Bears bring in three for tryouts

Discussion in 'Chicago Bears' started by short faced bear, Nov 12, 2013.

  1. short faced bear

    short faced bear

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2009
    Messages:
    10,124
    Likes Received:
    1,043
    Trophy Points:
    113
    By Brad Biggs, Tribune reporter

    4:39 p.m. CST, November 12, 2013

    With an open roster spot after placing cornerback Charles Tillman on injured reserve Monday, the Chicago Bears had three players at Halas Hall for tryouts Tuesday.

    An NFL source told the Tribune that defensive back Sherrod Martin, defensive end Jermaine Cunningham and tight end Zach Miller were in for a look.

    No roster move has been announced by the club.

    Martin has the most experience. He played 59 games over the previous four years for the Panthers, with 36 starts at safety. But he was used as a backup only last season. He has seven career interceptions.

    Cunningham, a second-round pick by the Patriots in 2010, played 36 games with 14 starts over the previous three seasons in New England. Cunningham made 3 1/2 sacks. He was one of the club’s final cuts and spent a month with the 49ers in October without seeing any game action. He played outside linebacker for those clubs.

    Miller was a sixth-round pick of the Jaguars in 2009 and had a brief stay in Tampa Bay. He has the same name as the veteran Seahawks player that is at the same position. The team brought in veteran Tony Scheffler for a workout previously and is likely building an emergency list with only two tight ends on the 53-man roster. Fendi Onobun is still on the practice squad.

    The Bears could fill Tillman’s spot from within. Cornerbacks C.J. Wilson and Demontre Hurst are on the practice squad. Wilson spent time on the 53-man roster earlier this season. With Zack Bowman moving into the starting lineup to replace Tillman, the team will need help on special teams.


    http://www.chicagotribune.com/sport...hicago-bears-tryouts-20131112,0,6068466.story
  2. tbear1

    tbear1

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2013
    Messages:
    320
    Likes Received:
    91
    Trophy Points:
    28
    It sucks that we even need to do this, but I like that Emery is not sitting on his hands. He appears to be active at evalutating talent and pulling from the outside if we can't do it from within.
  3. JJ-30

    JJ-30

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2013
    Messages:
    95
    Likes Received:
    62
    Trophy Points:
    18
    I sure the hell don't like that we are having to play our backups, the only good thing that is coming out of this is Emery and coaches are getting a good look at what our backups can do and how to impove them over the next so they will be ready to move into the starter roles next year or are seeing that we just need to move on from some of all together.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  4. mdbearz

    mdbearz

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2013
    Messages:
    561
    Likes Received:
    240
    Trophy Points:
    43
    Who ever comes in will be expected to play ST and be a depth guy. We are not going to find a starter off the streets that can fill Peanuts role.

    Zack has played well at times, so I hope he is ready for the spot.
  5. Blue Horse-shoe

    Blue Horse-shoe

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2013
    Messages:
    178
    Likes Received:
    63
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Yeah .... if getting released by the Vikes isn't a wake up call , then what ever would be .
  6. jackiejokeman

    jackiejokeman

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2013
    Messages:
    840
    Likes Received:
    95
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Urlacher must be quietly laffing his ass off about now.

    Maybe he was the strength & conditioning coach in the workout room for BEARS defense all these years.
  7. riczaj01

    riczaj01

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2006
    Messages:
    18,967
    Likes Received:
    1,617
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Jackie, what part of Urlachers last few years in Chicago screamed "healthy" to anyone? I seriously doubt he is laughing his ass off at watching all his friends go down w/injuries.

    The Bears signed Derrick Martin(Safety) to a 1 year contract

    Drafted by the Ravens in 06, been through three teams since then. Nothing that screams new starter imo.
    • Like Like x 1
  8. Bearsinhouston

    Bearsinhouston

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2012
    Messages:
    4,450
    Likes Received:
    618
    Trophy Points:
    113
    no, but once Tucker works his magic with him, he'll be playing like a HoFer. He'll be our McCown at QB... coming out of nowhere to surprise us all :)
  9. riczaj01

    riczaj01

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2006
    Messages:
    18,967
    Likes Received:
    1,617
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I wouldn't go that far, I'm not Tucker hater, I think he was given a bit of a raw deal(not running his D scheme/schload of key inj's) but I don't think he'll magically turn around a nobody, he hasn't worked that magic w/Conte and Wrong so Martin stands llittle chance imo.

