|
The Wide Receiver Position
|
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2013 10:13 AM
The Wide Receiver Position
Is Wide Receiver an Area of Need? Why or Why Not?
- Poll closed on 02/21/2013
- Yes: 26 votes
- No: 10 votes
"Tell Mike (Martz) I said f**k him!!" - Jay Cutler
SOB Director of Foeign Policy |
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2013 10:25 AM
RE: The Wide Receiver Position
I went with Yes.
Aside from Marshall, the Bears do not have another proven receiver on the roster. Earl Bennett is always hurt and may even be a cap casualty if he doesn't get his sh*t together. Even though he showed some flashes last season, it is still unknown if Alshon Jeffery is a legit 2nd option. Weems can contribute, but he is far from a solid weapon in the passing game. Hester said he doesn't even want to play offense anymore. That leaves Anderson, who was an undrafted rookie last season and spent most of the year on the practice squad...it's hard to imagine him stepping up and contributing on offense.
Now, it is possible that if the Bears were to add a pass-catching TE to the offense (please draft Ertz), that some of the concerns would be aleviated. But there is still a hole on the roster for a deep threat, that Trestman is said to covet.
In the unthinkable event that Marshall gets hurt, what do the Bears do? Would it be a safe assumption that the Bears should think long and hard about adding a veteran #2 or a slot guy like an Amendola, who can help move the chains? Do the Bears look to the draft and use a high pick on a WR?
"Tell Mike (Martz) I said f**k him!!" - Jay Cutler
SOB Director of Foeign Policy |
|
Reply |
Quote |
- gcoop33
- Hall of Famer
- 9470 posts this site
|
Posted: 2/14/2013 10:52 AM
RE: The Wide Receiver Position
Yeah....I think they need a burner to open things up. IF money weren't an opject...Mike Wallace would be great....However it is, so I don't think it is realistic.
Would love for them to hit on a speed receiver in the 4th or 5th rd....A guy that we could look back at and be like...how the hell did he last that long.
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2013 10:59 AM
Re: The Wide Receiver Position
I say yes, WR is of need. But for a draft pick to be that guy, no. Now I'm not saying don't draft a guy but I'm saying it would be an easier transition for a veteran to contribute sooner rather than later. Who I have in mind who that WR should be I haven't figured out yet because there is so much to be done via free agency and contracts of players currently on the roster to determine whether or not will there be enough cap room to support this idea and other areas of need as well.
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2013 11:09 AM
RE: The Wide Receiver Position
gcoop33 wrote: Yeah....I think they need a burner to open things up. IF money weren't an opject...Mike Wallace would be great....However it is, so I don't think it is realistic.
Would love for them to hit on a speed receiver in the 4th or 5th rd....A guy that we could look back at and be like...how the hell did he last that long. oh man could you imagine a WR core of Marshall, Jeffery, and Wallace?! + Forte/Bush?!!?! as long as we have an average OL we would put up some points. and in a hurry. #23 OF CHICAGO SPORTS:
23 - SANDBERG
23 - JORDAN
23 - HESTER |
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2013 11:30 AM
RE: The Wide Receiver Position
I said no. while I agree an upgrade would be nice, I really believe that the WRs werent utilized correctly last year. Marshall should have opened up the other Wrs but that didn't happen, I blame that mainly on Tice and cutler. Tice for failing to scheme it and Cutler for failing to look for it. Not long ago Bennett was best in the league in drops, Jeffrey should improve, Marshall is Marshall. those three should be a solid WR corps when utilized properly with some young guys role players, and others like Forte, Bush, E-Rod, Anderson. I am pretty confident that the WR Corps is fine.
If it is a need, then that need is far far far behind oline and TE
"Football players, like prostitutes, are in the business of ruining their bodies for the pleasure of strangers." ~Merle Kessler
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2013 11:43 AM
RE: The Wide Receiver Position
soupy75 wrote: I said no. while I agree an upgrade would be nice, I really believe that the WRs werent utilized correctly last year. Marshall should have opened up the other Wrs but that didn't happen, I blame that mainly on Tice and cutler. Tice for failing to scheme it and Cutler for failing to look for it. Not long ago Bennett was best in the league in drops, Jeffrey should improve, Marshall is Marshall. those three should be a solid WR corps when utilized properly with some young guys role players, and others like Forte, Bush, E-Rod, Anderson. I am pretty confident that the WR Corps is fine.
