one year deals. (That's most NFL contracts.)
  4. Would a new home motivate Long? I think the answer is absolutely yes. I spent some of this weekend watching Dolphins tape and - while he hasn't stated it publicly - I believe Long was struggling with injuries for a majority of the season and I agree with Prisco/King/Kelly in their assessment of his performance. I don't think he was bad in 2012 and I think he can be good in 2013.

If I were running the Chicago Bears, I'd bring Long in at the right price but no one knows for sure how Phil Emery intends to approach the free agency period. If he decided to roll the dice on Jake Long, he may reap the benefits for the next three seasons.


Leave a comment
  • Agree with everything you wrote Jeff.

    Cliff Stein can only do so much, but you are correct that the Bears can sign Long if they want him.

    Glad to see you used all those great comments you solicited over the weekend too ;)

    As I said in my write-up, the Giants deal with Will Beatty (5 years, $37.5 million contract with $19 million guaranteed) is about right. That would put Long's cap number at right around $8 million - probably more like $5 or $6 million in 2013 and 2014. That is very doable.

  • In reply to NewBearInTown:

    It should also be worth noting that although Beatty will avg $7.5M/yr, THIS year he will only count $3.5M against the cap, so we can afford anyone with the right contract.

  • If we are gonna spend that much on a LT we need to pick up Andre Smith as he will be available since the Bengals tagged Michael Johnson. Smith is a much better option than Long at this point.

  • In reply to BearDown85:

    I think Smith is a RT though. Do we really want to bring in a guy like Smith at that price then hope he can play on the left side?

  • Whoops...totally meant Brandon Albert! I had just read an article about Smith and had his name on my mind I guess.

  • In reply to BearDown85:

    lol, i'd both of them.

  • do?

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    Fuck jyeah, have you seen the tits on that guy? Check out his combine 40 video on YouTube, I'm blocked. Sweet Mammary Jebus!

  • In reply to MB30SD:


  • oh, right. sorry.

  • In reply to BearDown85:

    Or draft Jonathan Cooper or Lane Johnson as well as the FA signing

  • Good post, Jeff. One of your more meaty and researched posts.

    King is the NFL's equivalent of a fluffer girl in the Valley, so I wouldn't trust any article that says Long has gas left in the tank; I would want to see his medical reports and work him out privately. Stein will know what he's worth. Long also knows the cold weather will help him, the outdoor mudbath that is Soldier Field will HELP him, and he's a Wolverine so he knows the weather. He's well served extending his career up north with an outdoor stadium.

    That said, we play alot of games at Minnesota and Detroit, so his footwork MUST grade out. The legs are the things that go on these guys.

    I think there are other tackles out there, but if the Bears get Long and pick up Cooper in Rnd 1, you can pair a rook with Long and both will be well served. Voila, a new left side to the Bears line.

  • Plus, as 4Ever noted - the Lions are targeting this bad boy:

    Yeah, just what the Lions need - another freak of nature pass rusher with Peppers like upside.

    We need a OL upgrade badly.

  • In reply to gpldan:

    6-5. 271 with a 4.6 40. Against Webb. Uhhh.... no.

  • In reply to gpldan:

    Not to mention that as badly as the Pack needs secondary help, if this bad boy is on the board at 26, the Pack snap him up:

  • In reply to gpldan:

    Yes! let's trade something to get two 1 rds and get bavarious fucking mingo... it would be worth it just for the name!!

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    mingo the merciless!!

  • In reply to MB30SD:

  • In reply to gpldan:

    #... 53... out of 64.

    My god, our tackles... abjectly.... suck.

    Please, please, please Emery and Trestman... make this offseason a great one for us. Fix the oline finally. please.

  • In reply to gpldan:

    And supposedly Ansah didn't even train because he wanted to finish up his studies.

    Also, that was his first time running a 40, ever.

  • In reply to gpldan:

    There is no combination of draft selections that will mean anything in Detroit. They have been drafting early first rounders forever and it never amounts to anything. Somehow, Gym Shorts is still there. With a 5000yd quarterback, one of the nastiest defensive tackles in the business and the best receiver in the game, they're going to win 6 games this year. If that many. Plus, the city is going to be quarantined by the National Guard by fall. So they have that going for them.

  • In reply to Johnnywad:

    Schwartz could have the entire 1st round to himself and still field a 6 win team.

    So yes, if there is anything to be hoped for - is that the Lions, between the coaching staff and the front office - will ALWAYS find a way to fuck it up.

  • I like how none of us are talking anything BUT OL this offseason. As if this is a no-brainer.

    Let's remember that when Emery goes for a DT in the 1st round.

  • In reply to gpldan:

    I will become a ravens fan on the spot. Can't take that shit any more.

    jesus, don't even say that.

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    If Lotulalei was avaiable at #20, and teams had taken the top 3 tackles and top 2 guards, would you still say that?

  • In reply to NewBearInTown:

    NB, first:

    Second, I'd say that we don't need him, unless we deal pep for picks... we just franchised melt for lots of money.

    I'd say pick someone of need, like a very good WR if available, or a real TE if available, or even the safety from texas.

    Taking the best guy at the spot just doesn't work for a team like us. We've done it for 10 years and look where we are. We need to take a position or need. And ours in order of need are:

    1. OL
    2. OL
    3. OL
    4. TE
    5. FS

    My $.02

  • In reply to MB30SD:


  • In reply to MB30SD:

    We don't really know if it works my man. Taking the best guy available was the philosophy in place, but the brain trust of Angelo and Smith had no idea who that was. I think best guy available is a great strategy to employ for the long run. The Bears are just too fucked up front to do it right now. They need to mix drafting for need and best available for a couple of years, stabilize things, then get back to drafting best available. "Best available" has to be able to play though.

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    FS ? We need a linebacker or two and a speed receiver before we get a safety. Whats wrong with Conte and Pringles?

  • I agree.

  • He's trying to hide his love for Hardin. But I see right through it. Right through it.

  • In reply to Johnnywad:

    MB has a hard-on for Hardin, he's just in denial!

    I'm gonna make you a "Hard-on for Hardin" bumper sticker MB.

  • My excellent plan is working excellently.

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    Okay. Just for fun. If we took truly the "Best Player Available" in the last few drafts, here is where we would be:

    2005 - Not a great draft. We had the #4 pick overall and could have taken Antrel Rolle, Carlos Rogers, DeMarcus Ware, Shawne Marriman or Jammal Brown. We took Cedric Benson, who actually had a decent career (would not have been a waste if we took him in like the third round).

    2006 - We traded down with Buffalo out of the first. If we stayed put, we could have had DeAngelo Williams, Marcedes Lewis, Nick Mangold or Joseph Addai. At the spot we traded to we got Danieal Manning, but one spot lower was Roman Harper.

    2007 - Not a great year at our spot. We could have had Eric Weddle or Zach Miller. We took Greg Olsen.

    2008 - Branden Albert (sound familiar); taken 1 spot after Chris Williams. Could have also taken Dominique RC, Joe Flacco (the year before we traded for Cutler), Jeff Otah, Chris Johnson, Mike Jenkins or Duane Brown.

    2009 - Had we not trade for Cutler, BPA could have been Jeremy Maclin, Alex Mack, Percy Harvin, Michael Oher, Vontae Davis or Clay Matthews. In the second round the Seahawks took Max Unger with our pick, but could have also had Andy Levitre, Shady McCoy or William Moore. Third round pick (Jarron Gilbert) could have been Mike Wallace.

    2010 - Again, had we not traded for Cutler, BPA could have been Anthony Davis, Ryan Matthews, Earl Thomas, Jason Pierre-Paul, Mike Iupati, or Maurkice Pouncey (the last couple even with a trade down). In the second round, with our pick, the Patriots took Rob Gronkowski, we could have also taken Zane Beadles.

    2011 - The BPA here was probably either Andy Dalton or Colin Kaepernick. We took Carimi.

    2012 - Jury still out.

