But how is that not obvious right now? It's funny that the Browns are always the punching bag and the analogy for what a terrible franchise looks like. The Browns have actual talent on the offensive line and on defense. It's not all-world, but it's solid, and some of them are even young (gasp)!

The Bears are worse than the Browns for the reasons you outline above. They literally have two guys who are NFL-level talent under the age of 30 (Forte's there, but as a runningback, he may as well be approaching 40).

I don't really understand why the Bears are presumed to be a better franchise. Because of their history? Because they were a founding franchise? Because they have quadruple (at least) the fanbase? The NFL has a salary floor and a salary cap. It's not like the Bears can just decide to outspend the Browns when they feel like it.

Moving forward, I would take the Cleveland Browns ten times out of ten over the Chicago Bears. This team has absolutely zero positive things going for it moving forward. The fact that bringing in some shmuck fill-in QB might make you look competitive in one game in September means nothing to me.

_________________

Bit hyperbolic. From 2005-2012 the Bears were generally competitive. Not first class to be sure, more like a level below the Patriots and Manning-led Colts of the league. Not ideal, but not Browns-like either. It won't take much to get back to respectability if you hit in the draft more often than not, and if you have competent coaching.

_________________
Successful calls:

Kyrie Irving will never win anything as a team's alpha: check
T.rubisky is a bust: check
Ben Simmons is a liability: check
The Fields Cult is dumb: double check

2013 CSFMB ROY

Lovie Smith would have this team 9-7 in no time!

_________________
Reality is your friend, not your enemy. -- Seacrest

Lovie is the reason we we have to wait 5 years to be one of the true basement dwellers. I think Fox is a splendid coach, but the Emery/Trestman damage is going to set the Bears back a decade.

You just don't watch NFL football. It is ridiculous to believe a team can be set back a decade, as if it were the job of management to rebuild cities and not win football games. How long did it take Denver to reach the Superbowl once they signed Peyton Manning? The Saints once they signed Brees? The Cardinals once they signed Kurt freaking Warner?

_________________
Successful calls:

Kyrie Irving will never win anything as a team's alpha: check
T.rubisky is a bust: check
Ben Simmons is a liability: check
The Fields Cult is dumb: double check

2013 CSFMB ROY

The Bears once they got Cutler?

_________________
Reality is your friend, not your enemy. -- Seacrest

What's your point?

_________________
Successful calls:

Kyrie Irving will never win anything as a team's alpha: check
T.rubisky is a bust: check
Ben Simmons is a liability: check
The Fields Cult is dumb: double check

2013 CSFMB ROY

You first.

_________________
Reality is your friend, not your enemy. -- Seacrest

Your nurse is calling.

_________________

All the Bears need to do is sign a HOF QB. Problem solved.

_________________
Reality is your friend, not your enemy. -- Seacrest

It just sounds cooler and more devastating when you throw 10 years in there. The NFL in terms of rebuild generally takes 2 years. In the case of the Bears you'd have to add another year, maybe 2. Pretty much it's gonna be an annual recycling of this process: Release what players you can that don't destroy the cap; bring in some short-term personnel that may or may not fit your goals; keep most if not all of your draft picks. So far I'd say Pace has done that. The unfortunate part is that there's not a lot of talent carrying over from the previous regime. The obvious choice of Kyle Fuller is somebody who you'd like to shape into a part of the future since he's still young and has a high ceiling. Some probably also irrationally hoped McClellin, finally in the 3-4 scheme that the draft folks pegged him as a natural fit, would give you more glimmers of being a steady veteran presence that while unspectacular would be a guy you could salvage.

Unfortunately for Pace/Fox/etc., Fuller needs to be converted to safety yesterday and McClellin still has absolutely no instincts.

All that's leftover youth-wise is Kyle Long and Alshon Jeffery, both young and, if healthy, extremely valuable building blocks. Martellus is great but he won't stick around through a rebuild. Cutler is Cutler. Ratliff is good but aging and hurt. Everything else is basically shit.

For this rookie class Pace has some potentially solid players in Goldman & Amos who are getting invaluable game experience. Kevin White is a mystery, but his value is obvious should he pan out. Grasu struggled in preseason but he's a long project. Pace kept all of his draft picks, too. Something lost on Emery/Angelo that needs to occur every damn season, even if they don't make great impacts immediately or ever, you've got to at least have them be available.

Anyways I forgot what my original point was and now I've got to work on this old lady's computer and her keyboard is sticky. Her office smells like Werther's Originals and Old Golds.

_________________

The closest team to the Bears in the eight-division era is the Bengals. Rarely awful, never great, sometimes in the playoffs, but usually just hovering around the middle of the league. The difference is that Cincinnati fans know well enough to put football behind baseball.

_________________

Right... the Reds are a beacon of sports success.

_________________

You can achieve quick turnarounds in the NFL, and at a much faster rate than you can in the NBA or MLB. At least two primary reasons in my opinion:

1) The higher rate of season-ending injuries in the NFL is a great equalizer. If you're a decent team you're going to be able to contend with the division rival Packers if Rodgers blows out his knee, which is not unlikely. NFL injuries mean more teams have a shot at success due to the constant misfortune of other teams, the instances of which can make up for weaknesses on your own team.

