How's the defense shaping up and where to next?

Discussion in 'Chicago Bears' started by BearDownUnder, Mar 11, 2014.

  1. Grizzblue

    Grizzblue Pro-Bowler

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2012
    Messages:
    2,329
    Likes Received:
    615
    ßearz ßuckz:
    512ß
    Please Register or Log in to Remove this Advertisement!
    Ding ding ding...winner

    The 3 Tech is the most important need by a longshot. In our scheme the 3 tech is one if not thee most important position. A stud that can play 3 for now and in the future should be had at 14, we will prolly get our pick of all of them. No different than last year on the offensive side we can get all "oooo'd and ahhhh'd" by "skill positions" but if we are getting our ass kicked up front the rest dosent matter.
     
  2. lklrlolnlilklsox

    lklrlolnlilklsox Position Coach

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2005
    Messages:
    6,786
    Likes Received:
    365
    ßearz ßuckz:
    256ß
    Everyone wants to bring up the mighty Seahawks and how their. D won them a championship around here, we'll guess what, their front had exactly zero first round picks among them while their first round S, Earl Thomas, was a strong DPOY candidate who set the entire tempo for that unit. I'm not saying you can't find pace setter safeties in later rounds, but I am saying it's easier to create a solid front outside of the first.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  3. Grizzblue

    Grizzblue Pro-Bowler

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2012
    Messages:
    2,329
    Likes Received:
    615
    ßearz ßuckz:
    512ß

    That was the same argument against taking a guard in round one last year. "You can get good guards later so let's take someone else and hold off on a guard"

    Well we took a guard in the first. People whined and bitched. And we got a rookie pro bowler. People shut up.

    Yes, you can get quality anywhere in the draft at any position. Fact is it's easier to find IMMEDIATE IMPACT PLAYERS in the first. And for our d to work we need just that at the 3 tech.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  4. lklrlolnlilklsox

    lklrlolnlilklsox Position Coach

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2005
    Messages:
    6,786
    Likes Received:
    365
    ßearz ßuckz:
    256ß
    In my opinion, we just signed that player yesterday. His versatility for the crappy raiders is impressive and desirable, but Lamar should be playing UT full time.
     
  5. Grizzblue

    Grizzblue Pro-Bowler

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2012
    Messages:
    2,329
    Likes Received:
    615
    ßearz ßuckz:
    512ß

    I've thought of that but feel like he was paid to be our de. If he was playing 3 then I would think we would have signed another de by now after letting pep go.
     
  6. MPbears68

    MPbears68 Hall of Famer

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2011
    Messages:
    5,275
    Likes Received:
    1,695
    ßearz ßuckz:
    1,336ß
    If so, there's Melton's replacement (he's good as gone anyway) and the interior is set. Then we would just need TWO DEs. Simple.
     
  7. riczaj01

    riczaj01 DaBears Ditka
    SuperFan DBS Writer

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2006
    Messages:
    24,591
    Likes Received:
    3,973
    ßearz ßuckz:
    3,865ß
    Just get the best player on the board. IMO, and many others if Dix or Pryor are there then you have to take them b/c they are better players then Donald or Jernigan. If you get the best player then chances are you are getting a guy that is going to be much better then the next guy available in round 2 or 3 then if you reach for a speicific position.

    Your example, Long vs Warford very close in play compare that to Ogletree to Bostic, if the team had gone Oglretree/Warford the team right now is FAR better off then going Long/Bostic, b/c Ogletree is FAR better at LB and Warford is equal to SLIGHTLY less at G.

    Bring that to this year. Dix/Pryor are FAR greater then anyone in the 2nd, Langston/Boston and Donald/Jernigan are far closer to the guys like Johnson/Ferguson.
     
  8. Grizzblue

    Grizzblue Pro-Bowler

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2012
    Messages:
    2,329
    Likes Received:
    615
    ßearz ßuckz:
    512ß
    I couldn't disagree more that we would have been better off with Olgetree/Warford.

    Warford played nowhere near a pro bowl level like Long did, nor does he have near the potential Long has. Bostic was a noting special player on a god awful defense. I frankly do not think that Olgetree could have done anything better consistently with our entire DL getting blown into his lap, and no other LB really providing much alley support.

    But thats hardly the matter at hand.

    To your other point I completely agree. None of us are scouts and if Dix/Pryor grade out that much higher overall than Jernigan/Donald then I have no problem taking one of them first. Now if its a toss up and we really think a player at either position can have a day one impact, then I would prefer shoring up our DL first as a sustained pass rush and consistent run stuffing will aide whoever our safeties are.

    If there is a way to land an impact player and a serviceable guy at safety and DT, then I don't care who what where when or why we take guys, just ID and land those players.
     
  9. MPbears68

    MPbears68 Hall of Famer

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2011
    Messages:
    5,275
    Likes Received:
    1,695
    ßearz ßuckz:
    1,336ß
    Grizz, people forget that Long was drafted to eventually be a TACKLE. Don't kid yourself about him being a "guard".
     
  10. dabears

    dabears Veteran

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2013
    Messages:
    155
    Likes Received:
    33
    ßearz ßuckz:
    71ß
    Anyone think both Conte and Shea could be candidates to be cut after this year?
     

Share This Page