    So to recap, our top picks could have been:
    2005 - Antrel Rolle (safety)
    2006 - Roman Harper (safety), and kept the trade
    2007 - Eric Weddle (safety). Or Greg Olsen or Zach Miller (TE)
    Three probowl safeties. We could have then traded one for picks to save cap space when FA came and been even better off. Or two probowl safeties and a TE.

    2008 - Branden Albert or Jeff Otah (OT) or Joe Flacco
    2009 - Jay Cutler trade plus Max Unger (C) in second.
    2010 - Jay Cutler trade plus Gronkowski in the 2nd. Keep the Gaines Adams trade and we get Jimmy Graham in the 3rd (TE).
    2011 - Colin Kaepernick (QB)

    So now the Bears would have had 2 offensive linemen and a TE, plus a backup quarterback in Kaepernick (or Andy Dalton). This is picking strictly BPA (with hindsight).

    You're telling me that you would have been upset with that run of first round picks?

  • In reply to NewBearInTown:

    not at all, but your entire response was based on two things NB:

    1. That we had some type of super clairvoyance
    2. We had coaches/a GM who knew what the hell they were actually doing in the draft

    So your entire premise(s) is based on two core concepts that are as likely and real as unicorns and bigfoot.

    Thirdly, BECAUSE our drafts have been so incredibly f-ed up over such a long period of time, is exactly the reason we need to focus on fixing those terribly neglected areas first before we can take BPA at other spots.

    Not sure why this doesn't make sense. Do we have the guys in place now to make the right pics… I’m willing to give last year’s horrible (in my mind) draft a pass because I have to believe it had lovie, tice, and mari all over it. If Emery and trestman have the same kind of head-scratcher this year and take some unknown entity at say DE and RB in 1 & 2, I will have lost all hope. If they DO have a god draft and sure up the oline really well, then maybe next year we can employ much more of a BPA strategy. It’s plain wrong for this offseason. Just my thought about it.

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    I'm pretty sure Angelo threw darts at his "big board" to make his selections. And when he botched the trade with Baltimore, I'm pretty sure he missed the board entirely.

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    Go back through those drafts and look at players who are in our #1 position of need. Sometime there just isn't anyone there.

    Example: Gabe Carimi was a decent pick. Our biggest need was O-line, our second biggest need was WR. We went O-line. You are now looking to cut Carimi in favor of the next guy. Would you still have taken Carimi or do you think Colin Kaepernick deserved a second look?

    And think about this for a second, the Niners traded Alex Smith to KC for two 2nd round picks. Even if Cutler (better than Smith) maintained his starting role over Cap, we certainly could have gotten compensation in a trade. Plus, we would have saved the $3 million we spent on Campbell and that cash would have been great about now with our current situation.

    I'm not saying we get it right every time. But I would rather take a quality player regardless of position than just the next guy to get cut.

  • In reply to NewBearInTown:

    we don't have to bludgeon this NB. Here's my point in a nutshell:

    We need all oline positions basically. If there isn't a frist rd value guy there you move on to WR, TE or ILB (not FS as coach rightly pointed out... I'm not used to needing an MLB), if there aren't any of those at the pick (basically impossible), you go with a FS.

    We have enough big, multi-year holes that allow us to pick a guy or serious need at every freaking spot. Going DE, RB, and maybe even CB shouldn't happen this year unless a total gift falls to us.

    The MOST important factor has to be the talent pickers. Without the real deal there, we're sunk anyway (to shady's point)

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    A god draft would be awesome, MB. I imagine s/he could cover Cutty's blind side *and* block great for Matt.

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    It's a good draft for DTs according to Mayock ... if a stud drops into our laps to play beside Melton ...... with Wooten/Izzy/Peppers on the ends ...? Damn.

  • part 4, section 3 of my millionaire's toy club:

    the personal sub.

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    aaaaaaand, part 4, section 4.... the real fucking batmobile:

    Boom GP!

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    Veneno sounds like something you get from a Thai hooker.

    Or a minivan from General Motors, take your pick.

    I'm sure Clarkson will have one lined up for the fall season, either way.

  • In reply to gpldan:

    only 3 to be made. all 3 already purchased.

  • In reply to gpldan:

    You may not be that far off.

    Veneno means poison in Spanish, and an STD is dick poison, so there you go.

  • hee hee

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    And the female football player experiment ends much like "Crystal Pepsi" campaign...or, if you prefer literary over pop references, it ends not with a bang, but with a yelp...

    "Now, to be wholly fair, Silberman isn't the only applicant to be outclassed at one of these combines. And also to be fair, she said she had hurt her quad earlier in the week and aborted her kicking Sunday before she could attempt any field goals -- not out of shame, according to Silberman, but because she had aggravated the injury. She yelped after her first kickoff traveled about 19 yards and eventually met with the media throng awaiting her with ice wrapped around her right thigh"

    The title of that article is "Lauren Silberman stages pointless sideshow at regional combine" (and that's from a FEMALE writer).

  • "See, a woman can kick on a bum leg but Quitler can't throw a ball off one? Whadda PUSSY! Bring back Orton!"

    But seriously, fuck that bitch for criticising this gal. She's attempting to break new grounds and all this cow can do is sit around and mock her? We all know she never stood a chance, but at least show some class.

    Plus she'd be easier on the eye than the Janikowskis of this world.

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    They got TeBag kicking now?!

  • There was an interesting stats article, I think on the 4-letter site, now I can't find it - dammit - but the gist of the article was this:

    Drafting the best player available has ALWAYS been a smokescreen, for EVERYBODY. That statistically, NOBODY does it.

    Everybody biases heavily to need, and that best player available is just the opening gambit you enter a draft with so when another team comes knocking, they don't say "well, you didn't want a DT anyway".

    The analysis had some meat to it, in that it tried to quantify defensive (blocking) picks - denying your division rival their pick, etc - by looking at the longevity of the player after their rookie contract and if they were traded. It also means quantifying need, which seems very un-statistics like.

    The Bears are often cited as one of the NFL's most secretive teams, and the contempt shown by Lovie for the press I still contend contributed to his downfall.

  • In reply to gpldan:

    Dude, if you find that article, link it!

    I agree that A LOT of draft strategy is based on need unless a prospect falls like 10 spots from where they were charted to get drafted (then the question becomes: what the hell is wrong with him?)

    This happened with the Lions when they drafted DT Fairley at #13 even though Suh had a break out season and they desperately needed a CB. To go truly BPA I think a team must have a guy graded significantly higher than a need (In this case the Lions must have graded Fairley much higher than CB Prince Amukamura), but it's not often that guys fall like 7-10 spots (by not often I mean that maybe ONE guy in the first falls more than expected).

    Also, if teams don't draft for need, then why so many trades?

    Trades happen because teams draft for need.

    Teams moving up definitely draft for need. Typically, they have a gigantic hole and see a top prospect at that position and move on up.

    Teams trading down recognize that their top targets have either A. Been drafted, so why not get more picks? B. Will still be available a few slots down.

    I don't think it's till the 4rth where teams truly go BPA, and even then they take into account what positions they drafted and what positions on their roster. Or, if your the Bears, what special teamers are needed.

  • I should also mention that in that same 2011 draft Carimi fell a lot of spots, so maybe guys fall for a reason.

  • To the question of "why trade" if you just draft for need. Three answers:

    1) Other teams draft for need, so they overrate guys, so they will give too much compensation to move to a certain spot. The Redskins, for example, did this with RG3. The Browns did it with Richardson too.
    2) You are in a patch of picks where the value of the player does not justify the value of the pick - or you are targeting an area of the draft order where the opposite is true. For example, in 2011 there weren't any standouts on the board when we took Carimi. 5-10 spots up, there were some great players. You trade up 5 spots, and take a guy that is a good value. Practically though - you never see teams trading up just to get a random BPA, but I think you see teams trading down all the time for that reason.
    3) You're taking the BPA, the BPA is not in a position of need, so you are trading down or up so that BPA and need makes sense. (okay, this is basically drafting for need).