If it is a need, then that need is far far far behind oline and TE I agree with Soup, i think we have a good top 3 if utilized correctly. Throw in a properly used Forte and a decent tightend and it looks pretty good. i did not answer because a simple yes or no does not do it. I think if a guy is there in the fourth round on that you like then why not, but it would be way down on my list of needs. |
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2013 11:54 AM
RE: The Wide Receiver Position
The only area on the Bears team that doesn't need an upgrade is the cornerback position. With that being said I would not be surprised if Tillman's age doesn't start to catch up with him in 2013. |
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2013 11:57 AM
RE: The Wide Receiver Position
--------------------------------------------- --- PeanutCB33 wrote: soupy75 wrote: I said no. while I agree an upgrade would be nice, I really believe that the WRs werent utilized correctly last year. Marshall should have opened up the other Wrs but that didn't happen, I blame that mainly on Tice and cutler. Tice for failing to scheme it and Cutler for failing to look for it. Not long ago Bennett was best in the league in drops, Jeffrey should improve, Marshall is Marshall. those three should be a solid WR corps when utilized properly with some young guys role players, and others like Forte, Bush, E-Rod, Anderson. I am pretty confident that the WR Corps is fine.
If it is a need, then that need is far far far behind oline and TE I agree with Soup, i think we have a good top 3 if utilized correctly. Throw in a properly used Forte and a decent tightend and it looks pretty good. i did not answer because a simple yes or no does not do it. I think if a guy is there in the fourth round on that you like then why not, but it would be way down on my list of needs. --------------------------------------------- I'd say that you did answer...you chose No, when saying that you feel the current group is fine. "Tell Mike (Martz) I said f**k him!!" - Jay Cutler
SOB Director of Foeign Policy |
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2013 12:08 PM
RE: The Wide Receiver Position
Can I vote no/yes? I don't think it's high in the need category but like mentioned, they can use a speed receiver. I never like when fans settle for something because they're so used to poor play at certain positions but look at how far they've come in a season. Hester and Bennett were you're starting WRs. Bennett is now 3rd and Hester will be lucky to be a WR from here on out. Hester can still burn that never did him any good.
More than anything they need a competent pass catching TE, improved protection and an OC who can get the best out of his personnel.
Phil Emery is watching you FAP  "Steady progress in the goal of winning championships." |
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2013 12:36 PM
RE: The Wide Receiver Position
I vote yes. It is a position of need for a few reasons.
1. Even assuming Trestman is going to moderize his offense some to fit into today's NFL, it's still going to be an offense heavily driven by WR production.
2. While I am a big believer in JA still despite his up/down rookie season, I think he is more of a Brandon Marshall big body possession receiver then a burner. The Bears needed a burner last year to help stretch the field since you saw a lot of times, Bears receivers were bunch up. They need even more next year.
3. Look at teams that are strong offensively like Packers, Patriots, Saints and even the Ravens. They are deep in their receiving core. After Marshall, the Bears are very thin at that spot. And I know a lot of Bears fans are big fans of Earl Bennett but on most good teams he be a 4th receiver, if not a 5th even.
"Illusions Micheal, illusions. Tricks are something that a whore does for money.....or cocaine". - Gob Bluth
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2013 12:47 PM
RE: The Wide Receiver Position
Bearsfan247 wrote:
---------------------------------------------
I'd say that you did answer...you chose No, when saying that you feel the current group is fine. Yeh, guess i did. I should have clarified and said "i did not submit an answer to the poll".  |
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2013 1:31 PM
RE: The Wide Receiver Position
--------------------------------------------- --- PeanutCB33 wrote: Bearsfan247 wrote:
---------------------------------------------
I'd say that you did answer...you chose No, when saying that you feel the current group is fine. Yeh, guess i did. I should have clarified and said "i did not submit an answer to the poll". --------------------------------------------- No worries. Guess I could have worded it a little better. "Tell Mike (Martz) I said f**k him!!" - Jay Cutler
SOB Director of Foeign Policy |
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2013 1:34 PM
Re: The Wide Receiver Position
I voted no.
Simply enough the whole team always needs to be upgraded in general, and last year we brought in TWO Wrs in Marshall and Jeffrey and that's enough work on ONE area for the time being with so many other areas to work on.
I'm on the O-line bandwagon. I've been sitting on this bandwagon for 4 years now and it's only grown. FIX THE LINE!!!!!
