There is no more boring time to be a football fan than the gaping crevice of time between the NFL Draft and the start of training camp. So we're forced to read about Bensonboat and CryinBrian (picked to finish first and second in this weekend's Preakness). When the comments below hit triple digits, I start to worry I'm not doing my job. So let's argue about where we rank in division at each position on the field, starting with...
QUARTERBACK
1st
Aaron Rodgers has never started a professional football game.
Jon Kitna basically stinks.
Tarvaris Jackson won't be starting for the Vikings by mid-season.
The Chicago Bears might not win a championship with Rex Grossman he has had more post-season success than the the other three combined. Hell, Kyle Orton has a better winning percentage, too. I can't see a single logical argument against putting the Bears at the top of this list.
#2 Swubber said . . .1st!
May 15, 2008
#3 Scott said . . .I see where you are coming from but its definately optimistic. Jon Kitna sucks true. But i think Tarvaris Jackson will have a breakthrough season and the vikes will by far be our worst enemy in the midwest. I dont know about Aaron Rodgers but lets be honest. Rex can, at times, be a "not hall of fame QB". But lets see. I think maybe Rex will have a good season too.(didnt know if i should call it comeback or breakthrough season:P)
May 15, 2008
#4 Shady said . . .Kinda hard for me to imagine the Bears on top of anyones QB ratings but you make a good point. I'm rooting for Rex to put it all together this year but I'm certainly not banking on it. I disagree, Swubber, about Tarvaris Jackson. I don't think that kid will be starting for the Vikes or anyone next year. He's one of those tantalizing athletes with flashes but ultimately he's no good. So, bottom line, I'll side with you Jeff and say that I'll take our QB situation above any of the division rivals. But, if Rodgers stays healthy I'm guessing he puts up decent numbers. Just a hunch.
May 15, 2008
#5 LLcoolR said . . .Here's a great question from a Bears fan from Da Site:
"How do you plan on conducting the quarterback competition between Rex Grossman and Kyle Orton in terms of reps in training camp and the preseason, and what are the exact factors the Bears coaching staff will look for to determine who wins the starting job?"
Why is it a great question? Because he asks HOW the QBs will be evaluated.
Lovies answer?
Terrible:
"The quarterback competition is an open competition, and they are both coming into the competition on equal ground. As far as how we’re going to conduct it, we’re going to let them go play. We haven’t named a starter. They know that. They both know that we’ve been evaluating them since we started offseason workouts and it’ll continue up until it’s obvious to us that we know which guy should be the starter (are you kidding me Lovie?). When that’ll happen, it’s hard to say (durrrr). I don’t think you can necessarily gauge exactly who the guy is based solely on practice. There isn’t anything live in practice. So to me I see it going into the preseason, seeing what happens during the games and then making a decision from there."
First of all, does anyone else notice how much Lovie ends his responses with "we'll go from there"? That just pissed me off for some reason. It's like a BS reason to not follow through with your thought or bother to think about the future.
Secondly, he didn't answer the question. WHERE ARE THE SPECIFICS LOVIE? How are you going to evaluate these QBs? Do you even know HOW to evaluate QBs?
As someone who has studied Human Resources in business, I've learned how important it is to evaluate talent in an organization so that the right people are hired for the right position. In order to make the right choices, EVERY ASPECT of the job is specifically described so that even before candidates are considered for the job, there is a list of knowledge skills and abilities (KSAs) that correspond to every position.
After job specifications and descriptions are formed, candidates are then evaluated BASED ON SPECIFIC CRITERIA. The more specific employers get about what they're looking for in an employee, the better they are at evaluating the candidates performance!
While I realize this is only a response to a an letter on da site, it really makes me wonder if Lovie and Co. know how to evaluate talent based on how un-specific, vague and ambiguous his answer was to such a specific and direct question about the most important position on a football team... *sigh*
1. Kitna
2. Grossman?
3. Orton
4. Rodgers
5. Brohm
6. T. JaxWhat an intimidating list. This could be the worst division in the NFL for QBs.
May 15, 2008
#6 jeff said . . .I would agree that the Rex/Orton combo should put us above the rest of the div, but what about the change in philosophy for Detroit? Kitna isn't THAT bad. when he doesn't have to throw 40 times in the mike martz circus, he makes decent enough decisions. i won't even waste my time talking about tarvaris jackson. he'll somehow have a bad season just handing the ball off. i guess i'm a little excited about the mere possibility that the packers might, just MIGHT, have some qb issues to deal with aaron rodgers struggles/gets injured for the first time in my memory. i have been waiting for this for so long. lets just hope rodgers doesnt become the second coming or something crazy like that. that's just too much for me to take. but yeah, go rex/orton!