  • In reply to NewBearInTown:

    I chuckled a little at your 3rd point.

    It's true, everyone mindlessly refrains, "BPA" but almost no one practices it.

    I mean, look at the Chiefs this year with their #1 overall. One would guess that the worst team in the NFL surely has many holes to fill, and as such, BPA should reign supreme; however, look at the moves they've made.

    The Chiefs were mocked to draft Geno Smith, but then they traded for Alex Smith (unofficially), so no more QB.

    Then, every draftnik says, "Oh, they're drafting Joeckle!" but then they franchise Albert, and that's that. I mean, did Joeckle suddenly become a worse prospect at 4pm Eastern? NEED happened. The Chiefs no longer have a need at OT, so now they're mocked to draft DT Star Loutelie or trade down, because of...what else? Need.

    The whole process is definitely weighted towards need, especially in the first two rounds.

  • 1. Simple..Long can Sheite in one hand and wish in the other and the "Fecile Matter" will rise.

    2. How many "F"ing years do I have to ask for a qualified @ GUARDS!!!!!! L.L. can fir the mold..if he's healthy

    3. If one more person say's that "W" and BearJew can be our tackles..I'm just going to fucking kill myself..
    53rd and 64th......................................
    FUCK YOU GLITCHY!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Ass-Goblin!!!!ugh

  • In reply to lobotobear:

    Jonathan Cooper Lobo, this could happen. Get ourselves a sexy center in round two and then sign our left tackle in FA. JCoop and Lance at guard, FA LT ... Scott fights with Carimi for RT guard, rookie center with Garza there just in case. Not Zoe Saldana hot ... but given a year or two ....

  • FA centers :


    Todd McClure – ATL
    Morgan Cox – BAL – (RFA)
    Chris Spencer – CHI
    Jeff Faine – CIN
    Dan Koppen – DEN
    Dylan Gandy – DET
    Don Muhlbach – DET
    John Estes – JAC – (RFA)
    Brad Meester – JAC
    Thomas Gafford – KC
    Joe Berger – MIN
    Brian De La Puente – NO – (RFA)
    Justin Drescher – NO – (RFA)
    Jim Cordle – NYG – E
    Tanner Purdum – NYJ – (RFA)
    Jon Dorenbos – PHI
    Greg Warren – PIT
    Mike Windt – SD – (RFA)
    Clint Gresham – SEA – (RFA)
    Tim Barnes – STL – E
    Andrew Economos – TB
    Fernando Velasco – TEN
    Nick Sundberg – WAS – (RFA)
    Andre Gurode – FA
    Jason Brown – FA
    Jamaal Jackson – FA

  • Saw this useful snapshot of the cap hits for the Bears heading in to this season:

    13 FOR 2013

    Here are the Bears' 13 highest cap hits going into next season.

    Julius Peppers $16.383M
    Jay Cutler $10.37M
    Brandon Marshall $9.3M
    Henry Melton $8.45M
    Charles Tillman $8M
    Lance Briggs $7.416M
    Matt Forte $7.175M
    Tim Jennings $4.1M
    Kellen Davis $3.85M
    Michael Bush $3.55M
    Devin Hester $2.94M
    Robbie Gould $2.82M
    Earl Bennett $2.35M

  • Guys that stick out to me are:
    - Peppers (just because he is so much more than anyone else)
    - Cutler (because that will go up by a good $5 million next year)
    - Hester (I really doubt he's coming back)

    There rest of them look about right. Tillman and Melton's contracts will hopefully not hit the cap any harder than they currently do.

    Interesting to note: Not one offensive lineman on the list.

  • In reply to NewBearInTown:

    Kellen Davis hurts the most because he's not worth a hot bag of dog shit. I don't mind paying extra for something if it's good and I like it. Kellen Davis sucks and his salary from last year and any cap hit the Bears take this year should be repaid if he has any sense of decency. Pep's getting a boat load but he still has the ability to change games by himself. I'm hoping he restructures and retires a Bear.

  • In reply to Johnnywad:

    kellen davis is getting $4M fucking dollars for dropping everything that hits his hands. Jesus I wish I'd been 6'7".


  • In reply to Johnnywad:

    Pep's deal will have him retire a Bear without any restructuring. I think he's 37 when it expires. The best we could do that helps out all sides would be a one year extension with very little new money. That would allow us to restructure some of the cap hit into the new year with maybe a base salary of like $3-4 million (not bad for a 37 year old DE). His cap hit that year would be like $10 million a free up $2 million the next three seasons.

    But that all requires us to guarantee a lot of the money left on the current deal. And no matter how amazing of a player Julius Peppers is, there is a huge risk guaranteeing that much money to a 35 year old football player.

  • In reply to NewBearInTown:

    Peppers 35 is normal player 31.

  • there goes Albert:

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    He probably would have cost too much. I was lukewarm on him. On the one hand, he's young and decent; however, the Chiefs were worried about his back and even debating about kicking him inside. Maybe they were just posturing for hardball, but they weren't the only ones with those concerns.

    This might be bad news for us in FA (sorta - one less OT on the market might drive the price of others up), but this might bode well for us in the draft.

    The Chiefs with their #1 overall have taken themselves out of the OT market. With Albert and their new RT Winston, I seriously doubt they draft Joeckle now.

    This means all OTs get pushed back a few spots.

    If the Eagles at #4 draft CB Milliner, Lions at #5 draft DE Ansah, and the Cards at #7 draft a QB, that could conceivably mean that OT Joekcle can fall to the Chargers at #11 (doubtful, but maybe).

    Then, we'd just have to worry about the Rams at #17 drafting OT Fisher, and the Cowboys at #18 drafting OT Lane Johnson.

    If OT Lane Johnson is still available at #17 and we don't trade up and jump the Cowboys to land him, I'm going to be VERY pissed.

    It would be the Ryan Clady-Chris Williams draft all over again.

    Lane Johnson falling to the the mid-teens is a long shots, but hey, a gal can dream...

  • * Rams at #16

  • If Joekel falls to #11, do we give the Chargers our 1st and 2nd to take him?

  • In reply to NewBearInTown:

    IF Joeckel does somehow fall to the #11, I say, stay put.

    To me, Joeckel and Fisher are almost identical. I would say, let the Chargers draft him, and wait to see where Fisher falls.

    Ideally, Fisher would fall to #16 to the Rams, then, we swoop in with the Steelers at #17 and steal Lane Johnson before the Cowboys, unless we want to gamble that the Cowboys, and Giants will skip Lane Johnson (not bloody likely).

    Trading up 3 spots shouldn't cost us that much - maybe a 4rth (or next year's 3rd). We can even throw in Hester since the Steelers will be missing a deep threat from Wallace walking; plus, Hester would provide value for their KR/PR which will allow them to rest Brown from those duties especially since he's going to be their #1 WR now.

    That would be one nice scenario.

    If we end up buying Long, then we could just stay put and let Warmack, Cooper or Fluker fall to us, might even be able to trade down if all of them are still on the board at 20 (50/50 chance in my book).

  • That would be a major headline trade. Bears trade Hester to the Steelers to swap 1st round picks and draft Lane Johnson.

    Honestly the compensation seems about right for both teams. I'd do that deal.

  • Not a great selection. It's a shame that De La Puente is a RFA, I would love to have him over here. The TEN Centre is alright as well.

  • In reply to DYLbear23:

    The guy I really like is OG Vasquez for the Chargers. By all accounts, he was their only good Olinemen and ranks higher than Louis and 2nd only to Levitre. Should be a lot more reasonably priced than Levitre too.

  • Well my first thing was meant to be a reply to Irish, thanks CN!

    I was primarily addressing the list of FA centres that Irish put up as we really need to upgrade. I would love Vasquez as well but I think the Chargers will wrap him up. Him and Cutty could both have a bitch about Rivers if he did join us though.

