Hey guys,

Just had to get this off my chest.  IMO, Henry Melton is NOT a "Franchise-Type" player.
Yes he put up 7 sacks in 2011, and 6 sacks in 2012.  Yet, if you watch his play, he usually puts up the numbers against average talent or teams.

In 2011, he had 2 sacks in the opener against a Falcons team that was struggling and just finding itself.  In 2012, he had two sacks against a bad Colts team that were also struggling and finding itself.  Both teams improved (obviously), but I think we caught them at a good time.  

On the other hand, how did Melton do against teams like the packers/niners/texans etc.?  I do understand that EVERYONE struggled against these superior teams, but it bothers me that Melton is going to get 8 MILLION per year, when we have so many other needs to spend serious money on.  Melton is a small D.T. that may struggle against the run in future games.

We REALLY, REALLY need to upgrade the offensive line.  That costs money.  In addition, we have Jay's contract coming up, and the Urlacher situation.

I do like Melton, and hope that we can resign him.  I just don't want to break the bank on a guy that is not that much above 'average'.   I think the brass is more infatuated with him because of some padded numbers, and his young age.  I just don't want to knock our cap back several years when we have other more pressing needs.  I like Paea, Collins, and Okoye at D.T. if we do lose Melton.

Just my opinion..

Padded numbers, what padded numbers???  Sacks are sacks.  And what does the OL have to do with him getting paid???  He's made the Pro Bowl, registered more sacks than any other DT except one this past year, plays the 3 technique better than most, pay the guy.

I just worry about having 40million of our cap going for 4 guys on defense.  I would love to have Melton back but I think his number is going to be to high.  I would not be against putting the tag on him trying to come to an agreement if we cant work something out try to trade him to the cowboys or broncos who are looking for a DT.

Considering he plays the most important position in this defense. And with the advance age on some of our veterans, why not lock the guy in. Since he is not tagged yet, they will more than likely try to sign him outright but if they don't, it is better to tag him than to lose him.

I hear what you'r saying about Melton. The past 2 years he started off real fast . But, we need what he brings to the table in the Bear 4-3 defense. The Bears dont blitz, they like pressure comming from their front 4, so we need Meltons ability to put pressure on the quarterback from the tackle position. Melton is still young and his best years should be ahead of him. I would rather keep him and pay him top money at his position rather than lose him and regret it .

My ONLY concern with giving Melton a big contract, is the fact that he might not be very productive in another scheme that isn't the cover-2. We are sticking with the same scheme right now because the defense is currently built for it and has had success.

What if Mel Tucker comes in and this season, the defense takes a step backwards and Tucker/Trestman decide to scrap the scheme and go with what Tucker is more comfortable running? I know he has experience with the cover-2, but he's no Lovie Smith (expert in the scheme).

THEN what do the Bears do? They'll have a ridiculously large contract invested in Melton, who probably won't fit the new scheme. That's a big risk in my opinion. If I'm Emery, I franchise Melton and see how the 2013 season plays out. If the success continues, then give him the big contract.

Another option, though highly unlikely...sign and trade deal with Dallas for lots of draft picks.

---------------------------------------------
--- mustang69441 wrote:

Considering he plays the most important position in this defense. And with the advance age on some of our veterans, why not lock the guy in. Since he is not tagged yet, they will more than likely try to sign him outright but if they don't, it is better to tag him than to lose him.

---------------------------------------------

Pff has him as the no2 FA this year and he had a 11.6 run stop rating ,best for a DT in the NFL. Considering that he started as a RB than a DE in college and only has 2 full years at DT I'd say he could end up being a 10-12 sack a season player and worth the 8 million per season. Paea, Okoye and Collins are nice parts for the rotation but none have the ability to create pressure like Melton. He needs to stay a Bear.

What you just said makes tagging him a now brainer. It buys us a year if nothing else to figure out what we want to do.

