I was born and raised in California, in Forty Niner country to be exact. Growing up I was lucky to catch a Bears game on TV during the season and spent many a Sunday watching Joe Montana instead of Jim McMahon.  As I got older I've received my fair share of ribbing at the hands of these Cheese and Wine lovers (think the Kordell Stewart game or Cutler's 5 INT masterpiece), but aside from the usual weekly jibes what bothers me is their complete and total disrespect for the NFL BEFORE 1967.  They claim 5 rings to the Bears 1, I bring up the 8 NFL Championships and they blow it off as so much ancient history.  If I bring up the past (AKA anything before 1980) I'm told that I'm "living in the past" and that "those things don't county anymore" or the worst, that I wasn't alive yet, so somehow I get no bragging rights for these Bears accomplishments. I get heated when I hear these things, it deeply offends me, and here is why:

My grandparents were my link to Chicago, my Grandfather my link to the Bears. For me, everything I learned about the Bears came from him, not games, not ESPN, not football cards or books, but stories. He told me detailed stories about watching the NFL championship at Wrigley and listening to the team win during the 40s on the radio. He told me about watching games on the frozen steps of Soldier and screaming "run!" at Sayers on TV until he had burned a hole in the shirt he was ironing. I watched the 85 Super Bowl on his knee, only 3 at the time, I have only faint memories and his stories to relate to me that the event actually happened. This is how I got to know the bears.

When I think back to those stories and how my grandfather described these great players, how they made him cheer, boo, or cry I realize that’s why we crown champions and have halls of fame, to enshrine just how important these people were to us. In a game with a relatively short history it's funny how nearsighted some NFL fans can be. Is it just that I'm talking to 49er fans or is there a general lack of respect for history among fans in the NFL? I also grew up watching the A's and Giants on TV as a kid, and I'm still a fan of them, so I understand there is a different love for a team if you don't know the history. I know about the Giants history in detail but I wasn't there to experience it before 1980, no old men are telling me the tales of Giants lore, it's all what I've experienced and nothing more. Perhaps that’s the perspective of the average 49ers fan, or NFL fan for that matter, I don't know.

Are we, as Bears fans different? Does the long-toothed natured of our franchise make it better, or just turn its fans into old stalwarts who won't let go of the past? Should we let go at all? Do bragging rights last all time or is there a statute of limitations? I thought legacy, titles, and things like that were supposed to be remembered, but it sounds like the modern NFL fans is becoming a revisionist.Thoughts?

I know it's early to discuss draft but with the Bears not drafting until the third round this year I've been trying to see where some bargains might fall to them, and I think I found a good one in Oregon's RB LaGarette Blount. You probably know him as the guy who decked Byron Hout of Boise State following a game there earlier this season, however, if you've been watching Ducks football as I have, you'd also know Blount is a big sized RB in the mold of Brandon Jacobs with a whole lot more speed than Jacobs. Best part is (for Bears fans not, Blount), his punch on the Blue Turf and the subsequent suspension has dropped his draft stock to the point where he was once a late first early second round choice and now some sites are questioning whether he'll get off the board before the 4th.

We all know what Forte can do after last season, but after this season maybe we are all wondering just whats going on with him. While I don't think a new feature back is what the Bears need, I do think a nice change of pace back like Blount is exactly what this team needs. With Blount sharing time with Forte the Bears would instantly have a formidable run game again. Blount isn't the best RB around, but his size and strength are great around the goaline and nice when you need a few yards on 2nd or 3rd and short. His line at Oregon has been decent, I must admit that, and thats a luxury he's not going to get in Chicago, but more than any 3rd round OL or DB, Blount is the best value at that late of a round.

It’s been discussed before here at WCG, and I’ve been thinking about it a lot, but until recently it was only conjecture to talk about Charlie Weis as a possible OC/HC for the Bears. Today brings reports not only of his firing, but also, of apparent interest from as many as 6 NFL teams in securing his services as OC (we can only guess who; Carolina, Cleveland, KC?). So now I’m really considering this option for the Bears, and I’m considering a few things here: first, would Charlie Weis even accept the OC role in Chicago IF offered to him, AND, second, would he be a good fit for the Bears if he did?