  • I honestly wish Brian Burke would quit reminding everybody he was a fighter jock. Outside of that, his company is doing real stats work and coming up with some interesting findings:

  • In reply to gpldan:

    BTW, this Moneyball style would nearly dictate a parting of the ways with Peppers, even if he still ate cap.

  • Out of curiosity, what would you deem as an acceptable amount to pay to Long?

  • In reply to DYLbear23:

    For me, $9M/year with incentives.

    Not double digits, that's for sure, and definitely NOT $11M/yr.

  • Bears used as the example, with the lowest WPA

  • I also think the math has not properly accounted for the money needed to sign THIS year's draft class and lock them up. With the Rook wage scale, this will be easier but still will take up cap room.

    Appearing on ESPNews Saturday March 2nd, John Clayton suggested that free agent LT Jake Long "could go to Chicago" if he hits the market.

  • In reply to gpldan:

    I checked it out.

    The Bears 2013 draft class will cost them approx $3.6M which is in the bottom 4 (most likely because we're in the middle of each round and are missing a 3rd and 7th).

    This site breaks it down and seems to be on the up-and-up.

  • Thanks.

  • "Some" NFL teams reportedly believe Long needs to play right tackle instead of left, which would severely diminish his market value. Long is also coming off back-to-back disappointing seasons. Our gut feeling all along has been that Long will wind up re-signing with the Dolphins on a deal worth significantly less than he's seeking. His current asking price is a laughable $11 million a year.

    Pro Football, possibly throwing some FUD out there on behalf of the Fish, as I don't think is a particularly reputable group.

  • THe daily mock draft, where the Baking Mingo goes to 2

  • Jeff started out the post talking like Long is damaged goods and on the downside of his career to justify his belief he won't make $10 mil+/year. The guy has played 5 years and is 27. Lots of elite OL play for 12-15 years. Long is going to get way more than $8 mil/year. Maybe he won't be worth the money but that's not going to stop some team from paying it.

    Also, so many of you guys have such a hard on for Lovie you give Emery a pass for last year's draft. It's a convenient way to be in denial that Emery totally screwed the pooch. Maybe in 2-3 more years that draft will look better but right now it looks dreadful. Time will tell.

  • In reply to CanadaBear:

    I'm not sure who you think is giving Emery a pass around here. Pretty much we've turned Chicken Dinner into a bad joke and Hardin was just plain stupid. When we turn Dinner into Briggs replacement, nobody will be surprised.

    Jeffery did not redeem that draft, he's been a bit fragile for a big Roy Williams like target.

    Also, I want to say that Carmini is, I think, a total bust at anything except MAYBE guard. If I was Emery and up at 20, with Cooper AND DJ Fluker on the board, I would go get Fluker and not Cooper, because even with Scott's play - I think I'd rather have a tackle that can actually PLAY tackle.

  • In reply to gpldan:

    I've been reading a constant barrage of posts talking about Lovie/Tice being responsible for Emery's draft last year. That makes no sense. Emery is the GM and the draft is his baby.

  • In reply to CanadaBear:

    just not true at all last year canada.

    THIS year the draft is his baby and I will 100% hold him to it... last year he was basically told that lovie was his boss. That draft had lovie/angelo written ALLLLLL over it.

    Again, zero leway or excuses for emery this year.

  • In reply to CanadaBear:

    Now that's quite harsh Canada. Screwing the pooch would be what Angelo did in 2007:

    Olsen (with Panthers), Bazuin, Wolfe, Okwo, Beekman, Payne, Graham (with Ravens), McBride, Brant.

    That is bloody awful. Drafting Jeffrey alone is better than that. We don't know what we have with Hardin, and I would like to see Rodriguez getting a chance at TE. I was not happy with the Shea pick, or the drafting of two CBs in the 6th and 7th. I would have loved to have picked up Burfict with our 7th (as would others on the site), instead we picked a 5ft8 CB that got cut almost immediately.

    It was an average draft at best, and because of it Emery will be under a lot more scrutiny this year.

  • In reply to DYLbear23:

    I don't think #2 or #4 even made it to opening day...

  • In reply to tobijohn:

    The thing is that was one of JA's worst drafts (unfortunately there's more competition for that title). The fact that we are even comparing Emery's first draft with that one raises a lot of questions for me. I'm not out to crucify Emery, I'm just tired of a lot of posters giving him a pass and blaming it on Lovie/Tice.

  • In reply to DYLbear23:

    Olsen was a decent pick and Graham was a good pick. So far, Jeffery was a decent pick with a lot of upside. Chicken Dinner doesn't seem to live up to his high draft slot. Hardin, who knows? E-Rod, same thing. If all those guys pan out it was a good draft. If not, uh-oh.

  • In reply to CanadaBear:

    I think we need to wait at least another year on McClellin. I'm really not ready to bury him yet. And if he does end up replacing Briggs, and has a career as good as, say, Hillenmeyer, I woukd consider him a good pick.

    Yeah, sometimes you get more for your #1, other times you get Quentin Coryatt, or Curtis Enis. Reading the text of this one, I did not realize that the Bears were considering a receiver with that pick. *sigh*

  • In reply to SC Dave:

    They say it takes 3 years, and I think that is a fair assessment.

    Shea - Either at OLB or DE, if he continues to grow, he could have a career like Izzy's. Never going to be in contention for a blockbuster contract, maybe never make the probowl, but put up solid stats for 6-8 years. If he moves from DE to OLB the way Izzy moves to 3 tech? Not bad. But if he never matures beyond his not terrible rookie season, he'll be a bust. So Shea is the classic example of a player who needs time to see if he'll be worth it.

    Jeffery - If we drafted him without moving up, I'd be thrilled. Since we moved up, I need to see more upside. But his rookie year was perfectly good for a rookie. If he grows into a solid #2, he'll have been a good pickup.

    Hardin - If he gets healthy, let's see what he can do. So far he's spent all his time in rehab.

    Rodriguez - He flashed solid skills as a FB. I am concerned that Emery is pushing for him to play TE, where he will not fit. In that way he could have a Daniel Manning stretch with us - lots of talent but poor placement on the roster keeps him from producing. Only time will tell.

    6th and 7th round CBs - Neither really did anything. But that counts for most guys in the 6th and 7th. As long as Emery finds one gem every 2-3 years in the 6th, 7th or undrafted, I'm cool with that. Truth is, Isaah Frey is still on the team, he might turn into something in another year or two.

    So basically nobody is threatening to make the probowl, so you can't call this an A grade. But if Shea, Jeffery and Rodriguez all turn into regular contributors, which is legitimately possible. If Hardin gets healthy and plays well, or Frey starts making plays on special teams, or Rodriguez find his nitch and starts producing consistently. If we see 4 or 5 out of 6 the draft is a solid B. If only Jeffery and Rodriguez pan out, but are regular starters, still a C+.

    If nobody matures, its a bust. But only time will tell.

  • In reply to NewBearInTown:

    An Izzy-like career for a few years for the 19th pick of the draft is a C at best. I love Izzy but I'd love him a lot less if he was 19th pick of the draft. No issues with Jeffery. Hardin and E-Rod, who knows? Totally agree about those 6-7 rounders. Although they should at least be ST'ers about half the time.

    Agree about needing 3-4 years to completely judge a draft but this last one didn't exactly get off to a great start.

  • In reply to SC Dave:

    at least those are who the bears get.

  • In reply to SC Dave:

    Wow Dave, you and I agree on Bears stuff almost all the time but I'm shocked by this. You'd be OK with Chicken Dinner if his career rivaled Hillenmeyer's? C.D. was the 19th pick of the draft. H.H. was a serviceable player for a few years. Nothing more. That's REALLY low expectations for the 19th pick of the draft.

  • In reply to CanadaBear:

    Last year's draft was definitely underwhelming. That's the best description I felt afterwards. Puzzled, bewildered, "eh" are also accurate.

    It seemed like the Bears had no strategy. Like they had a lot of guys graded and didn't account for other teams also wanting those guys. Their grading also left me a bit confused.

