Jump to content

Bears sign S Tashaun Gipson


CBears019

Recommended Posts

The Gipson signing makes a ton of sense.

He has 104 career starts and what our safety spot is lacking is experience. Even if he doesn't beat out Deon Bush he provides a break glass in case of emmegrency option if Bush gets exposed with more playing time.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gipson is a guy I stumped for last offseason before the HHCD signing. He’s not an intimidating box safety but I think he’s more capable of playing there than HHCD. He has a flare for making the big play too.

Gonna need a new number though - 39 is taken here... 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

For me the key here is that we added more vet depth at Safety.  Whether he's more of a FS vs a SS is somewhat redundant anyway since both positions tend to be swapped around at times anyway.  The positive is he has significant starting experience and he's good.  At least as good if not better than HHC-D.  IMHO a vet Safety was the last must piece of the offseason puzzle to put in place and it's been done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, soulman said:

For me the key here is that we added more vet depth at Safety.  Whether he's more of a FS vs a SS is somewhat redundant anyway since both positions tend to be swapped around at times anyway.  The positive is he has significant starting experience and he's good.  At least as good if not better than HHC-D.  IMHO a vet Safety was the last must piece of the offseason puzzle to put in place and it's been done.

You comfortable at RB? I think we need a similarly experienced vet backup there too. He should cost less than Gipson just got, and can have Shaheen’s roster spot. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, AZBearsFan said:

You comfortable at RB? I think we need a similarly experienced vet backup there too. He should cost less than Gipson just got, and can have Shaheen’s roster spot. 

Not as uncomfortable as some.  To be honest I'm far more uncomfortable knowing Nagy doesn't seem to know how to use the backs he has correctly which I hope will be resolved by his additions to the coaching staff.

Montgomery was under used, Cohen was woefully misused, Patterson was hardly used at all and Nall was either on the PS or ST exclusively.  We've added two UDFAs and I'm sure Pace will be looking at others who hit the street.

We foolishly lost Kerrith Whyte last year and his speed but I like Nall as a hammer and tongs kinda "big back" more than others as well.  I think he can contribute if given a better chance.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, AZBearsFan said:

You comfortable at RB? I think we need a similarly experienced vet backup there too. He should cost less than Gipson just got, and can have Shaheen’s roster spot. 

Unless the plan is for Patterson to get a ton of RB reps, I am going to be concerned.

Still good options out there and we have 3 cutable TEs

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, soulman said:

Just had another thought.  If both Tashaun and Trevis Gipson make the 53 man roster were gonna need jerseys that say Gipson I and Gipson II.  :D

It seems in the mid-2000s that the requirement to differentiate in the NFL was scrapped. So I expect they'll both just wear Gipson. That said there are some old NFL references that have full names on teammates. 

2947387578_6442d4008a_o.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, WindyCity said:

Unless the plan is for Patterson to get a ton of RB reps, I am going to be concerned.

Still good options out there and we have 3 cutable TEs

Yeah, I’m not worried about making a roster spot. There are plenty of spots for trimming right now with all the camp bodies. For all the talk about our TE “depth”, we have 11 WR currently listed on the team website and that doesn’t even include Ginn yet. I think we should aim far higher than Patterson as our primary backup RB given the FA options out there though. I’m not comfortable with him taking over a primary role should Montgomery miss significant time. There are a half dozen guys who could capably fill that role on the market. As far as I’m concerned if Patterson didn’t see 100 offensive reps in 2020 that’d be fine by me. His value to the team isn’t on offense. He’s not a capable enough WR that his presence on the field isn’t a tip off to what we are doing. We need to get far more unpredictable. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Orange&Blue said:

It seems in the mid-2000s that the requirement to differentiate in the NFL was scrapped. So I expect they'll both just wear Gipson. That said there are some old NFL references that have full names on teammates. 

2947387578_6442d4008a_o.png

In 2006 we had Todd and Tank Johnson and I think they had full names. I guess if it mattered they could go with Ta Gipson and Tr Gipson. Time will tell - both are locks to make the roster. 

Edited by AZBearsFan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, WindyCity said:

The Gipson signing makes a ton of sense.

He has 104 career starts and what our safety spot is lacking is experience. Even if he doesn't beat out Deon Bush he provides a break glass in case of emmegrency option if Bush gets exposed with more playing time.

I am thinking if he is healthy he is the starter.  Coaches like veterans.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We never seemed to worry much about who we had behind Matt Forte so why all the worry about who the #2 RB will be?  We signed Mike Davis to share carries last year then never used him.  Hell, we didn't even use Montgomery like he needs to be used.

Until someone can break Nagy of his addictions to pass plays and clever gadget running plays who the #2 RB will be is almost inconsequential.  How can you distribute runs when you call less than 20 of them in an entire game?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...