Chisoxfn

I was surprised too. I get it, they have invested a lot in TE, but Kmet has the makeup of a totally complete TE. Something Bears haven't had in a long time.

Absolutely agree. I expect they will trade into this draft with one more pick at some point. Probably Pace will dangle some pick from next year for a 3rd, 4th or 5th (or to move up). With him having a few compensatory picks expected, my presumption is he will leverage part of that to buy one more now. Man I really wish this team still had a 3rd/4th round pick. Just pains me what they gave up for Montgomery and Miller...would have been nice, especially knowing how deep this draft was at wideout (and to be frank, they could have gotten a better back than Montgomery and never should have had to move up to get him). I don't mind Montgomery but not one thing special about him (and I said those exact same things last year when they took them). That said, I complain about Pace more than most here and I absolutely was 100% content with both guys they acquired. Both were fringe 1st round guys and have ability to be good starters. I think pace would have maybe made a deal...but just not a lot of dealing in this draft (given the remote setup). I think they wanted Kmet pretty badly knowing how key TE is/was to the Bears system. And at least we didn't go with some DII TE. We took a guy who comes from a school that has produced some solid TE's.

They could have 20 on the roster, if they are all crap, it doesn't matter. And to be frank, outside of Graham (who is mediocre)...they all STINK. I really do think the biggest reason this team and Mitch took a step back was the complete JUNK they got out of TE. No team was even close to as bad as the Bears a TE last year.

What is wrong with Kmet? You just didn't want TE? I think I have been on record as saying I would take at least 2 (TE/WR), if not 3 in this draft. I would like us to move down with the next pick. I wouldn't draft CB this year...would try and get a vet signing (vs. using an early pick...think the draft grades are better on the wideouts). Delpit wouldn't be bad though (as I don't have a major issue taking a safety...better relative chance of them delivering vs. a CB). If I did go CB, I'd go with Jaylen Johnson.

I can't complain about this pick. Critical position in the Bears offense and Graham is just a short-term need. They need to massively upgrade. I just hope for once Pace is right on evaluating TE.

What is this related to?

I was going to say Packers going for a QB and they did.

MJ and Reinsdorf get along. IN case you didn't know it, JR took Michael under his wing and they speak a lot about owning franchise, etc.

They do have an entirely different front office. Reinsdorf is at this point the one person still there (from a continuity perspective) but you are right...there has always been the perception of what the Bulls ownership & front office did to the GOAT. I just have to hope somewhere there is some bow that talks about how Jordan and JR are pretty tight nowadays.

Wow - That would be an out of left field hire, but one I could get on board with.

That was real good too.

To be honest...I just wish he never did that Wizards return. That said, while he wasn't the same player with the Wizards...it was 3 years later. You never know what him continuing to play would have meant. He was still best player in the league at that time...but I don't know that they could have gotten pass the Lakers (Kobe / Shaq). I honestly think Michael hung them up at the perfect time and in some ways, Krause was trying to be like Belicheck, which was, call it quits a year or two short but maintain longer success vs. totally bottom out. That said, 6 championships is just special, but you never know what could have happened had Krause and Phil just worked together and they could have landed McGrady plus the other top pick (Pippen for Celtics 3 & 7 (or whatever pick it was)) and than pivoted the team under an aging, but still very dominant Jordan. Like I said...I dont' think they win another championship...but I do think they don't bottom out and maybe they would have won another championship. Hard to say cause you never know what happens. Like I said...I'll take the 6. Would it have been better if they brought everyone back again and than lost to Spurs/Lakers? Or is it better that the team NEVER lost in the Championships.

I think the best part about last dance has been seeing Jordan getting interviewed. HE always kept things so close to the vest that this is just an awesome look into him. The story of him writing his mom in college was great, how he talked about coach K, etc. The interesting thing was, Jordan would have done a rebuild with the Bulls...he just wanted Phil to be his coach.

I would love trade backs and a draft where we got 2 wideouts and a TE that were rated high plus a CB. But honestly, I'm entirely focused on the skill positions on offense and I'd probably try to be aggressive on the veteran front to get a CB. The team has major depth needs at corner. IF Fuller were to go down...oh my.

It vaguely rings a bell. Paniagua probably would have had threats if he ever pitched another game in Chicago after that short fiasco.

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/04/20/coronavirus-antibody-testing-shows-la-county-outbreak-is-up-to-55-times-bigger-than-reported-cases.html

Gronk is back. Traded to Bucs (re-unites with Brady).

You than don’t get a batter out while giving up four runs and make White Sox fans forget Jose Paniagua!!! I kid I kid.

I agree. I bet we trade up instead.

Definitely; I'll be livid if he mortgages future high picks in this draft. That said, Bears have more insights into how Burton's recovering from his injury and if it isn't looking promising, I can appreciate the need to move in. They have just sunk in so much money on TE under Pace and whiffed bigtime (not that anyone could have predicted Burton falling off after looking like a solid signing). In general, I respect Pace. He's done a lot of good things and isn't afraid to get rid of his own guys (Burton / Floyd / Gabriel).

How many kids in lower income / high poverty areas are actually worse off (by not being in school). It is a delicate concept, but is school actually a safer place (with the risk of Coronavirus) vs. being at home. In many cases...the answer is probably no, but I bet you there are situations where the answer is a resounding yes.

It is going to be interesting when states start shutting down their borders, etc. If I'm next to one of those states and took a different, more aggressive approach and got things situated, I'm not about to get messed up by a fellow state. I'd help as much as I could resource wise, but I'm protecting my states population.

It is easy for me to make the statements I'm making. CA has just done a stellar job (for once). State has its issues but I think they have been a great leader in how proactive and thoughtful they were in this process. But it is also a massive state with a ton of urban areas so you get forced into that decision. I kind of get it for those states that don't have massive urban areas / centers which tend to be more rural. If you had good testing a more targeted approach would be pretty efficient (to the point you might say the cost-benefit is okay). But you just can't get people in massive areas (i.e., big church gatherings, big events, etc). Big urban area or small city, the risk of mass infection events is way too high with this thing (next thing you know a small town of 1000 people has 500 roaring cases and no possible way of treating its people).

What you say is also true. Goes back to what we are doing and staying diligent on it (for at least another month) is going to be key. Get this thing as beat as you can to the point where we can increase possibility of staying unlocked for the long haul (with just isolated closures until we get a cure/treatment). Get the infastructure and everything ready so we can handle (and don't go too crazy too fast or potentially don't get crazy at all...some lessening of restrictions is better than nothing). We need to be measured...if you can get back to 75% of normal and curb this thing with a high probability, it is better than going to 100% and having to shut back down and literally start from square one at zero (because we weren't ready).

What some of these states are doing is just absurd. I get it if people want to go on walks and enjoy some fresh air but you can’t have people partying on beaches etc. Vitamin D is a good thing and might actually help people bounce back from this thing but any benefit of Vitamin D is offset by higher infection rates if the beaches looks like they did a couple weeks back.