    Like I previously stated, a lot of that had to do with a muddled situation where the HC interviewed the GM - yet everyone knew that it was deep playoff run or bust for Lovie, which had to be somewhat awkward.

    It's my personal belief that Emery did his homework, graded guys, mapped out the draft, but ultimately let Love-Tice-Marenilli get their players with a wait and see approach. Well, we saw how that turned out.

    I agree with MB that this year Emery will get no leeway. If he drafts another S in the 2nd I'm going to turnoff my TV for about 5 years.

  • First of all, fuck Jason Whitlock in the face with a corndog. Secondly, the Bears should restructure Peppers, extend Cutler, extend Marshall, extend Tillman and Jennings and give themselves space to maneuver in FA this offseason. If they stand pat without addressing these current and expiring contracts there won't be much wiggle room.

  • In reply to Shady:


  • Reworking Peppers deal may prove too costly

    Brad Biggs,0,636939.story

  • And lastly, fuck snow. Again? Fack.

  • 73 here

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    you would have got bonus points if you put that little degree sign next to the 73.

    Is there some sort of HTML code for that? hmmmm...

  • 73°

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    Nick Lachey doesn't think it's hot enough...

  • In reply to Shady:

    i prefer this:

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    Just remember, you made me do this...

  • In reply to Shady:

    rabbit and I trying to get you to play all night... where you ats?

  • In reply to Shady:

  • Lach will cost roughly $3.5M/yr? That still seems like too much. If so, offer him a 2-yr deal, with $2M this year, and $5M next year (which he will never see because he will retire a SB Champ like Lewis).

    "CSN Chicago believes free agent Brian Urlacher would have to play for about half of his $7.5 million 2012 salary to return to the Bears.
    The Bears have maintained radio silence on their intentions for the future Hall-of-Famer, while the sides have just eight more days to reach a deal before the start of free agency. Urlacher has said he's willing to give the Bears a "hometown discount." How big of a discount the Bears have in mind will be the sticking point. "


  • That seems a little steep to me, too. How about half that with incentives for playing time and a few performance benchmarks that could get him to $3.5M?

  • In reply to tobijohn:

    You don't give Brian Urlacher performance benchmarks. That would be a kick right in his nuts.

  • In reply to tobijohn:

    Everybody mentions the incentives, but "likely to be earned" incentives still count against this year's cap. I think 4ever got it about right. We'll pay him $2-3 million this year and maybe $4 million next year, but year 2 will be fully or almost fully voidable.

  • canada... pari-nice on now. awesome.

    Floated the idea to a couple riding buddies yesterday... catch TDF this year? We're looking into it.

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    I was trying to find P-N on the TV yesterday. No luck. I'll have to give it another shot. If I was going to see a Grand Tour I'd follow Graham Watson's advice and see the Tour of Spain. He's been photographing the Grand Tours forever. According to him you can get up close and personal at the Vuelta with a minimum of difficulty. TdF is just nuts. I'd love to see the Giro but it's supposed to be almost as nuts as the TdF.

    This year there is a Tour of Alberta in Sept. It's going to be a pro race. I'll probably go watch a stage or two in the mountains. I'll let you know when there are more details.

    If you guys go to the TdF, you'll have to give me the skinny.

  • I want this man's life:

  • hey johnny... fat.... cow

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    Look at those udders! oh yea.

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    she's sexy as hell. When people hate on her I laugh because I can only imagine the below average places their penises have been or have never been at all.

  • yeah maings. she looks so soft and smooth and just yummy. Chicks with 6-packs are grooooss.

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    Its all matter of personal taste. Actually, I'm not into squishy girls.

    The woman I had with what I consider the closest to a perfect body was a yoga gal would liked cheese a lot - the combo gave her a delicious combination of a soft exterior with firm strength beneath. Yummy...

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    MB...Sheite...I got the wrong artist job...Christo!!!!!!! I'd take that job any day for commission work...hell I'd do it for free!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


  • In reply to lobotobear:

    pro boner work lobo?

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    tee hee betcha!!!!!!

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    kids good MB? growing like crazy?

  • In reply to lobotobear:

    yeah, thanks lobo. They're awesome maings. How's your clan?

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    all good!

  • pretty awesome... maings:

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    Yes. C'Caw! C'C'aw!

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    WTF???? bbbbbbbbbbbbbbwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • DJ Moore just got cut.


  • THere goes the value of my autographed football.


    Holy shit, if Dwayne Bowe can get this kind of money what do you guys think Brandon Marshall could get if he was a dick about it?

    Bowe is being paid like a top 3 receiver. Marshall IS a top 3 receiver!

  • I feel like we're missing a reg who feeds on offseason activity like prime rib. #whereRUR2

    I needs my surrogate twitter updates.

    C'caw! C'Caw!

  • my god man:

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    The Saleen S7 was, in fact, ahead of it's time.

  • In reply to gpldan:

    LOVE saleens maings. Serious viciousness.


    I saw the Jensen tweet. But its just Jensen speculating (and he frankly doesn't seem to notice the cap when he tweets). PFT has taken Jensen's idea and turned it into "Bears expected to make an offer."

    Emery is obviously looking for a "franchise" tight end. Cook is a good candidate. Kellen Davis will not be back this year. That's about all the info that the article is based on. I am certain Emery has not leaked a word.

  • In reply to NewBearInTown:

    Jared cook or.... steve the magazine salesman? You decide:,%20Orlando.jpg

  • In reply to NewBearInTown:

    Shit, we have E-Rod! What *else* do we need?

  • hey shady, why do I feel like this is EXACTLY what your twitter account would look like:

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    Stop jerking around on the inner mess and go out and buy BO2!

  • In reply to Shady:

    hahahaha. I gots no money any mo maings.

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    When has that ever stopped you?

  • Guys,

    We don't have the money. Also Webb is decent. Give him a chance

  • In reply to FrankSchoenburg:

    this can't be real. can it?

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    Yes it is. The 2nd Green Bay game Webb was good.

    Look at our cap. We need to make moves just to resign some of our own guys.

  • In reply to FrankSchoenburg:

    frank you are smoking crack my friend.

    He was ranked the 53rd tackle out of 63 total Frank.

    You are lovie smith aren't you?

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    If I was smoking crack, I'd be saying stuff like let's sign Long, Andre Smith, Cook, and Levitre! Super Bowl! No my friend, I am sober and understand arithmetic.

  • In reply to FrankSchoenburg:

    Webb, is an absolute turd Frank. If the Bears go into the season with him at left tackle I will kick Emery in the nuts, especially after Emery's train wreck first draft. I could have drafted better sitting on my couch drinking than what Mr. Synergy did.

  • In reply to Justin:

    Only in hindsight

  • In reply to FrankSchoenburg:

    Frank, you are correct that we're not going to make any big splash signings. But cap space is deceptive. Here's a simple example.

    Say we wanted to bring in Jake Long for $8 million a year. We could give him a 5 year, $40 million contract, with $20 million guaranteed as a signing bonus. Long wants more money per year, but its hard to say to no that large of a guarantee up front. We can do this with minal cap space.

    Long gets $20 million as a bonus, which we pro-rate entirely over the last four years of the contract. We pay him $2 million this year (base salary, workout bonus, etc.). We pay him $3 million next year, then $4 million, $5 million and $6 million. Even though he puts $22 million in his pocket this year, his cap numbers would be:

    2013 - $2 million
    2014 - $8 million
    2015 - $9 million
    2016 - $10 million
    2017 - $11 million

    2014 and 2015 would be tricky with the Cutler, Marshall, Melton and Peppers contracts, but we would have a season or two to work all of that out (and those deals can be pushed out as well). By 2016, we could have planned for the cap hit accordingly, plus we will not be paying Peppers anymore. Very manageable.

