Archuleta and Harper?
 

Bears release veteran safety Archuleta

Bears release veteran safety Archuleta
Chicago Bears


Adam Archuleta, S
Career statistics
Tackles: 530
Sacks: 18
INTs: 4
LAKE FOREST, Ill. –- The Chicago Bears released veteran safety Adam Archuleta on Tuesday.

Archuleta appeared in 15 contests for the Bears in 2007 with 10 starts at strong safety, ranking eighth on the team with 64 tackles. He added three tackles for loss, two sacks, one interception, one fumble recovery and five special teams tackles.

Originally drafted by the St. Louis Rams in the first round (20th overall) of the 2001 NFL Draft, the Arizona State product spent his first five NFL seasons with St. Louis, the initial three under the tutelage of then Rams defensive coordinator Lovie Smith. Archuleta joined the Washington Redskins in 2006 before being traded to the Bears in 2007 for a sixth-round pick. He has started 86 of 103 career games played in the NFL with 18 sacks, four interceptions, four forced fumbles and six fumble recoveries. His 18 sacks are the most by an NFL safety since 2001.


Hmmmm....

Re: Archuleta and Harper?
 

So who are you suggesting we move Harper or Archuleta to FS should we consider bringing him in here?

Archuleta has been in a downward tail spin since he left the Rams. If he isn't looking for anything unreasonable, I wouldn't mind taking a flier on him... but I wouldn't have any high expectations on his production.

I would rather see Bullocks and Harper back there honestly.

Re: Archuleta and Harper?
 

I'd put him in at FS. Bullocks hasn't shown too much and he's past the time to have a break out year.

It worked with Knight and Bellamy.

Re: Archuleta and Harper?
 

Never know. A change in systems? Playing behing the bears front 7 would make any safety numbers decline. He never really was an Int machine. But he could tackle. Sounds like Harper. take Adam then ship Harper to the NYG for Shockey? Nah keep the youth. Here I go open another can of Shockey worm soup.

Heck just do it so we can get his girlfriend. jennifer walcott

Re: Archuleta and Harper?
 

This guy is a horrible pass defender, pretty good as a run supporter though. That's why he got benched when he played for the Redskins , and then they drafted LaRon Landry. Bears drafted Craig Steltz and then he got the boot there. He must hate LSU safeties.

Re: Archuleta and Harper?
 

Bullocks ain't so hot at pass defense OR tackling.

Re: Archuleta and Harper?
 

He stunk it up defending the pass, but he played well versus the run.

Re: Archuleta and Harper?
 

Not from what I saw. He took terrible angles on ballcarriers and on several occassions just whiffed. I really don't see what Bullocks brings to the table. KK and Harper need to be our starting safeties on Week 1.

Re: Archuleta and Harper?
 

You sure you aren't mistaking Bullocks for Harper on the poor angles and whiffs? I can remember a few of those. I'll pass on soon to be 32 year old KK as our starting safety. Good 3rd safety and perfect rotational guy.

Re: Archuleta and Harper?
 

You guys need to watch more film. If we would have had C. Baily and D. Sanders in our secondary last year it would not have mattered. You give any NFL caliber quarterback as much time to throw as we did last year and sooner or later someone is gonna be open. The ball was being passed around on our secondary like a comb on fith grade picture day. While I will agree that we need improvement in the secondary the problem starts up fornt with the anchor 7. Why do you think we drafted 2 DT's and picked up a new D-line coach? A single player on any team cannot be assesed without looking at the whole unit. I agree thawt some blame goes to the DB's but you cannot expect any DB to try to cover recievers for greater than 3-4 seconds. QB pressure is the key to a good secondary. Nobody was complaining about Bullocks or Harper 2 years ago when we where 1 game away from the SB. Now we have a bad year and they are crap? Look at the big picture before you point fingers.

Re: Archuleta and Harper?
 

You are preaching to the choir... at least about the pressure. Bullocks on the otherhand, minds of many have already been set.

Re: Archuleta and Harper?
 

Bullocks isn't a playmaker. Bellamy was, Knight was, even Willie Clay was. Bob Sanders or Ronnie Lot could play in the weakest secondary ever and still make plays. Bullocks never shows up just like Simoneau. I'd rather a slow safety that's always around the ball making plays than a fast guy that's never around. Dwight Smith as better IMO than Bullocks.

Re: Archuleta and Harper?
 

Bullocks has been about the same (statistically) his whole stay here.

. G GS Tkl Solo Ast Sck PDef Int
2007 New Orleans Saints 14 14 77 65 12 1.0 8 2
2006 New Orleans Saints 16 16 71 56 15 0.0 5 2
2005 New Orleans Saints 16 13 67 53 14 0.0 5 1

Josh Bullocks

If he was good enough to play in a secondary that made it to the conference final (and he was), then he's good enough to play in a secondary that can take us to a conference final.

I agree that he isn't a play maker. I just think "he sucks" is way too strong. He may not be good, and he is certainly not great, but "sucks", really?

I am certainly pro getting an upgrade at Safety, but I don't think that is as simple as replacing Bullocks with "whoever".

Re: Archuleta and Harper?
 

I'd like to see Archuleta competing with Bullocks and KK. If Bullocks wins out then fine by me.

Re: Archuleta and Harper?
 

That seems like a pretty sane stance. I'd like to see them bring in someone I thought was good already, then I wouldn't feel like they would have to grow on me.

I'm not really sold on Archuleta, but I'm certainly sold on the idea of some competition. Isn't this why we had like 10 Safeties on the roster at the beggining of training camp last year?

Re: Archuleta and Harper?
 

he was playin in the sec. when we went to the conf. finals but he was also part of the reason we didnt win that game.. we got burn deep plenty of times that game and bullocks was always out of position.. frankly im tired of seeing him blow coverages.. he sucks..

Re: Archuleta and Harper?
 

He's also part of the reason we made it to that game (i.e. he was a contributing member of our defense that year).

I doubt that he was always out of position. (And before anyone suggests I didn't see the game, I did).

Statistically speaking Bullocks is about where most of the second rate starters in the NFL are. Of course, we could get better, but we could get a lot worse.

I'm starting to think that I just don't understand what people mean when they say "sucks." I'm really coming to believe that means "I don't like so and so, and we could have a better player than so and so" - not much content there.

I can certainly get on board with upgrading that position, but I think we could do much worse than what we have. Was the secondary really that much better the two games KK started (I'm actually just asking that - it isn't rhetorical)? If someone decides to answer that, I'm not going to be swayed by your opinion - I'd like something a little more concrete.