May 15, 2008
#7 Taylor said . . .i think kitna's shortcomings have been covered up in his last two stops because of the insistence on throwing a ton in cincy and detroit. it's actually easier to stat build then win ballgames...let's see if he can do it.
May 15, 2008
#8 shonbear said . . .Rex or Kyle, I have to say we are the most solid as far as the QB position goes. Unfortunately having the best QB situation in the NFC north isn't enough to win the division, even with a healthy D. Minnesota is gonna be tough. It's all about our running game and the o line giving the QB some time. Even if Rex turns into the pro bowler we all thought he would be in Sept of 06, he still needs some protection and someone to run the ball. I like Forte, but I'm not ready to assume he's ready to carry this team.
May 15, 2008
#9 Blog Down, Chicago Bears said . . .shady,
Lovie provides those lame ambiguous answers to the media because he is arrogant and thinks the fans are not worthy or intelligent enough to know the whole answer.
Rex and Kyle are the best in the division, but Tavarious J might look better because of Berrian and Peterson taking pressure off him.
The Bears D needs to crush both those options and him in the process.
May 15, 2008
#10 Rancid said . . .Wow! It's been years since we could say that we might, possibly, just have the best quarterback in the division. Thank you, Farv-uh-ruh.
With that said, Rex is either no. 1 or no.4. See, even he doesn't know. Basically, he's either brilliant or Chad Hutchinson-reincarnated.
Hopefully, there will be a distracting Brohm v. Rodgers controversy, Tavaris will regress and who's the Lions guy? Kitna! Jon Kitna! Are you f'n me?
I'm going to make like Kitna and predict:
1. Kitna
2. Rodgers
3. Rexy/K.O.
4. T.Jaxxx (looks dirty, huh?)But I hope Rex or The Beard will prove me wrong.
Gosh, Jeff. I wish Blog Down could see as many comments...
Damn your quality Web page!!!
May 16, 2008
#11 Jerseybearfan said . . .As far as overall QB situation I agree we have the best set up. I would possibly go with Kitna but I tend to agree more with jeff concerning how Martz affected his performance. I think he's going to have a downer year. Plus he has little behind him. Drew Stanton was a 2nd round pick but went on IR during training camp and checking their roster showed only one other QB: Dan Orlovsky. I'd say they're one ugly sack away from a heap of trouble. I'll also take Rex/Orton over Rodgers/Brohm. In fact, I rate GB last in the QB department.
1. Rex/Orton/Me
2. Kitna/Stanton/Nobody
3. Tjax/Bollinger/Ferotte/Booty (4 backups are better than one)
4. Rodgers/Brohm. FlynnMay 16, 2008
#12 shonbear said . . .I just watched Mr Smith's Q&A on DaSite and I have to say his answers really piss me off!!!!!! Why does he even bother to answer at all......Dont you wish he had a little Jim Mora Sr in him >> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C3NDiMorX-o&feature=related
May 16, 2008
#13 Jerseybearfan said . . .How about our outher opponents outside the division:
Manning
Dellohme
Garcia
McNabb
Bulger
Carter
Ryan?
Garrard
Breeze
SchaubWhere do our guys fall on that list?
Not at the bottom, but definitely not at the top either. By the time we play some of them, there will definitely be some QB changes all over this list, but hoprfully not ours...
May 16, 2008
#14 jeff said . . .opps...I forgot
Im going out on a limb here.....
1. KYLE "NECKBEARD" ORTON
2. Kitna
3. Rodgers
4. Tavarious JMay 16, 2008
#15 David Adam Archuletta said . . .shon, pretty damn close to the bottom. but all we gotta do is get into the playoffs. three teams cant stop us from that.
May 16, 2008
#16 animal said . . .1. We just DON'T KNOW who is going to step up until they step up. Who would have guessed that Cleveland QB Andersen would break out last season? Where did that come from? Not too long ago, Favre was supposed to be washed up, Garrard was a backup, etc. We just don't know.
2. On blog sites for other NFC North teams, they are ripping Wrecks and Horton the way we are ripping their qbs. In Green Bay, they think Rodgers one good quarter last years means he'll be awesome this year. In Minnesota, they think this is the year that TJack rewards his coach's confidence. In Detroit, they're choosing to remember the first half of 2007 when Kitna led the league in passing. Each team sees their qb with rose colored glasses and thinks the other three or four qbs are wretched.