    Now, if Long wants more money, and we give him escalating bonuses to make the contract look more impressive, we could do something like 6 years, $60 million, with $20 million guaranteed. We pump up the base salaries in the last three years a bit and create some room to convert future payments to bonuses (you can only prorate for 5 years in the future), and the deal looks like this:

    2013 - $2 million
    2014 - $8 million
    2015 - $9 million
    2016 - $12 million
    2017 - $14 million
    2018 - $15 million

    Except that we structure it so that the last year is voidable. In that case, if Long drops off in 2016, we can cut him and only be left with a few million (maybe $5 million or so) in dead cap space for 2017. And there are was to split that dead space into 2018 as well, further softening the blow. So the reality is that the team's risk is only marginally increased, but the agent gets to grab bigger headlines.

  • In reply to NewBearInTown:

    I agree with everything you said and appreciate the explanation. I wouldn't mind giving Melton the 5 year $40 million deal you outlined for Long.

  • In reply to FrankSchoenburg:

    Melton isn't coming off of a down year, and he has no major injury history. He'll get more than $40 million when he signs a deal.

  • In reply to NewBearInTown:

    NBIT -

    Long can realistically command a $2M signing bonus, remember what this guy wants from the Fish? I don't know that you can escape paying him 6-7 in his opening year.

    Long is no dummy, he is going to get what he can now - no guarantees from a guy who is fading that he really has 4 years left.

  • In reply to gpldan:

    GP, read it again. I'm giving the guy a $20 million signing bonus, but pro-rating it over the last 4 years of the deal. He'll make $22 million his first season, but only 2 will count against the cap.

  • In reply to NewBearInTown:

    All these numbers are giving me a headache. Where is another sexy lady in body paint?! Yeeeeeaaaahhh Buuuuddddyyy!!!

  • In reply to NewBearInTown:

    Cliff Stein better be looking over his shoulder. There's a NewBearInTown and he's the cap master. Seriously dude, you got skillssss!

  • In reply to FrankSchoenburg:

    You are correct, if by "don't you mean "do" and if by "decent" you mean "dog shit."

    LGs, TEs and HBs shouldn't have to help out their LTs all the time. It limits the O (see Bears 2012).

  • Long, Smith, Bushrod, Levitre, Vollmer, Loadholt, Baker, and Cherilus. At least one of these guys need to be wearing navy and blue next season, preferably two or three.

  • In reply to Shady:

    Where is the money going to come from?

  • In reply to FrankSchoenburg:

    You can restructure Peppers, extend Cutler, Marshall, Tillman and Jennings to free up cap space.

  • In reply to Shady:

    Ok, I guess you could do that. But then we will be in cap HELL in a couple of years. It's a very dangerous plan. I don't want to or think we'll do it.

  • In reply to FrankSchoenburg:

    I'll re-post it here.

    Butch’s Mathematically Challenged Capology

    Like I said, it’s slow, so here’s a possible cap situation for the Bears in 2013.

    The Bears according to “Over the Cap” (
    have roughly $10,389,955 in cap space.

    This lands them almost smack in the middle of the league cap-wise, however, the Melton contract will shrink that significantly.

    If Melton indeed gets franchised, that would cost the Bears $8M, leaving the Bears with approx. $2M. Keep in mind the avg draft class costs about $5M, and we still have FAs to possibly re-sign: Louis, Hayes, Izzy, Okoye, D.J., Roach, Scott, Collins, Campbell, McCown, Hayden, Spencer, Bowman, and oh yeah, Lach.

    Having only $2M effectively removes us from any OT FA dreams we might be pondering. With that money, we might not even be able to sign a measly TE FA.

    So, some cap maneuvers need to be made.

    1. PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE Pepp, restructure! You da man, but $16M for this year is killing our cap!

    2. We need to release these players.

    - Hester. $2.34M.
    - Davis. $3.85M
    - Adams $555,668
    - Garza $2.12M
    - Ed Williams $715, 000
    - Toeaina $1.62
    - Walters $550,000

    I’m not exactly sure about how much cap hit they’ll all cost, but I assume not much. As such the Bears should save roughly $10M, which means we’ll have about $20M to play with.

    Let’s say worse case scenario, Melton get’s franchised.

    $20M-8= $12M

    With $12M we must re-sign a few of our guys.

    Lance Louis
    Okoye and/or Collins

    Let’s say that they collectively cost us $5M this year, that would then put us at approx $7M above the cap, which would leave us with about $2M for an FA (Keep in mind that the avg draft class cost $5M).

    If we really need it, we can probably restructure a few other contracts (B-Marsh, Cutler, Peanut maybe even Bush), but the way I see it, as it stands (With no Pepp restructure and Melton tag), the Bears only have about $2M to play with in FA (though I‘m sure the Bears will cook the books somehow), and we’d have to say goodbye to some familiar faces, not least of which is Lach’s mug.

  • Addendum.

    This is the most conservative estimate and calculated before the cap got bumped $2M.

    So, add $2M + $2M and we got $4M.

    The draft will cost us closer to $3M than $5M, so that's another $2M.

    Now the Bears have $6M.

    Then factor in that I wholly believe Melton will get a contract, and it won't be for $8M the first year (just look at Beatty who is getting paid only $3M this year). So, let's say Melton's new contract saves $3M. Add that to the $6M.

    Now, the Bears have $9M.

    If the Bears even restructure ONE contract (a strong likelihood), let's say conservatively it gets us at least $2M (and probably free up a lot more).

    Now the Bears have approx $11M.

    If the Bears really back-load Melton's contract, and the mystery restructure, we can probably free up another $6M and we'd have about $17M in cap space for an FA.

    That's more than enough for ONE solid FA. Keep in mind that almost all contracts are back-loaded (see Will Beatty) and that the cap will increase significantly once the new TV deals kick in sometime in 2015 (hence why all the contracts now have a huge increase in that year).

    If one contract is restructured it won't put us in a bad spot going forward. We're going to have to re-sign Peanut eventually, so why not now?

  • - Hester. $2.94M ($833K dead cap) = save $2.11M
    - Davis. $3.85M ($1.35M dead cap) = save $2.5M
    - Adams $555,668 = save all but $1K
    - Garza $2.12M = no dead cap, straight up saving of $2.12M
    - Ed Williams $715K = no dead cap, save $715K
    - Toeaina $1.62M ($500K) = save $1.12M
    - Walters $550K = save all 550K

    Total freed cap space of approx $9.5-$10M.

  • "roughly" $10,389,955 in cap space!! lol... really lol. You're killing me, dood!

  • In reply to FrankSchoenburg:

    go back up and read NB's and $'s posts about this... don't post half-cocked Frank.

  • In reply to MB30SD:

  • In reply to FrankSchoenburg:

    yes, we've read all those frank. If emery doesn't rework any current contracts or let some big boys go, we can't afford hardly anything.

    Some of that stuff just NEEDS to happen if we're going to build this team up under the new management.

  • In reply to FrankSchoenburg:

    FrankShoenburg sounds like a jewish attorney/accountant name...find some loopholes and make it happen!!! jk :)

  • In reply to 505 Bears!!:


  • In reply to Shady:

    Navy and blue? What team is that, the Blue Meanies?

  • In reply to gpldan:

    Haha yeah, The Montreal Meanies. Jebus. Wearin' the GSH!

  • Hell no to Long at $11 mill per. Anything close to that is stupid. Jared Cook anyone?

  • You guys are right, who needs Long and Levitre when you've got Webb and Carimi holdin' it down? smmfh

  • In reply to Shady:

  • The Bears can do whatever they want in free agency and it won't matter until they start hitting on some drafts. Last year's turds aren't going to cut it Emery. And no, it's not to early to tell that last years draft was a terrible.

  • In reply to Justin:

    Were I to accept that, it would be equally reasonable to accept that it is not too early to know that you have no idea what you're talking about.


    Cook has limited run blocking ability?

    So, 3 years later, we get Olsen with a tan? Are you kidding me?

    I don't care. Vernon Davis is considered a poor run blocker. Cook looks like an upgrade to me. Anybody who can make the freaking catch on the seam fly route would be lovely.