Taking the first point, I think there are serious hurdles to get Charlie Weis here. First off, I think the fact that South Bend Indiana is essentially the extended Chicagoland area, Charlie and ND fans might be mutual in there hopes of note seeing each other on Sundays the same as Saturdays. My grandparents were Bears/ND fans, and I'm sure many of you know Bears/Irish fans, so it would seem like after the debacle in ND with the alumni (remember the billboard?) Charlie might want to get as far away from this place as possible. That being said, we also have to assume Charlie would WANT to be an OC in Chicago where Offensive Coordinators have never really existed. He was an OC in NE with one of the greatest teams in NFL history, would he want to join this shipwreck of an offense as it's savior after being heralded and then crestfallen as the savior of ND football or would he want an easier return in a friendlier place? Like Weis, Mangini and Crennel have looked horrible away from Daddy Belicheck and only McDaniels is really being successful so might Charlie want to win some favor BACK before trying his luck somewhere adventurous? KC has Matt Cassel and other teams have pieces or personnel he might favor more, but I can't think of one reason aside from Money he'd even coach here if given the chance. IF he did manage to get past all that, there is still his health and issue which I think is still the biggest hurdle for him. He seems like, even if ND had a great season, he'd need a season off. That being said, ND didn't have a good season and his time there has to have given him either hives, nervous shakes, ulcers or all of the above. I still think he takes a season off, which might put him right in place to replace Turner (or Martz) under a new HC after the Bears give this joke of a staff another season.

As for the other point of consideration; whether he would be a good choice for Chicago, I've given it more thought, but have less answers.

First off is Cutler, we all recognizing he's the franchise now and we need someone who can tailor an offense to him, as well as develop him as a QB. For the latter I think Weis is the man. I've read articles where he's been accused of being somewhat of an a-hole and wouldn't mesh well with Cutler, but I reject that as I see a track record of Weis doing well with QBs. At ND Charlie got the best out of Brady Quinn, possibly the best we might ever see of him, and that was following a woeful season at the hands of Willingham. Next is Clausen who had a few poor showings his Frosh year after arriving to much hype (like Cutler) but Weis settled him down for a decent Sophomore season (QB rating and numbers all went up) and he was a midseason All American this year as well. In the NFL we see Weis working with Tom Brady and Matt Cassel, though I can't pretend to know how much impact he had there, but suffice to say he ran system that suited them both well.

That being said (I say that a lot) I believe it's that system which Charlie runs which would be most beneficial to the Bears, albeit with new personnel on the field. Charlie's system is the antithesis of the West Coast offense, it favors using the run to setup the pass, and using play action and run fakes to setup deep throws. This sounds like Cutler, this sounds like what Cutler ran in Denver (and it's what Denver runs now), and I think, with the right personnel behind him, this would benefit Cutler greatly. Allow Cutler and the pass offense to dictate the game, pass on first down like the Colts and Saints, use that arm of his to get the distance the Bears used to rely on big name backs to do for them. Weis in NE used the speed and mismatches of Moss and Welker to throw everything they could at defenses, often not even lining up a tailback (shocking to most Bears fans, I know). We've seen Jay run this in sort of wide open offense in Denver with much success, and if the Bears can manage to get a big time wideout (and an o-line), they could easily do something like this with Bennet, Knox, Hester, and Olsen being freed up.

With this playing style also comes the system of coaching which Belicheck preaches. We’ve all opined for a Singletary or Cowher to come wakes us from the slumber of Lovie's "droopy the dog" coaching style, but I think Weis would bring that in a way. Those Patriot teams were hard working, team oriented, well disciplined teams who were made to believe they were as good as we thought they were. We see McDaniels working wonders with that system in Denver, and while Weis isn't exactly Ditka on the sidelines, he grimaces, yells, and shows emotion unlike Lovie, we know he's watching, know he's paying attention. What you don't get in guys like Cowher and Singletary is the offensive mind of Weis, and I think that combined with his experiences under Parcels and Belicheck will bring a good atmosphere to the locker room.

Obviously it's a lot of ifs and buts, and I don't think Weis saves this team by himself, but I do think he's a good fit here in Chicago.