I think if we actually have people reading this site, let's start something of a conversation down there in the "Comments" section.
Here's the question:
AT WHAT POINT, IF ANY, DOES LOVIE SMITH TURN TO REX GROSSMAN AS THE STARTING QUARTERBACK?
#2 WCG said . . .We do not start him unless Orton starts making bad decisions consistently. At least for the rest of this year. Next year its an open competition. But for now, if its not broken, dont fix it. Besides, at this point, Orton has more game experience than Rex does anyway.
November 23, 2005
#3 Noah Brier said . . .Never. Even at the end of this year Orton needs to be named starter going into next year. Grossman has not made it through three straight seasons. I don't care if they are all freak injuries, we cannot put all of our time into him for him to go down again.
November 23, 2005
#4 jeff said . . .I'm torn. On one hand I think Grossman might give us a better chance to win. On the other, we've gotten this far with Orton and I worry what would happen if the rookie was looking over his shoulder.
November 23, 2005
#5 moose juice said . . .I think he's already looking over his shoulder.
Remember, Craig Krenzel won three straight starts last year and I continue to believe that wins and losses are not the proper barometer for judging a quarterback. We are currently playing football with a quarterback whose role is to not fuck up.
He's played well but one cannot argue with the fact that he's the lowest rated quarterback in the entire National Football League.
I don't see any reason that we should have to hold teams to 10 points or less to win games. The '85 Bears were the greatest defense of all-time but they also led the NFL in scoring offensively that year. If Rex Grossman means more offensive productivity, isn't it in the best interest of the franchise to turn to him?
Again, I don't know the answer to this question but I'd certainly like to know that the best available player at every position is on the football field each and every Sunday.
November 25, 2005
#6 Noah Brier said . . .The answer to the question depends on what Orton can develop into. Could Grossman develop into more than Orton? We won't know the answer to that question for 5 years or more. Are either of these going to blossom into a prize QB - the leader of the bears for the next 10-12 years? If not, cut bait. In order for Orton to keep his job, the bears must believe that he has the same or better potential as Grossman. Do they? My gut tells me they don't. Orton will backup Grossman next year and Grossman will have a season similar to Orton's. This is sad because the QB saga needs to come to an end. The D needs the complimentary O to go to the big one.
November 28, 2005
#7 Reverend Dave said . . .I don't know, am I the only one who thinks Orton has potential for the future?
November 28, 2005
#8 Noah Brier said . . .not the way he played against tampa.
November 28, 2005
#9 moose juice said . . .Even with how he played against Tampa. If we want to win now, I agree, Grossman may be a better option. However, if we're talking about a future franchise quarterback, I think I'd put Orton a hair ahead of Grossman at the moment.
November 28, 2005
#10 Max said . . .Without some playing time for Grossman, how will we ever know? I like Orton's play thus far. I expected a bad repeat of last season when Rex went down. Orton has held his own - a respectable job well done. But, is it the QB position that is the problem or the WR? I think it is the QB spot - the passing accuracy is mediocre at best. What I don't know is which one of these guys has more potential to become a top 10 QB within the next 2-3 years. Do either or them?
November 28, 2005
#11 jeff said . . .i think grossman may be the better QB. But I say stick with Orton because Rex hasnt been in a game situation for the past 13 weeks. And even then it was preseason. The man has got to be rusty. Plus, Orton may run the offense a little bit better just cause he is more used to it. Future wise, I like that we have 2 QB's that have potential to be great. I'm going to go with Grossman being the better of the 2 But, as of right now, I am not looking past Green Bay.
November 28, 2005
#12 Mike said . . .I think it's impossible for anyone to win the who is better now argument? For one, Orton is the lowest rated quarterback in the game. So if Grossman came in and was the second lowest, he'd be better?
I just see a quarterback missing wide open reads and I don't care how long you've been in the league...you've got to hit open men.
November 29, 2005
#13 Chad said . . .Well,, in my eyes Orton is only a puppet on strings, basically he is only doing what side lines are telling him to do.. I think they might want to let him open up a bit, see what he is made of, he might just suprize alot of us fans..
I have a hard time passing any judgement here cuz well unlike most people who are writing,, I live in a part of the country that really don't propmote "Bears Ball".. Yes people I have been a Bears fan since I could walk and i regret I don't get to see them play more,,
Lets Blow Out Da Pack
December 3, 2005
#14 Scott said . . .I have no reason to believe that Kyle Orton will not be a better pro than Rex Grossman. Orton is bigger and has a better arm. I don't know about you, but I like my QBs like I like my drinks, tall and strong. And Kyle is both. Look around the league, the best qb's are very tall. Manning, Palmer, Brady, Culpepper. I like QB's who can see over the line. Not little dwarfs like Grossman. He may be listed at 6'1" but I'll be damned if the guy is even 5'11" in spikes.
December 3, 2005
I don't know about starting but he needs to get some playing time in to see what we have.With the slim leads that Orton is providing that may never happen. Therefore it will take a Bears loss to get REX in.
December 7, 2005
Here at DaBearsBlog, you are free to kill us or the Bears as you so wish. You are not free, however, to be an asshole. So if you spew racism or ill-meaning foul language (cursing about football is just fine) or anything of that ilk, your comments ain't gonna last long, jerk.