Page 1 of 1

Re: So Deonte Thompson can play, just not for the Bears??

Posted: Mon Oct 23, 2017 12:45 pm
by UOK
Apparently Thompson has ties to Tyrod Taylor going back to High School, so that could be one part of it. The other thing is that Thompson was getting a fresh start and that wakes something up on occasion for athletes.

I don't feel bad at all about releasing him. He was unreliable and mediocre.

Re: So Deonte Thompson can play, just not for the Bears??

Posted: Mon Oct 23, 2017 12:51 pm
by Otis Day
It was just a question of which unreliable, mediocre WR you were gonna release. Deonta must have lost the coin flip.

Re: So Deonte Thompson can play, just not for the Bears??

Posted: Mon Oct 23, 2017 12:53 pm
by wab
Also two catches made up the majority of his yards...so it wasn't like he was just destroying the defense all day.

The Bears didn't just release Jerry Rice.

Re: So Deonte Thompson can play, just not for the Bears??

Posted: Mon Oct 23, 2017 2:22 pm
by Bears Whiskey Nut
wab wrote:Also two catches made up the majority of his yards...so it wasn't like he was just destroying the defense all day.

The Bears didn't just release Jerry Rice.
We're not looking for Jerry Rice WAB. We're looking for a receiver that can run a route and catch a ball. That's it. Personally I think he was an average receiver, which is better than 80% of our current roster.

Re: So Deonte Thompson can play, just not for the Bears??

Posted: Mon Oct 23, 2017 2:29 pm
by wab
Bears Whiskey Nut wrote:
wab wrote:Also two catches made up the majority of his yards...so it wasn't like he was just destroying the defense all day.

The Bears didn't just release Jerry Rice.
We're not looking for Jerry Rice WAB. We're looking for a receiver that can run a route and catch a ball. That's it. Personally I think he was an average receiver, which is better than 80% of our current roster.
He's been cut how many times? I get that it's frustrating to see a player the Bears just had go out and have a nice day when the Bears are struggling to find guys to catch the ball. But they aren't throwing to WR's anyway.

I think Wright is infinitely better than Thompson, and I don't understand why he's not been more involved.

Re: So Deonte Thompson can play, just not for the Bears??

Posted: Mon Oct 23, 2017 2:38 pm
by G08
wab wrote:
Bears Whiskey Nut wrote:
wab wrote:Also two catches made up the majority of his yards...so it wasn't like he was just destroying the defense all day.

The Bears didn't just release Jerry Rice.
We're not looking for Jerry Rice WAB. We're looking for a receiver that can run a route and catch a ball. That's it. Personally I think he was an average receiver, which is better than 80% of our current roster.
He's been cut how many times? I get that it's frustrating to see a player the Bears just had go out and have a nice day when the Bears are struggling to find guys to catch the ball. But they aren't throwing to WR's anyway.

I think Wright is infinitely better than Thompson, and I don't understand why he's not been more involved.
Loggains think he's at his best playing something like 18-25 snaps per game.

Re: So Deonte Thompson can play, just not for the Bears??

Posted: Mon Oct 23, 2017 3:03 pm
by HisRoyalSweetness
wab wrote:Also two catches made up the majority of his yards...so it wasn't like he was just destroying the defense all day.

The Bears didn't just release Jerry Rice.
Even at age 55 Jerry Rice is probably still better than any of our WRs!

Yesterday I asked Torry Holt if he'd come out of retirement and play for the Bears. Unfortunately he just laughed. :(

Re: So Deonte Thompson can play, just not for the Bears??

Posted: Mon Oct 23, 2017 4:11 pm
by donkeykong
wab wrote:Also two catches made up the majority of his yards...so it wasn't like he was just destroying the defense all day.

The Bears didn't just release Jerry Rice.
Nobody said “why did the Bears release a Pro-Bowl receiver”. We currently have, apparently, nothing on the roster and what we did have wasn’t good enough for a roster spot...but is good enough for a roster spot on another team and immediately produced. I’m not expecting this production from him in a weekly basis, but come on! We also don’t have any type of deep threat, so two of those plays must have been over 25 yards then...we also don’t have anybody outside of a RB doing that either, that would also be nice production to have.

