Mock Offseason Feb 9th - By WindyCity

Discussion in 'Chicago Bears' started by ZifanQ, Feb 10, 2014.

  1. ZifanQ

    ZifanQ Pro-Bowler

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2012
    Messages:
    1,508
    Likes Received:
    142
    Ratings:
    +164 / 0 / -1
    ßearz ßuckz:
    68ß
    • Agree Agree x 1
  2. little bear

    little bear Assistant Head Coach

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2008
    Messages:
    12,435
    Likes Received:
    853
    Ratings:
    +985 / 1 / -3
    ßearz ßuckz:
    1,125ß
    I'm pretty sure he's coming back as soon as FA starts.
  3. riczaj01

    riczaj01 DaBears Ditka DBS Writer

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2006
    Messages:
    22,523
    Likes Received:
    2,959
    Ratings:
    +3,581 / 10 / -8
    ßearz ßuckz:
    1,782ß
    Not a fan of bringing Garza and McMannis back, seems a bit of a waste.

    No way in hell the team is getting Byrd, who wants a 9mil contract, not a 6mil the first year and then 9mil, and other teams will give him that 9mil.
    No thank you to another vet rb backup, please please please no more, just draft one late and get a cheap young effective guy.

    The draft is solid enough though, although I'm not sure why he's taking Donald at 14, I cannot see Nix, Hagemen and Jernigan gone before 14, and all are better options then Donald. If those 3 were off the board, then there's next to no chance that Ealy, Truitt, Clinton Dix and Pryor are; and if they are, then how the hell do you not grab Mosely at ILB and get a similar guy like Donald at 2?

    I do like how he's getting O talent at the back end of the draft, team needs a C, you get one later, need a depth WR, get on later, need a backup TE, get on later, and he has the Bears doing that; while also getting potential starters on D.

    This is not one of his better mocks.
  4. ZifanQ

    ZifanQ Pro-Bowler

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2012
    Messages:
    1,508
    Likes Received:
    142
    Ratings:
    +164 / 0 / -1
    ßearz ßuckz:
    68ß
    The Garza really depends on whether Kromer thinks Boggs is our furture center or we'll have to draft one/sign a FA. If Boggs isn't our furture center and the only center we pick up is through the draft I would like to have Garza has back-up/starter in the season, and let our rookie take over doing the season unless he is another Mills pick up.

    I don't see us landing Ward or Byrd either, but you never know with this Emery guy. Magic happens in FA, but I imagine both of them wants too much cash. If this is the case I really don't see us passing on Cliton-Dix if he is available at 14th. But then again it's Emery who is drafting, so I wouldn't be surprised if he picked a guy like Donald.
    • Like Like x 1
  5. riczaj01

    riczaj01 DaBears Ditka DBS Writer

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2006
    Messages:
    22,523
    Likes Received:
    2,959
    Ratings:
    +3,581 / 10 / -8
    ßearz ßuckz:
    1,782ß
    True enough about Emery, he can both be a magic worker and a head scratcher. I'm not saying he won't go w/Donald, just that I cannot see why when those other 3 DT's should mostly be on the board.
  6. 4dabers

    4dabers Veteran DBS Writer

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2013
    Messages:
    690
    Likes Received:
    606
    Ratings:
    +747 / 0 / -0
    ßearz ßuckz:
    90ß
    Not my favorite Mock either, but Windy will do several of these to show various options; this may not be his favorite either. It does address many of our needs, but I would be a bit disappointed with this draft. I'll wait for Windy's next one to see if I like it better.
    • Like Like x 1
  7. riczaj01

    riczaj01 DaBears Ditka DBS Writer

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2006
    Messages:
    22,523
    Likes Received:
    2,959
    Ratings:
    +3,581 / 10 / -8
    ßearz ßuckz:
    1,782ß
    I was reading a few more things on that msg brd from him, he seems really high on Donald and much less high on guys like Hageman. I'm never a big fan of taking guys from smaller schools early though, I want someone a little more proven and honestly I'm tired of the light weight DT(if you can call 280+ light). from what I'm reading on him he's also scheme limited which isn't really an Emery trait, Emery is about versatility, which is why Truitt/Hageman actually make more since(not like Emery wouldn't pounce on Truitt if even if he's an early 2nd round guy). Both are bigger and look to be able to be more verasitle.

