Bears Draft Process Change: Dan Roushar Update

by Chief Editor

The Bears’ Draft Shift: Why More Visits Don’t Mean More Picks

For years, Chicago Bears fans could often predict draft picks based on pre-draft visits. The team would host prospects, and those players frequently ended up donning navy, and orange. That era appears to be over. A recent shift in the Bears’ pre-draft process, confirmed by offensive line coach Dan Roushar, suggests top-30 visits are now used to investigate concerns, not to solidify commitments.

From Confirmation to Investigation: A League-Wide Trend?

The Bears haven’t been alone in this change. Successful franchises like the Baltimore Ravens, Detroit Lions, and Seattle Seahawks have adopted a similar strategy. Instead of using these visits to reassure themselves about a sure thing, they’re digging deeper on players with question marks – medical concerns, character issues, or questions about football IQ. The Ravens, for example, met with Tyleik Williams and Josh Simmons before the draft last year but ultimately passed on both, opting for Malaki Starks, whom they hadn’t previously hosted.

This approach isn’t about being secretive. it’s about risk mitigation. Teams are realizing that a thorough vetting process, even if it means passing on a player they initially liked, can prevent costly draft busts. Roushar explained the visits are now used to determine if existing information is incorrect.

Red Flags and the 2026 Draft Class

Early indications suggest the Bears are applying this new strategy in the 2026 draft. Several players who have met or will meet with the team already have notable concerns. Running back Seth McGowan’s past legal issues (larceny resulting in a three-month jail sentence) are a clear character flag. Wide receiver De’Zhaun Stribling has an undisclosed injury history and questions about his football understanding. Center Jager Burton has dealt with injuries and snapping inconsistencies, although linebacker Jimmy Rolder was a late bloomer, only becoming a starter in his final college season.

These aren’t necessarily deal-breakers, but they explain why the Bears are bringing these players in for closer scrutiny. The fact that they’re being visited suggests the team sees potential, but also recognizes the need for further investigation.

What This Means for Bears Fans

This shift in strategy should temper expectations. Don’t assume a top-30 visit guarantees a player will be drafted. In fact, it might indicate the opposite. It’s a sign the Bears are being diligent and prioritizing thorough evaluation over simply following the traditional pre-draft script.

The Bears’ improved drafting in recent years seems to correlate with this change in approach. By focusing on uncovering potential problems, they’re increasing their chances of drafting players who will contribute to the team’s success.

Position Player School Pre-Draft Concerns & Weaknesses
RB Ashton Jeanty Boise State Volume load at the college level; potential for “tread on the tire” issues.
RB Omarion Hampton North Carolina Lateral agility; sometimes criticized for being a “straight-line” power runner.
RB Kaleb Johnson Iowa Pass protection skills; needs to improve consistency in blitz pickup.
RB Brashard Smith SMU Smaller frame; questions about his ability to be a true “three-down” back.
WR Isaiah Bond Texas Physicality against press coverage; thin frame may struggle with NFL-level jams.
WR Tre Harris Ole Miss Top-finish speed; scouts questioned if he could consistently separate at the next level.
WR Kyle Williams Washington St Route-running polish; relied heavily on athleticism over refined technique.
WR Jaylin Lane Virginia Tech Size limitations; primarily viewed as a slot-only or return specialist.
WR Dontae Fleming Tulane Level of competition and limited production compared to Power 4 peers.
WR Kelly Akharaiyi Miss. State Drops and inconsistent hands; occasionally struggled with concentration.
OT Will Campbell LSU Arm length; measurements suggested a potential required move to Guard.
OT Josh Conerly Jr. Oregon Play strength; needed to add functional mass to handle NFL bull-rushers.
OT Anthony Belton NC State Footwork and speed out of his stance; occasionally sluggish against twitchy rushers.
OL Jonah Savaiinaea Arizona Conditioning and weight management; questions about his ideal pro position.
G Dylan Fairchild Georgia Lateral quickness in space; sometimes struggled when asked to pull or reach.
TE Jalin Conyers Texas Tech In-line blocking; seen more as a “big receiver” than a traditional tight end.
DE Shemar Stewart Texas A&M Production vs. Traits; elite physical tools but lacked high sack numbers in college.
DT Omarr Norman-Lott Tennessee Run defense; undersized for an interior player, leading to anchoring issues.
LB Nick Martin Oklahoma State Coverage instincts; occasionally slow to react to crossing routes in zone.
CB Jahdae Barron Texas Top-end recovery speed; concerns about getting beat deep by burner WRs.
CB Jordan Hancock Ohio State Injury history; durability was a primary focus for teams during the visit.
S Andrew Mukuba Texas Tackling consistency; had a tendency to dive at ankles rather than wrap up.

FAQ

Q: Does a top-30 visit guarantee a player will be drafted by the Bears?
A: No, it does not. The Bears are now using these visits to investigate concerns, meaning a visit could indicate a player is less likely to be drafted.

Q: What types of concerns are the Bears looking for during these visits?
A: Medical concerns, character issues, and questions about a player’s football IQ are all areas the Bears are evaluating.

Q: Are other teams using this strategy?
A: Yes, successful teams like the Ravens, Lions, and Seahawks have adopted a similar approach.

Q: How can I stay updated on the Bears’ pre-draft visits?
A: Follow reputable sports news sources and draft analysts for the latest information.

What do you think of the Bears’ new approach? Share your thoughts in the comments below, and be sure to check out our other articles for more in-depth draft coverage!

You may also like

Leave a Comment