2) It's simply easier to find guys who can excel at NFL jobs than it is to find guys who can excel in the MLB or NBA. You can mold a six foot four physical specimen into a decent o-lineman or a beast TE, but you can't do so for equivalent positions in other leagues. The availability of moldable talent in the NFL means you have more opportunities to address talent gaps on your roster, whereas in the NBA or MLB you're not going to find a 20 point scorer or 25 homer guy off the street. You're going to have to wait for the draft, get lucky in free agency, or wait out a bad draft pick - not so in the NFL. You can always find a guy. Think about how many fourth and fifth round picks have grown into solid, if not spectacular, players in the NFL. That's because it's simply easier for the common man to play football professionally than it is other sports.

_________________
Successful calls:

Kyrie Irving will never win anything as a team's alpha: check
T.rubisky is a bust: check
Ben Simmons is a liability: check
The Fields Cult is dumb: double check

2013 CSFMB ROY

Also, salary cap.

_________________

In turn, the Reds are like the Bears: a cheap crappy team living on its ancient founding and past glories. The only difference is we haven't confirmed whether Virginia McCaskey hates Jews.

_________________

Don't disagree but Bears need to "find" like 20 starters. It's going to take awhile. Even so without a QB you are not going anywhere.

_________________
Reality is your friend, not your enemy. -- Seacrest

What's better: the Bengals' playoff 0-6 record in six appearances since 2005 or the Bears' 3-3 record in three appearances since 2005? Can we agree that neither one is "just a notch below" the Patriots and Colts?

_________________

You can find 20 starters in one or two off seasons. You just have to pick the right ones. That is kinda a big issue.

_________________
Elections have consequences.

Nitpick if you'd like, no objection from me here. My broader point was disputing the hyperbolic assertion that the Bears are somehow the Browns, as if Lovie's mediocre-plus (does that work?) era never existed. Not sure what went on in the 1980s beyond the championship, but there's that too, for whatever it's worth.

_________________
Successful calls:

Kyrie Irving will never win anything as a team's alpha: check
T.rubisky is a bust: check
Ben Simmons is a liability: check
The Fields Cult is dumb: double check

2013 CSFMB ROY

The Bears aren't the Browns. I won't argue that. As a matter of fact, the flaming bag of dogshit that is the re-established Cleveland Browns is actually a singular case study in how not to begin running an expansion team; the corners they cut in getting the new business off the ground have haunted the franchise to this day. It's the topic of a book called False Start: How the New Browns Were Set Up to Fail , and I'm trying to read as much of it as Google Books will let me for free.

_________________

Plus, I don't care what anybody says, Kevin Costner fucked that draft up and the Browns are still paying the price.

_________________
You know me like that.

Why? Because it's quite simple with Tebow. He's a winner and can inspire a team, something we haven't seen in Chicago for a long time.

And you don't lose anything to put him in. Rather, you save a draft pick potentially by not having to draft a QB.

Tebow does something better than Cutler, he scans the field looking for the open receiver while having a pocket presence to avoid the rush. And he can throw the deep bowl. So what the F are you talking about that he can't throw?

All I know is, at the end of the year, Cutler will still suck and we'll all wring our hands over what it'll take to get rid of him. Get someone new next year, you got a rebuilding year with him. From that perspective, therefore, this is a wasted year. But this is nothing new with the Bears.

You can tomorrow get a hot QB. Let's say an Andrew Luck. Doesn't matter: we don't have a great line, we don't have very good receivers. Whoever it is back there gets beaten up. Luck will be gun-shy and ruined. What's that? Sounds like our experience with Cutler? Of course it does. Without a "rest of the team" there's no reason to get hot QB.

I don't think that's going to change with Pace & Fox. Get rid of Sweaty Teddy; that won't matter either. Ginny McCaskey?!?

_________________
Middle Aged Crazy, like Uncle Terry

He doesn't save you from drafting a quarterback. But if he wins you a game, you draft a lesser quarterback.

_________________

Andrew Luck would kill to get the Bears offensive line.

_________________

The problem with this team is numerous but the main problem is the ownership. Until Ginny is dead and gone (which can't come soon enough) and her retarded children sell this team, the Bears will continue to bumble and stumble throughout each season.

These imbeciles hire bad people who make bad decisions and therefore put together bad teams. This won't stop until ownership changes.

Sundays for me now consist of doing anything but watch these incompetent boobs embarrass themselves and this city. Ryan Pace, Orlando Pace or Pace Picante sauce ain't going to fix anything soon.

John Fox and Adam Gase couldn't win with a HOF QB, so what pray tell are they going to do with a shitty QB like Cutler?

Fuck you Ginny you old shriveled up vag.

_________________
RFDC thinks I'm retarded.

POTY.

I haven't watched a whole game yet. Probably won't.

They remind me of being a Bucks fan with Herb Kohl owning the team.

_________________
2018
#ExtendLafleur
10 More Wins

No

_________________
Successful calls:

Kyrie Irving will never win anything as a team's alpha: check
T.rubisky is a bust: check
Ben Simmons is a liability: check
The Fields Cult is dumb: double check

2013 CSFMB ROY