---------------------------------------------
--- Bearsfan247 wrote:

My ONLY concern with giving Melton a big contract, is the fact that he might not be very productive in another scheme that isn't the cover-2. We are sticking with the same scheme right now because the defense is currently built for it and has had success.

What if Mel Tucker comes in and this season, the defense takes a step backwards and Tucker/Trestman decide to scrap the scheme and go with what Tucker is more comfortable running? I know he has experience with the cover-2, but he's no Lovie Smith (expert in the scheme).

THEN what do the Bears do? They'll have a ridiculously large contract invested in Melton, who probably won't fit the new scheme. That's a big risk in my opinion. If I'm Emery, I franchise Melton and see how the 2013 season plays out. If the success continues, then give him the big contract.

Another option, though highly unlikely...sign and trade deal with Dallas for lots of draft picks.

---------------------------------------------
--- mustang69441 wrote:

Considering he plays the most important position in this defense. And with the advance age on some of our veterans, why not lock the guy in. Since he is not tagged yet, they will more than likely try to sign him outright but if they don't, it is better to tag him than to lose him.

---------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------

In order for the Bears to get a SB victory, we are going to have to go through 3 or 4 teams. At least 2 of those teams will have high octane offenses that many more times than not won't care about a pro bowl DT, DE, LB, etc. Did anyone watch the playoffs? There wasn't much defense being played. Now I'm not saying defense doesn't matter, but to me its silly to put that much money in that side of the ball. For example, the 49ers were stacked at S and LB and did that help them stop many opponents? No. To me, keep the defensive side of the ball young and hungry. Have it full of players playing for their next contract and then recycle them. You can find guys like Briggs and Melton in the mid rounds. I think most of the cap should go towards offense with the first 2 picks each year going to keep the offense deep. Good offenses will score on you regardless of who you have on the field, so why not build something to keep up instead of try trying to stop them which we all know just doesn't happen much in todays NFL.

I want to avoid spreading the wealth and then realize we are just average on both sides of the ball. We have too many guys like Cutler and Marshall coming up for contract soon and our O line needs money put into it. I would rather give that Buffalo guard the money some want to give Melton. With as many holes we have on the offensive side of the ball, its just crazy to me to pay a DT like Melton big money when he came into the leauge as a project.

BOTH teams that played in the Super Bowl were "defensive" teams. Teams who are known for defense, but also have an offense that can move the chains and score points. It's balanced teams that are winning championships these days.

You can't ignore the defensive side of the ball, because you want a "high octane" offense. You have to find balance. Balance in drafting and balance in free-agency.

Tag Melton and see what happens with the 2013 season. If the defense continues to shine, then give him a big contract. If not, then let him go elsewhere for the big money.

Bearsfan247 wrote: BOTH teams that played in the Super Bowl were "defensive" teams. Teams who are known for defense, but also have an offense that can move the chains and score points. It's balanced teams that are winning championships these days.

You can't ignore the defensive side of the ball, because you want a "high octane" offense. You have to find balance. Balance in drafting and balance in free-agency.

Tag Melton and see what happens with the 2013 season. If the defense continues to shine, then give him a big contract. If not, then let him go elsewhere for the big money.

Actually, Baltimore wasn't even rated in the Top 10 defensively last year:

http://www.pro-football-refere...rs/2012/opp.htm

As a matter of fact, their offense was actually rated higher:

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/2012/

Baltimore's vaunted "D" was really based off reputation. They had a good defense but it was no longer great. That is why Flacco stepping up was so important and having a monsterous postseason. Had he just been pretty good, they would never even got to the SB since their defense was not good enough to carry them alone.

I do agree though with your ultimate statement about Melton. At minimum, tag him and see how it plays out.

Baltimore is not a defensive team anymore. Flacco just decided to become a stud and make throws that few others not named Aaron Rodgers can make. The 49ers? They sure didnt look like a defensive team this playoffs. See, you know me 247. I really dont care what teams do against sucky offenses. It is my belief that you can build a competitive defense with mid rounders that can stand just as much a chance against some of these offenses and rules as a defense with pro bowlers sprinkled in. Maybe the defense with a few pro bowlers allows only 31 points instead of 38. Thats really what its come to with some of these offenses. I would rather get an offense that can score 39.