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2013 1:41 PM
RE: The Wide Receiver Position
---------------------------------------------
--- Cubfan41 wrote:
I vote yes. It is a position of need for a few reasons.
1. Even assuming Trestman is going to moderize his offense some to fit into today's NFL, it's still going to be an offense heavily driven by WR production.
2. While I am a big believer in JA still despite his up/down rookie season, I think he is more of a Brandon Marshall big body possession receiver then a burner. The Bears needed a burner last year to help stretch the field since you saw a lot of times, Bears receivers were bunch up. They need even more next year.
3. Look at teams that are strong offensively like Packers, Patriots, Saints and even the Ravens. They are deep in their receiving core. After Marshall, the Bears are very thin at that spot. And I know a lot of Bears fans are big fans of Earl Bennett but on most good teams he be a 4th receiver, if not a 5th even.
---------------------------------------------
Yup. Agree 100%.
Jeffery has some potential, but I don't see him in the "stretch the field" mold, whatsoever. I agree that is probably more like Marshall. A big, physical guy who will go up and get the ball, rather than just flat-out run passed the defense or, as they say, "take the top off the defense."
Depth at WR is very important in todays NFL. I assume that the Bears are going to become more of a pass first team, so the more weapons the better.
As for Bennett, I think he has a lot to prove these days and that starts with, can he prove to stay healthy for longer than 2 weeks at a time? I may be the only one thinking it, but I'm not sure Bennett's roster spot is as safe as some may think. Just my two cents anyways.
I also think that adding a pass-catching TE (again, please draft Ertz lol) would make the offense extremely dangerous as long as the QB can spread the ball around and take that next step.
"Tell Mike (Martz) I said f**k him!!" - Jay Cutler
SOB Director of Foeign Policy |
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2013 2:46 PM
RE: The Wide Receiver Position
I think we should go into this offseason with the mindset that everyone but Marshall sucks, because that was the case last season. If Earl decides to show up and/or Alshon takes a huge step forward in 2013, that's great. But if there's a playmaker available, do not pass him up because of those 2. Patterson in the first round might be an interesting darkhorse.
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2013 5:47 PM
RE: The Wide Receiver Position
As others have said, we need a speed guy so I vote yes. Would love a guy who scares teams so BM, AJ, EB, and hopefully a new TE would have more room to work underneath.
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2013 6:12 PM
Re: The Wide Receiver Position
From what I have read about Trestman, we should expect multiple receivers in trips formations, and other sets that make quick hitters work well. We need the slot receiver like Welker as opposed to the burner. Oh yes and a reliable TE with sticky fingers not dick fingers.
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2013 8:03 PM
Re: The Wide Receiver Position
I voted "yes", to the question asking if WR is an area of need.
My rational is that current roster has;
-#1...Marshall who was our whole show in 2012 and oft double teamed.
-#2...Jeffery, great but last yr. was injury prone. Hope 2013 will be better.
-#3...Bennett, also great but injury problems.
-#4...Hester, poor performance and questionable QB chemistry and future in Chi.
-#5...Anderson, unproven.
-#6...Weems and Allen, possible but largely ST players.
Of course receiving also includes RB's and TE's, but for our WR crew, if they stay healthy all season and OL improves we could be just OK, but still think we need a good FA (with no learning curve) in the #3/#4 spot.
On the priority list of needs though I'd put OL, TE, OL, LB, maybe RB (Matt starting to get hurt too often), ahead of WR.
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2013 9:00 PM
Re: The Wide Receiver Position
---------------------------------------------
--- dickbutkus97 wrote:
From what I have read about Trestman, we should expect multiple receivers in trips formations, and other sets that make quick hitters work well. We need the slot receiver like Welker as opposed to the burner. Oh yes and a reliable TE with sticky fingers not dick fingers.
---------------------------------------------
That's a good point.
Just looking around the league at West Coast schemes, it doesn't seem like any of them have that dependant deep-threat. They have guys who are expected to catch a short pass and turn it into big yards. I'm far from an offensive guru, so please someone correct me if I'm wrong, but my understanding of the West Coast passing game is to make timing based, efficient passes to move the chains and go for the big plays when it's there? Which, theoreticaly, makes a guy like Amendola or Welker very important because of their ability to get open quickly underneath.
Great discussion guys. Keep it up!
"Tell Mike (Martz) I said f**k him!!" - Jay Cutler
SOB Director of Foeign Policy |
|
Reply |
Quote |
