Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Chicago Bears' started by Aenir, Apr 21, 2014.
Interesting. I agree with most of it, but I don't think DE is a position of need. Unless you have to have two double digit sackmasters. Which in that case, most teams are in need of DE's.
I don;t think we are as done with the line as we should be, but trugh be told... last year I didn;t think we were done either because I felt we had a hole in C. We did ok, and I think this line is much improved. I'd like to see a penetrating DT chosen at 14, but Emery has the flexibility to run with the line as-is and upgrade the secondary if he wants.
The truth is we don;t know how good or how bad the line is this year. We all think it will be better. I think so too. We still don;t know how big a factor Mel is or how big a factor Pasqualoni will be. We think the arrow is pointing up, but until they play we don;t know it it's ok as is or a DT would make a big difference. I say pick the DT (overkill is ok here!)
I hate these writers who know nothing about this team and it's needs. We need one more DE like I need a spare asshole.
I'm pretty sure you could have picked something else that didn't paint a nasty picture in my head!! :D
With the De la Puente signing we also don't need an offensive guard.
These types of articles are just like the Chicago Bears mock drafts where they say we're taking Timmy Jernigan. They're half-assed by writers who aren't putting much thought into it.
Most of us on these boards could do a better job than they do.
we have more than enough DE's but the more I think about it, the mre I feel we need a great run-stopping DT
Can never have enough quality depth. BIG problem for the Bears last year. Just sayin'
Since when would OG be a need worth mentioning?
2 Rock solid starters- and flexibility with Garza and De la Puente to have at least some decent depth.
This is almost as bad as ESPN
I don't think anyone said that the Bears need another OG.
Offensive Guard was wrongfully mentioned as a position of need in the clip from the article above.
RB2, QB2, TE2, DT/NT/CB2/FS/SS/S2 all bigger needs then anything on the OL, it'd be like listing WR as a need.
Thanks for pointing that out. I totally missed it.
What, a second left arm? An eye in the middle of my forehead? Three balls? The list was endless but that one just seemed the most useless of them all.
Yea I read that yesterday and just laughed, oh sure you can always use a good OL but its not a need at this point.
Yeah, DE is not a "need" nor is OG or at least not now that we have de la Puente and Britton signed and James Brown as well. He also projects Houston as DT when he's not except maybe as a pass rusher if we don't get one in the draft who can do as well. Houston isn't 300lbs as he's listed. He played last year at 275-280lbs and he intends to play at that weight this year as well. He's already said that which makes him even lighter than Donald.
I doubt Jernigan or Ealy are even on their list which means this guy either just drew names out of a hat or used a dart board. These guys are lazy with their research and the only exceptions are the Bears beat writers who actually know the team.
I like the three balls idea. Gives you a rotation for when they get a little tired. This way we could get one up (literally) on those damned Canadian large balls.