If we lose melton we would have to imo draft a dt ( i think it's a deep yr for dlinemen though)

maybe this should be in the war room

---------------------------------------------
--- Cubfan41 wrote:

Bearsfan247 wrote: BOTH teams that played in the Super Bowl were "defensive" teams. Teams who are known for defense, but also have an offense that can move the chains and score points. It's balanced teams that are winning championships these days.

You can't ignore the defensive side of the ball, because you want a "high octane" offense. You have to find balance. Balance in drafting and balance in free-agency.

Tag Melton and see what happens with the 2013 season. If the defense continues to shine, then give him a big contract. If not, then let him go elsewhere for the big money.

Actually, Baltimore wasn't even rated in the Top 10 defensively last year:

www.pro-football-refere...rs/2012/opp.htm

As a matter of fact, their offense was actually rated higher:

www.pro-football-reference.com/years/2012/

Baltimore's vaunted "D" was really based off reputation. They had a good defense but it was no longer great. That is why Flacco stepping up was so important and having a monsterous postseason. Had he just been pretty good, they would never even got to the SB since their defense was not good enough to carry them alone.

I do agree though with your ultimate statement about Melton. At minimum, tag him and see how it plays out.

---------------------------------------------
I respectfully disagree. Though their ranking statistically wasn't that high, the Ravens defense won them some games last season. Without their defense consistently playing good football, there is no way that team is the perennial playoff team that they are today. Their defense had to bail Flacco and their offense out, more times than not last season. Their defense did a damn good job against the Patriots' high powered offense, in the AFC Championship game. Had their defense not played well in that game, they aren't Super Bowl champs.

The 49ers defense was great all season until Justin Smith was hurt. At that point, their defense slipped to just good...good enough to help them to the Super Bowl.

Which takes me back to my original point. Teams need balance and today, balanced teams are winning Super Bowls. Which is why Lovie's philosophy would never win the Bears a Super Bowl. You can't expect your defense to consistently score points, create turnovers and carry your team because your offense is crap. The Bears don't win 10 games last season without their defense playing lights out. They also don't lose 6 games and end the season with an epic collapse because their offense can't do jacksh*t.

A balanced Chicago Bears team can win championships. I've been saying it for years. If we had even an average offense in '06, we win that Super Bowl. How on earth JA and Lovie never realized that is beyond me.

Melton has improved every season since he got the Chicago, and this last year, he had a great season...

You can't let guys like that go.

The Franchise tag is available, and not going to be used on any other players.

Offer him a decent 4 year contract. If he doesn't take the deal, he gets tagged this year. That simple...

But in no way do you let a guy like that go at this point in his career. I don't know how the Bears could ever hope to get similar production out of someone that's not currently on the roster. Keep Melton. Tag him if you have to. That's what the tag is there for....

TheUFan wrote: In order for the Bears to get a SB victory, we are going to have to go through 3 or 4 teams. At least 2 of those teams will have high octane offenses that many more times than not won't care about a pro bowl DT, DE, LB, etc. Did anyone watch the playoffs? There wasn't much defense being played. Now I'm not saying defense doesn't matter, but to me its silly to put that much money in that side of the ball. For example, the 49ers were stacked at S and LB and did that help them stop many opponents? No. To me, keep the defensive side of the ball young and hungry. Have it full of players playing for their next contract and then recycle them. You can find guys like Briggs and Melton in the mid rounds. I think most of the cap should go towards offense with the first 2 picks each year going to keep the offense deep. Good offenses will score on you regardless of who you have on the field, so why not build something to keep up instead of try trying to stop them which we all know just doesn't happen much in todays NFL.

I want to avoid spreading the wealth and then realize we are just average on both sides of the ball. We have too many guys like Cutler and Marshall coming up for contract soon and our O line needs money put into it. I would rather give that Buffalo guard the money some want to give Melton. With as many holes we have on the offensive side of the ball, its just crazy to me to pay a DT like Melton big money when he came into the leauge as a project.