    I'll hardly knock him for thinking out of the box, I purposefully did that several times.
  8. butkus3595

    butkus3595 Pro-Bowler

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2013
    Messages:
    1,608
    Likes Received:
    737
    Ratings:
    +912 / 1 / -0
    ßearz ßuckz:
    764ß
    Donald went to Pitt....since when is that a small school? I'm with you though...I think thats a bit early for Donald.
  9. riczaj01

    riczaj01 DaBears Ditka DBS Writer

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2006
    Messages:
    22,523
    Likes Received:
    2,959
    Ratings:
    +3,581 / 10 / -8
    ßearz ßuckz:
    1,782ß
    I'll be the first to admit if I'm wrong on college football, but since when has Pitt been a powerhouse in college football? ACC isn't exactly a football power conference.

    I'd be okay w/Donald if I believed the Bears were looking for strictly cover 2, 4-3 DT's; I'm just not sure that's what they want. If they want scheme versatility and confusion then I would think Hagemen/Truitt make more since if they go that way in round 1, both are seen as DT/DE's which means they could move all over the field and both appear to be big enough to play NT in a 3-4; where Donald is seen as strictly a 4-3 DT.
  10. JustAnotherBearsFan99

    JustAnotherBearsFan99 Coordinator SuperFan DBS Writer

    Joined:
    May 21, 2012
    Messages:
    9,938
    Likes Received:
    2,611
    Ratings:
    +3,020 / 4 / -0
    ßearz ßuckz:
    1,719ß
    It sounds like Donald is a late 1st rounder at best, and maybe will drop to the early 2nd round. It would be quite a "reach" to spend our #14 pick on him. I'd be okay if we traded down to get him, but even then he doesn't sound like anything special to me. I'd be pretty disappointed if he were our first pick in this draft.
  11. Grizzblue

    Grizzblue Pro-Bowler

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2012
    Messages:
    1,929
    Likes Received:
    431
    Ratings:
    +487 / 2 / -0
    ßearz ßuckz:
    99ß
    Landing burid in FA would be a real game changer for the offseason. It would be te best case scenario IMO and if it worked out would be an instant jolt.

    That said, gime Jerrigan in round one if he's there.
    • Like Like x 1
  12. butkus3595

    butkus3595 Pro-Bowler

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2013
    Messages:
    1,608
    Likes Received:
    737
    Ratings:
    +912 / 1 / -0
    ßearz ßuckz:
    764ß
    You never said Powerhouse, you said small school. Pitt is not a small school and correct me if I'm wrong...but they've produced a pretty good amount of very good pro's. Lastly...I'm pretty sure this years national champ came from the ACC.
  13. butkus3595

    butkus3595 Pro-Bowler

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2013
    Messages:
    1,608
    Likes Received:
    737
    Ratings:
    +912 / 1 / -0
    ßearz ßuckz:
    764ß
    A certain beloved tight end and coach for our Bears came from that "small, non-powerhouse" school known as Pitt.
    • Like Like x 3
  14. riczaj01

    riczaj01 DaBears Ditka DBS Writer

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2006
    Messages:
    22,523
    Likes Received:
    2,959
    Ratings:
    +3,581 / 10 / -8
    ßearz ßuckz:
    1,782ß
    Butkus, small in reference to football programs, I understood your confusion so I expounded on the point, if you are still not understanding it's a problem on your end not mine.

    Hey great players come from the CFL too, maybe we should skip the draft and just pick up 6 players from the CFL, b/c exceptions to the rule are obviously the new rule right butkus?
  15. Bearstuff

    Bearstuff Yes, in the woods. Staff Member SuperFan

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2006
    Messages:
    29,722
    Likes Received:
    1,038
    Ratings:
    +1,227 / 3 / -3
    ßearz ßuckz:
    602ß
    Is Pitt smaller than Vandy? Is it smaller than Louisville? Smaller than Connecticut, or UVA or UNC?

    Pitt is no small school, and every year they have multiple players drafted in the NFL. Sure they haven't competed for a national championship since Tony Dorsett, but there are quite a few HOF players that came from there too. Not small at all.
  16. butkus3595

    butkus3595 Pro-Bowler

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2013
    Messages:
    1,608
    Likes Received:
    737
    Ratings:
    +912 / 1 / -0
    ßearz ßuckz:
    764ß
    Allow me then to expound. My point is you're wrong. As you say, if you can't understand that it's a problem on your end. If you don't know the history of the Pitt program and the players it's produced, thats your problem. If you don't know about the 12 national titles they've won(and the 4 other times they were selected national champ by a selector, well I can't help you. If you don't know that they have had the 8th most All Americans in college history of all D-1 schools, I don't know what to tell you. If you don't know about the NFL Hall of Famers that called that school home(which incidentally is the 4th most of any school in the country), I can't help you. IF you don't know that they have had at least one player represent them in the Pro Bowl every year since 1981, I don't know what to tell you.