  • In reply to gpldan:

    I think "limited run blocking ability" is a cliche applied to all TEs who can catch. Kind of like "average speed" is automatically applied to white wide receivers. Has anybody watched the tape?

  • In reply to NewBearInTown:

    Yeah, I remember seeing that about Olsen about five or so years ago right here on Da Blog

  • In reply to gpldan:

    It's hard to make a block when you line up in the slot. Cook lined up in the slot 70% of the time.

    Outside of Gronk and Graham, there is NO TE who can both block well and stretch the seams. It's usually an either/or proposition for TEs.

    Rudolph blocks well, but he's more a possession TE like Witten, not a seam stretcher (why does that sound pornographic?)

    Emery has insisted he wants a seam-stretcher. We already got the best blocking TE in Spaeth.

  • On extensions.

    Tillman is 32 on the last year of his deal. I think it is a very real possibility that the Bears give him a contract this off-season that allows him to retire a Bear. I'd have to do some research to figure what that looks like, but he could probably do a 4 or 5 year deal. Let's say 4 years and $25 million, $13 million guaranteed. His old deal average around $5.5 million a year, so this would maintain that. He'd get an extra $5 million this year, and the large guarantee and annual average would give us a lot of flexibility.

    Jennings is 29 and probably will want similar money to Tillman. He is due less money this year than Peanut, so we could shrink the guarantee a bit, but I wouldn't have a problem offering the same 4 year, $25 million contract. Since Jennings is younger, we could even do something like 5 years, $31.25 million with $9 million guaranteed. So Jennings doubles his 2013 money. Peanut gets the bigger bonus, Jennings gets the extra year. The Bears have probably the best cornerback tandem in football.

    Marshall is due $9.1 million this year and next year. He is 28. We could offer him the same deal Dwayne Bowe just did. That would be 5 years, $56 million. The problem is that doing a deal like that actually hurts our cap situation slightly. Marshall's $9.1 million is pretty frugal; Bowe's (and VJax has basically the same deal) averages $13 million a year the first three years. Plus Marshall's situation on the team is tied up with Cutler's, I'm not sure we want to do his contract until we do Cutlers as well. So if we aren't extending Cutler this year, we aren't extending Marshall either.

    Melton is the wild card. Gerald McCoy is on a 5 year, $63 million contract. Suh is also at around 5 years, $60 million, but with better guarantees. Those (I think) were both rookie deals and are the biggest in the NFL for tackles - averaging $12 million per year. There are lot of other guys in the $6 million/year range. Forte had a similar tag number to Melton and he signed a 4 year, $30 million deal. DTs have longer shelf lives than running backs, but Melton only plays 55% of the snaps in a given season. And DTs don't make what DEs make, so no Peppers style deal on the horizon. If we can do something like 5 years, $45 million, with $20 million guaranteed and some escape routes on the back end, I'd be game. But that would likely only reduce our cap hit this year by maybe $4 or $5 million without creating a bad situation in the future.

    So to recap. Extend Tillman and Jennings and the total cap responsibility stays at around $12 million for starting corners, but we can push some of that to future years, freeing up as much as $6-8 million in cap space. Hold off on Marshall. Give Melton a long term deal, freeing up another $5-6 million in space.

  • In reply to NewBearInTown:

    You know the irony is that the Cover-2 doesn't need shut-down corners, so usually the system saves the team from having to sign a Revis.

    But not only do we have one good CB, we got TWO and must pay them more than most cover-2 CBs in the league.

    This is part of why we're a little strapped for cash. DEs and DTs are supposed to get paid, but 2 CBs and a MLB and ROLB on top of that - mucho money.

    We're a victim of our own success on D, and a victim of our own ineptness on O (having to reach for a LT and TE).

  • Yeah, but we don't play Cover 2 every down. The Lovie-Deuce (as it is popularly called on the blog) is a shell the disguise what the D is really doing. Offenses are kept honest on the deep ball because we could really be in a true Cover-2, which would punish that sort of strategy (like what the Ravens do with Flacco). But at the same time, we are able to shift into other schemes after the snap through discipline and coordination from our back 7.

    With strong corners in 2012, we played a lot of cover 1. That also allowed us to cover for weakness in the middle by bringing an extra safety down to challenge the run.

  • In reply to NewBearInTown:

    Yeah, but "zone" corners in general aren't paid as much as "man" corners (that's why Prime Time labels every slow corner a zone corner).

    But now we have two PB CBs and must pay them accordingly, which in the past wasn't the case.

    I almost wish Peanut and Jennings didn't make the PB and just stayed under the radar, but I am glad that Jennings finally caught those balls and that Peanut got the recognition he deserved.

  • Oh, and for the record, I would have mad a bad ass zone corner!

    During football practices me and this one other player (who also was a wrestler) used to go at it as WR-CB.

    The coaches would line us up arm lengths from each other, and we'd basically strike each other as hard as possible, jamming or trying to escape the jam, then we'd switch positions.

    It was pretty much like boxing but with a karate fist. I think the coaches mostly did this to amuse themselves, though I'm sure they'd say it was for "technique" (though all they did was mil around spitting out sunflower seeds and talk to each other).

  • we rotated in college. Safeties played corner in practice and the other way around. Playing corner is BRUTAL. Everyone but you knows where the ball's going. So fucking hard to do.

    In thinking about it, I guess it was probably easier for the corners to play safety. oh well.

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    Playing CB is EXTREMELY hard, and it doesn't surprise me at all that to be good at it you need near arrogance to play it.

    I remember the coaches "OK, you got to go up to this guy and press him, smack him off the line (never mind that he's about 6inches taller and 20 pounds heavier). Then, turn your hip and mirror him (never mind that he's fast and have no clue where he's going). Then, read his body language. If his pupils get big (never mind that your running full speed and his pupils and you have to read his dime size pupils between his face mask), whip your head around and go up for the ball."

    Oh, and make sure that the whole time you don't bump him because that's pass interference and the whole stadium will know it.

    And that's just the pass. Defending the run was an even scarier proposition because you're basically just sitting there waiting for a 220 pound horse charging right at you.

    That's when certain CBs make "business decisions" according to Deion, and he's right. You can see those HBs sweeping almost in slow mo, and the whole time you're thinking, "Where the fuck are the linebackers!?" or "Please, Jebus, let a safety be behind me in case he trucks me over or jukes me." And that's the thing, as a corner, you don't really know. You're out there on an island.

    I give mad props to CBs. It takes a lot of balls, athleticism and instincts to play it well, because ONE play can make them the goats of the entire game.

  • I have to defer to you guys that played it, but I look at FS,and it reminds me of the position I played - soccer goalkeeper. Everyone - anyone - else on the field could screw up but if *you* did, bad news.

    I guess I can understand the island part.

  • CB is a very demanding position SC.

    If you do happen to catch the half-millimeter of pupils dilating while running full stride between his face mask, you still have to whip your head around, jump at just the right time (about 3 feet because the WR is like 6'4 and probably has a 36inch vertical), and swat the ball down.

    And even then the coaches will smirk, "Hey, you got your hands on it, why didn't you intercept it? That's why you're a cornerback".

    That's why all the DBs love Deion. He might be full of hot air, but not only did he do all that, but he made it look easy. AND he played baseball.

    He's a little annoying on the NFL Network, but he's pretty funny too. When Rich Eisen asked him, "Did you really just keep running out of the stadium when you ran your 40 barefooted?" Deion responded, "Don't be silly. I had more respect then that. I stopped afterwards and shook hands with the scouts. However, I did do the interviewing. First question was, 'What spot do you got? Oh, you ain't getting me. Next."

    All this while sporting gold chains and a jerry-curl. That dude is funny.

  • this can't be real:

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    btw, the second part of the vid is at a high school about 1/4 of a mile from my bros house and 4 from mine.

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    You lost me at Jamarcus.

  • I'm sure somewhere Jerry Angelo is laughing his ass off that Chris Williams is a back-up guard for the Rams, and that we're left having to overpay for a mediocre LT because of his incompetence.