You're severely discounting the importance of defense because of one Super Bowl and a couple of playoff games. Each year is different, each game is different. 18 pts would have beaten a very good Patriots offense in last year's SB, and 14 pts would have beaten them in the AFCCG this year. The Bear defense is the type that with all the turnovers they force and their own TD's, don't necessarily need 39 points from an offense to win a SB. 

As this all relates to Henry Melton, hell yes I would FT him if a long term deal can't be worked out. He gets as good a jump off the ball as anyone in the league and is extremely disruptive.  And he's in his prime. I'd take him over "some Buffalo guard" anyday of the week for FT money

TheUFan wrote: In order for the Bears to get a SB victory, we are going to have to go through 3 or 4 teams. At least 2 of those teams will have high octane offenses that many more times than not won't care about a pro bowl DT, DE, LB, etc. Did anyone watch the playoffs? There wasn't much defense being played. Now I'm not saying defense doesn't matter, but to me its silly to put that much money in that side of the ball. For example, the 49ers were stacked at S and LB and did that help them stop many opponents? No. To me, keep the defensive side of the ball young and hungry. Have it full of players playing for their next contract and then recycle them. You can find guys like Briggs and Melton in the mid rounds.  ( these are pro bowlers, not that easy )  I think most of the cap should go towards offense with the first 2 picks each year going to keep the offense deep. Good offenses will score on you regardless of who you have on the field, so why not build something to keep up instead of try trying to stop them which we all know just doesn't happen much in todays NFL.

I want to avoid spreading the wealth and then realize we are just average on both sides of the ball. We have too many guys like Cutler and Marshall coming up for contract soon and our O line needs money put into it. I would rather give that Buffalo guard the money some want to give Melton. With as many holes we have on the offensive side of the ball, its just crazy to me to pay a DT like Melton big money when he came into the leauge as a project.

I disagree.. The post season is all about QB play and Dline play. 3T is the most important spot on our defense, thats the one spot you cannot afford below average play. We need Melton.  And BTW, Henry Melton's spot is more important than any guard in the NFL. 
You can argue that may be he is not consistent enough but to start talking of giving a premier inside rusher's money to a guard is funky. At least to me.

TheUFan wrote: Baltimore is not a defensive team anymore. Flacco just decided to become a stud and make throws that few others not named Aaron Rodgers can make. The 49ers? They sure didnt look like a defensive team this playoffs. See, you know me 247. I really dont care what teams do against sucky offenses. It is my belief that you can build a competitive defense with mid rounders that can stand just as much a chance against some of these offenses and rules as a defense with pro bowlers sprinkled in. Maybe the defense with a few pro bowlers allows only 31 points instead of 38. Thats really what its come to with some of these offenses. I would rather get an offense that can score 39.

They spent a lot of money on their defense. The fact that Suggs had a nasty injury or that Haloti had to leave the game doesn't change that.  Going by your logic, Baltimore would let Haloti and Suggs go. I Don't think so.

Man. I don't get it...

Haven't fans been pretty disappointed in the drafting in Chicago? With good reason, to doubt, but Melton's one of those draft picks that really paid off. He was a GREAT pick by JA...

How could anybody suggest that we let him walk? WTF? Especially with a tag available...

If the draft is at all important, then so is hanging on to those few great draft picks that come to Chicago, especially when they're healthy, playing well, and entering their prime...

TheUFan wrote:  its just crazy to me to pay a DT like Melton big money when he came into the leauge as a project.

This attitude drives me crazy, because it's retarded...

Who cares how you happened to view him when he came into the league? Things change, teams and players adapt, and no matter what folks thought of Melton a few years ago, NEXT year he's going to be the best DT on the Chicago Bears... The fact that he played on offense and at DE in the past has nothing to do with next year, and nothing to do with his ACTUAL VALUE....