    If all of that info makes them a "small time" program...well...I guess we will have to agree to disagree on what makes a program big time or not. I apologize for my sarcasm, but I tend to be snarky.
  17. riczaj01

    riczaj01 DaBears Ditka DBS Writer

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2006
    Messages:
    22,523
    Likes Received:
    2,959
    Ratings:
    +3,581 / 10 / -8
    ßearz ßuckz:
    1,782ß
    They haven't won a NCAA championship since 1976, before that championship it was 40 years in 1937 yes a true college powerhouse indeed. They've been laregly irrelevant since the early 80's, when they had 2 "unclaimed championships"

    Again sorry I wasn't clear in large college football program vs small, sorry that you think Pitt is somekind of college powerhouse, must have hit a nerve; you're favorite college team I guess? ACC is not a college power conference, nor is Pitt a powerhouse football program. Every team has a good run occassionaly, doesn't make them a bigtime football program. They are not Alabama, they are not Texas or USC they are not FL, they aren't even Oregon.
  18. butkus3595

    butkus3595 Pro-Bowler

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2013
    Messages:
    1,608
    Likes Received:
    737
    Ratings:
    +912 / 1 / -0
    ßearz ßuckz:
    764ß
    No, I actually don't have a favorite college team. I gotta say this is a pretty silly argument you're making. By that definition Notre Dame is a "small" school. And OREGON HAS NEVER WON A NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP! They are obviously small time in your eyes. NC State has never won a championship...are they "small" too? How about OK State, South Carolina, West Virgina, VA Tech, and Wisconsin...does their lack of a national championship make them "small time" programs? Are Clemson and Texas A & M small time because they only have 1 national championship, with Clemsons the most recent in 81? How about Penn State and Georgia...I guess they're small time too eh?
    As for Alabama, after Bryant and before Saban got there they were pretty much an after thought. National Championships are not what make programs big time or not.
  19. Grizzblue

    Grizzblue Pro-Bowler

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2012
    Messages:
    1,929
    Likes Received:
    431
    Ratings:
    +487 / 2 / -0
    ßearz ßuckz:
    99ß
    I agree with rics original point. Not to put words in his mouth but what I got out of it was we are drafting at number 14. Let's aim for a guy who played at a large program and competed against top talent. A proven guy who has shown he can consistently play against other future nfl players. That being said, give me Jerrigan any day over a DT from Pitt. Same for Clinton-Dix both are proven against flat out better college competition. Can a great player come from Pitt, or IU, or Mid Tenn St? Sure. But is it a gamble taking a player from a smallER school over a proven guy that played against top talent? Yes.
    • Like Like x 1
  20. butkus3595

    butkus3595 Pro-Bowler

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2013
    Messages:
    1,608
    Likes Received:
    737
    Ratings:
    +912 / 1 / -0
    ßearz ßuckz:
    764ß
    I get the point trying to be made...my point is it's a bad point, and incorrect.

    Jernigans schedule:

    09/02/13at Pittsburgh * [​IMG]
    09/14/13vs. Nevada [​IMG]
    09/21/13vs. Bethune Cookman
    09/28/13at Boston College * [​IMG]
    10/05/13vs. Maryland * [​IMG]
    10/19/13at Clemson * [​IMG]
    10/26/13vs. North Carolina State * [​IMG]
    11/02/13vs. Miami * [​IMG]
    11/09/13at Wake Forest * [​IMG]
    11/16/13vs. Syracuse * [​IMG]
    11/23/13vs. Idaho [​IMG]
    11/30/13at Florida [​IMG]


    Donalds Schedule:

    09/02/13vs. Florida State [​IMG]
    09/14/13vs. New Mexico [​IMG]
    09/21/13at Duke [​IMG]
    09/28/13vs. Virginia [​IMG]
    10/12/13at Virginia Tech [​IMG]
    10/19/13vs. Old Dominion [​IMG]
    10/26/13at Navy [​IMG]
    11/02/13at Georgia Tech [​IMG]
    11/09/13vs. Notre Dame [​IMG]
    11/16/13vs. North Carolina [​IMG]
    11/23/13at Syracuse [​IMG]
    11/29/13vs. Miami [​IMG]


    They played in the SAME LEAGUE!!!!! I get Fla. State had a better year, but THEY PLAYED AGAINST THE SAME TALENT largely. I'd take Jernigan over Donald because I think he's a better player, not because he played for the National Champions or because he played for Fla State. Brian Urlacher played for New Mexico State...should we not have drafted him? Would you not draft Jameis Winston because he played in the ACC? It just makes no damn sense.

Share This Page