    That being said I'd like to see what his scheme looks like w/actual talent to run it.

    was anyone aware that Bass was also a OLB in college; as was CornWash and Shea for that matter? How many undersized "fast" DE's do we need on this team? How many of these guys might be a better fit as an OLB in a 3-4 scheme? But Greene and Bostic are both prototypical 4-3 guys(not sure what Rutgers and the Gators D scheme is). I'm confused. Seems to me The young Bears DE's need to add about 15lb's to add some bulk, that or the team needs to start drafting guys out of position.
  10. Bearsinhouston

    Bearsinhouston

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2012
    Messages:
    4,450
    Likes Received:
    618
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Actually, Ric I don't hate the guy either. I'm sure he is a great guy. I just don't think he is effective. I know he has all kinds of injuries to work with, but the best coaches seem to be able to get through injuries and still make it happen. I do see improvement on the D, but it has taken a while to get there.
    I just don't view Tucker at the same level of coaching that we have in Trestman/Kromer. I was really hoping for a stronger D coach. Actually, with Trestman being an offensive coach, we really need a reversal in terms of a better coach on D than on O since Trestman can supplement the O coach. The D coach needs to be a stud all on his own.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  11. MPbears68

    MPbears68

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2011
    Messages:
    3,702
    Likes Received:
    714
    Trophy Points:
    113
    BIH, you hit the nail on the head there. I agree completely. Tucker has had a lot of bad breaks for sure but he's also done nothing to make you think he'd be anything special if everyone was healthy. I'd put DeCamillis in that same "nothing special" category. Both these coaches' respective units have understandably declined but the speed and depth of the decline makes me think better coaching could have cushioned it more.

    Ironically, the D probably put in its best two overall performances the last 2 games (ST coverage seems to have tightened up a bit too) even though the injury parade is in full force. Strange. Where was that a couple weeks before, Mel? That D performance in Washington was truly embarrassing.
    • Like Like x 1
  12. riczaj01

    riczaj01

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2006
    Messages:
    18,967
    Likes Received:
    1,617
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I mocked it originally, but apparnetly Mel Moving to the sidelines might have actually helped; GB it also helped that Rodgers went out first drive and their OL is awful. but Det they really did step up big and the only real difference was Tucker on the sidelines.
    • Like Like x 1
  13. Bearsinhouston

    Bearsinhouston

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2012
    Messages:
    4,450
    Likes Received:
    618
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ric:
    I'm thinking Rogers going down (and so having less O to defend) is a bigger factor than Tucker moving to the sideline, but none of us are in a position to know for sure.
  14. mdbearz

    mdbearz

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2013
    Messages:
    561
    Likes Received:
    240
    Trophy Points:
    43
    I'm sure Martin is going to be a depth/ST guy, but it would be nice to see the competition elevate Conte's play.

    We signed a safety not a CB, that has to make Conte think that he might be on the hot seat.
  15. MPbears68

    MPbears68

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2011
    Messages:
    3,702
    Likes Received:
    714
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The D got a big stop and sack against Rodgers to hold them to three early in the game. Only one drive but they made a nice stand deep in the RZ. I agree that Seneca coming in made their job a lot easier but I still give the D credit for a decent overall performances against Green Bay and Detroit. They actually got STOPS.

    If that is due to Tucker on the sidelines then he needs to stay there because I definitely have noticed a difference since the bye.
  16. Bearsinhouston

    Bearsinhouston

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2012
    Messages:
    4,450
    Likes Received:
    618
    Trophy Points:
    113
    What I think caused it MP, is a "going back to basics, focus on fundamentals" that Tucker went to. I just posted a good link to an article in another thread. If Tucker on the sidelines, works better, that's great. I'm not sure that is the difference maker, but it sure hasn't hurt.
    • Like Like x 1
  17. riczaj01

    riczaj01

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2006
    Messages:
    18,967
    Likes Received:
    1,617
    Trophy Points:
    113
    But that doesn't explain a huge step up against Det
  18. Bearsinhouston

    Bearsinhouston

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2012
    Messages:
    4,450
    Likes Received:
    618
    Trophy Points:
    113
  19. riczaj01

    riczaj01

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2006
    Messages:
    18,967
    Likes Received:
    1,617
    Trophy Points:
    113
    that's a good article. the vets shouldn't need that type of structure or work, but w/the Rook's and young guys you HAVE to do that.
  20. Bearsinhouston

    Bearsinhouston

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2012
    Messages:
    4,450
    Likes Received:
    618
    Trophy Points:
    113
    yeah, I thought the article was pretty well balanced. It gave Tucker lot's more leeway than I think he deserved, but I have no idea if I'm right or they're right. I just know it's not clicking.

    The reason that I don't think Tucker moving to the sidelines made a big difference is this.

    I have seen no real ability to make adjustments to getting gashed in the run game (or hell the passing game either). That was with the benefit of him being in the booth and seeing the whole play develop. And that is a huge benefit. If he can't do it there, being at the field level is not going to be able to give him any better perspective, so I don't think it has anything to do with his being able to make better calls at field level. And those electrons move pretty fast. The extra distance from the booth is nothing when calling in plays on the mic from up top. Doesn't he use a mic down on the field too? I see no difference. The only thing that I see that would be different is that he is there to provide direct motivation and grab guys be the sleeve and give them plays.
    I don;t see those benefits having the kind of impact I see the last two weeks.

    I think it is getting better at fundamentals and seeing plays, which begs the question of why they weren't coached up in those respects already.

Share This Page