It just doesn’t make sense, that’s all I was saying.

Re: So Deonte Thompson can play, just not for the Bears??

Posted: Mon Oct 23, 2017 4:29 pm
by Otis Day
Hey, dammit, Tanner Gentry has been active for how many weeks now? :?

Re: So Deonte Thompson can play, just not for the Bears??

Posted: Mon Oct 23, 2017 5:33 pm
by Hematite
We are literally talking about #4 or worse WR's that on our team have to be a #1 or #2. The idea that Thompson can perform while in the #4 spot in Buffalo shouldn't be shocking, he just couldn't handle his role here. Will Gentry or McBride do any better? Probably not, but at least its an unknown at this point whether either can develop beyond that role.

Re: So Deonte Thompson can play, just not for the Bears??

Posted: Wed Oct 25, 2017 8:23 am
by Boris13c
Otis Day wrote:It was just a question of which unreliable, mediocre WR you were gonna release. Deonta must have lost the coin flip.

yes

Re: So Deonte Thompson can play, just not for the Bears??

Posted: Wed Oct 25, 2017 10:17 am
by sturf
We have all seen Deonte Thompson catch the occasional deep pass in a Bears uniform. I was surprised when he was cut, but when Bellamy was simultaneously restricted to special teams only. I figured someone made a decision that those guys were never going to develop into anything more so move on to new guys even if they're not as good initially. Whoever made the decision probably didn't expect Wheaton to immediately get hurt after they cut Thompson though.

Re: So Deonte Thompson can play, just not for the Bears??

Posted: Sun Nov 05, 2017 5:23 pm
by donkeykong
For those keeping score and still wondering how a team like the Bears who “have the worst receiving Corp in football” still have no receivers but let this guy who wasn’t good enough to make the roster go...

7 receptions 81 yards and 1 TD this week. Bills top receiver last 2/3 weeks.

We sure could have used that production! I would also still like to know what the Bills saw that we couldn’t see or utilize??

Re: So Deonte Thompson can play, just not for the Bears??

Posted: Mon Nov 06, 2017 12:57 am
by Atkins&Rebel
The Bills are great at recycling Bears rejects...Heck they have Jordan Mills starting at RT for them.

Re: So Deonte Thompson can play, just not for the Bears??

Posted: Mon Nov 06, 2017 9:49 am
by G08
I was expecting him to do more this season once Mitch took over... fucking pissed they told him to take a hike.

Re: So Deonte Thompson can play, just not for the Bears??

Posted: Thu Nov 09, 2017 9:41 am
by Richie
Inman/Wright/Wheaton/McBride/Gentry (Bellamy on SPT's only)

Meh... it's not like Thompson would really make a difference there. As mentioned, it was basically a coin-flip as to who we decided to cut.

Re: So Deonte Thompson can play, just not for the Bears??

Posted: Fri Nov 10, 2017 9:05 am
by donkeykong
Richie wrote:Inman/Wright/Wheaton/McBride/Gentry (Bellamy on SPT's only)

Meh... it's not like Thompson would really make a difference there. As mentioned, it was basically a coin-flip as to who we decided to cut.
Well he’s making a difference on another team with the same problem we have. Why is that?

Re: So Deonte Thompson can play, just not for the Bears??

Posted: Fri Nov 10, 2017 11:31 pm
by docc
..Voodoo of course..

Re: So Deonte Thompson can play, just not for the Bears??

Posted: Sat Nov 11, 2017 2:46 am
by ramentaschen
Bah


It's things like this that make me question just what Loggains is doing for our offense

Re: So Deonte Thompson can play, just not for the Bears??

Posted: Mon Nov 13, 2017 9:52 am
by Boris13c
docc wrote:..Voodoo of course..
we need a John Fox voodoo doll