    This is sort of how it goes in my head (Khan=Jerry. New Life=Emery).

  • Or more accurately, Spoc=Emery turning radioactive trying to clean up Angelo's mess.

  • To me, that movie is still far and away the best of Star Trek.

    Too lazy to find the audio. but

    McCoy: Where are we going?
    Kirk: Where they went.
    McCoy: Suppose they went *nowhere*?
    Kirk: Then this will be your big chance to get away from it all.

    Saavik: You lied!
    Spock: I exaggerated.

    [Saavik has just left the turbolift]
    Dr. McCoy: Did she change her hairstyle?
    Kirk: I hadn't noticed.
    Dr. McCoy: Wonderful stuff, that Romulan Ale.

  • In Te'o news...

    "That’s the word from Texans defensive end Antonio Smith, who said on Pro Football Talk on NBC Sports Network that if Te’o gets drafted by the Texans, his treatment in Houston will be brutal.

    “Our locker room is full of clowns and, oh, man people would kill him. I mean he would be the butt of every joke for at least two, three years,” Smith said.

    Good thing Te'o's not sensitive...oh, wait...

    It's going to be very interesting how this plays out. In locker rooms, it's an unstated goal to make fun of someone until he either turns red, or begins crying...and then, you laugh even harder (and in these times, probably record it on your cell and post it on youtube).

  • Hey, we haven't had any haikus lately! I know it's the off-season, but you guys are slacking!

    So, here's a Cap Haiku (First of its kind!). It's entitled:

    "Jerry's a Millionaire, and You're Not"

    Bears need an OT
    And TE, but what mula?
    Sad clown in the rain.

  • haunting.

  • Poetry?... Lacking...
    Wrong draft picks? Oh! More sacking...
    Jay says: "I'm packing"?

  • Fred Davis, Emery on line one...

    “I mean, you want to end up somewhere where you know you could fit and feel comfortable,” Davis said during an interview with 92.3 The Fan in Cleveland, via Dan Steinberg of the Washington Post. “If you’re talking about two or three million dollars difference with a team, I would rather go for happiness any day than some more money. I’d rather be somewhere where I know that they’re gonna use me to the best of my ability, believe in me, a team that wants to give me a chance to come in and help them any kind of way, right away, and let’s win some games. That’s what I want. I don’t want to just go for the money and just start losing. I kind of want to be in a position where I can help a team win.”

    The only real question is, how healthy is he after a torn achilles (keep in mind too that he got busted for PEDs).

    He's very productive, but health issues...

  • A decent TE FA sum.

    "Tight end is a position where the Bills had an entrenched starter in Scott Chandler. However, following Chandler’s ACL knee injury in Week 16, his availability is in doubt for training camp and the start of the regular season. With limited depth behind him, especially in the pass catching department Bills GM Buddy Nix has admitted the team is in the market to make an addition.

    The heavy hitters
    Jared Cook – Tennessee – Cook has great size and the physical attributes to be a mismatch in coverage similar to Chandler. Athletic enough to be a downfield threat in the passing game, Cook hasn’t been able to produce in a way that’s fitting of his skill set. But there’s no denying his pass catching and big play ability. Age 25.

    Fred Davis – Washington – Davis is a versatile tight end, but coming off an Achilles injury his physical state will play a large role in what he could command on the open market. Capable of getting consistent separation in the passing game Davis also has the ability to line up as an H-back or on the line. Age 27.

    Tony Gonzalez – Atlanta – He’s 50-50 to retire according to reports and if he does play a 16th season he’s expected to re-sign with the Falcons. Gonzalez has lost a step, but can still find the soft spots in zones and is a go-to guy in the red zone. Age 37.

    Dustin Keller – NY Jets – Another mismatch in the passing game, Keller is more of a split out type tight end. A solid route runner with great hands, Keller can be a go-to guy particularly in the red zone. His athletic ability enables him to make plays despite less than ideal size. His injury history (see: hamstring) is the only drawback. Age 28.

    Middle market
    Martellus Bennett – NY Giants – Bennett is a capable of being an in-line blocker while also athletic enough to make plays in the passing game. Coming off a career-high season in catches (55), receiving yards (626) and touchdowns (5) Bennett is a good mismatch in terms of size and speed. Age 26.

    Anthony Fasano – Miami – The veteran tight end is never going to wow anyone with athleticism, but is a well-rounded tight end that has enough athleticism to make plays and help a passing game. Capable of standing his ground as a blocker, Fasano offers an offense a consistent and durable player. Age 28.

    Brandon Myers – Oakland – Coming off a breakout season with the Raiders (79 rec., 806 yds, 4 TDs), Myers has developed into a solid passing option. A willing blocker that battles, Myers is not a game breaking threat in the passing game, but knows how to find gaps in the defense and make plays. Age 27.

    Leonard Pope – Pittsburgh – With production that’s fallen short of his physical talent, Pope has bounced around the league a bit. A good blocker and route runner Pope is a major mismatch at 6’8”, but is mainly a short area receiver. Pope offers a great jump ball target in the end zone. Age 29.

    Delanie Walker – San Francisco – Another versatile player that offers options in-line and as an H-back. Has even lined up at fullback on occasion. A dependable route runner, Walker gets consistent separation and developed into a reliable third down option for the 49ers. Age 28.

    Veteran options
    Dallas Clark – Tampa Bay

    Chris Cooley – Washington

    Ben Watson – Cleveland

    Possible fits for the Bills
    Martellus Bennett – Bennett is not expected to be re-signed by the Giants. Coming off a productive season the tight end might be on the verge of providing the most consistent play of his career.

    Anthony Fasano – Fasano could be a dependable target in the passing game and offer enough on the blocking side to be a reliable starter.

    Brandon Myers – A young player still looking to improve, Myers could build on his breakout numbers of last season in the right offensive system."

  • Keller, Fasano, Cook. That's the order I would target them for us.

  • On the high side I like Gonzalez, on the low I like Pope.

  • Pope, Myers and Keller all look interesting. I doubt Emery will make a move on a heavy hitter.

  • Bugger the hockey
    And no one watches baseball
    Give me football back

    False start on center
    3rd and 20 once again
    Please can his ass Phil

    Some want a Tackle
    Some Barkevious Mingo
    We'll get white safety

  • Gotta like the draft that Walter Football mocked for us today.
    1. Tavon Austin (WR)
    2. David Bakhtiari (OT/G)
    4. Dion Sims (TE)
    5. Oday Aboushi (OT)
    6. [Didn't mock]

    No help on defense, but this would be a big "welcome to Chicago" present for Trestman and Co. 2 possible starters for the O-line, plus a solid all-arounder at TE and a guy who has superstar potential in Tavon Austin.

    If he makes some value acquisitions on D in the off-season and gets Melton to sign a long term deal, this would be a nice haul for year 2.

  • In reply to NewBearInTown:

    I think we have much bigger needs than WR, And only one year of Emery to get me there.

  • In reply to NewBearInTown:

    OL in 1 and 2 pls.

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    The problem with that in this mock is that there isn't anyone to take in 1. He's not Joekl and Fisher gone in the top 5. Before 16, he has teams taking Johnson, Warmack and Cooper as well. And then he has the Cowboys taking Fluker (which would have been our "draft for need" reach pick). So who would we take?

    And if you like Barrett Jones, Walter has him going in the 3rd to the Cowboys, so we could theoretically take him instead of Bahktiari in the 2nd for essentially the same draft.

    We could go LB in the first round in this situation, but the point of my post is that this mock has Emery giving Trestman a bunch of brand new toys.

  • In reply to NewBearInTown:

    I don't dislike that draft, given that we could then cut Hester, Bush and Lack and restructure some cap to get Long.

  • In reply to NewBearInTown:

    I guess I was thinking outside of the 'using this particular mock' box NB.

    In a perfect world we'd get johnson or warmack in the 1st. If that could happen and then your 2,4,5, I would be pretty happy. Pick up an ILB in FA

Leave a comment