THAT SAID: I just personally haven't seen the whole upside of Tarvaris the way other people do. What am I missing? I still think Rodgers is one of those Tedford system guys that will not be able to make the transition to the big time. On the other hand, I do think Kitna is an adequate or solid qb at this veteran stage of his career. But finally, I absolutely think Rex has the best chance of the four NFC North starters to be the one that steps up, breakout year! We know it's in him (first half of 2006), he's got momentum (2nd half of 07 before the injury), he's got a good qb coach, there are millions of dollars on the line thanks to the one year contract, and he has every kind of experience (from big postseason wins, to cataclysmic disasters and everything in between)
My rankings;
1. Rex throwing to Hester streaking down the sideline
2. Kitna, doing just enough as a savvy vet to make you say: Didn't he used to suck?
3. Tarvaris Jackson - as long as he can handoff, the Vikings are still the team to beat.
4. Aaron Rodgers - joining Akili Smith, Kyle Boller and Joey Harrington in the Jeff Tedford Big Tease Hall of FameMay 16, 2008
#17 Max said . . .Kitna? Seriously? If you would rather have Kitna than Orton/Grossman, you are retarded and need to pull the spoon out of your ass.
Good post Shon (12). Rex is still one of the better QBs in the NFC.
Oh ya, and "pissed off" gargles balls.May 16, 2008
#18 jdawg said . . .I hate this. . .
But right now at this very moment, Kitna is the best starting QB in the NFC North. He will not finish the year as the best, but he is definitley, right now at this moment, the best in the division.
He makes mistakes and he throws a ton which helps the stats. And I love Rex and KO alot, but Kitna has veteran leadership and a strong arm. . . its not his fault he plays for the Lions (or is it? Did he go there through FA? cause if he did, hes a fool)
Rex and/or KO could jump over him by the halfway point, but one or the other needs to show me they can run this offense to the point of winning games. And honestly, neither has shown me enough to warrant the title "best QB in the division".
Both have the potential, Rex with maybe a higher ceiling, but KO really has shown me more cause he wins game and limits the mistakes. I have him over Rex right now. (I still think Rex is starting the year though) Rex just makes me want to believe there is a superstar inside him.
To hell with Rodgers and T-Jack. . .
May 16, 2008
#19 mikebdot said . . .to be honest... I have no idea.
If Rex can finally shake that turd out of the bottom of his pants he can be good, but he still makes those crazy-bad throws.
Jackson will be interesting to watch. He'll benefit from AP and that line, so he's going to see a lot of 8 men in the box. He's got a cannon, but can he make the quick throws?
Kitna bugs the shit out of me.
Rogers? How the hell can anyone know?
May 16, 2008
#20 Pissed Off said . . .Shady (re: #4) In that Lovie Q&A he does actually address the other (besides QB) elephant in the room (re: Hester):
We definitely see his role expanding on offense. Now you can say he’s had about a year at the receiver position, and I’ve seen him grow so much. With that, he should be able to do more for us offensively. That’s the plan. As far as that taking away from his special teams role, that’s not necessarily what will happen. We’re going to see how that plays out. But I see him still handling the returns and becoming a bigger part of the offense.
That's good news. I'm hoping when he says "we're going to see how that plays out" it means "if he only has about 3 or 4 actual returns a game, no big deal, but if teams begin to kick more to him, we might remove him from the field every so often when he says he's tired". If that's the rationale, I have no problem with it. Likewise, if he continues to score TDs on STs and he is not contributing at WR or dropping passes, running wrong routes, etc., or he is just plain tired and not producing TDs or big plays, then they should limit his offensive snaps (or remove them altogether). Especially if Bennett, Monk or Bradley step up.
He also put the notion of using Kellen Davis at DE to rest, which is good. I like definitive answers.
As for the QB question Shady rips into, I'm not that concerned with his skirting of the specifics. He answered the first part of the question. "Seeing what happens" is quite vague, but whatever. I just like the fact that they have realized game situations differ greatly from practice and are going to take that into account.
John Kitna is obviously the most accomplished player in the division. He has finished multiple seasons without being injured or yanked from the starting lineup after taking over. His main problem is he is old. The O-line in Detroit is absolutely terrible. He was sacked 114 times the past two seasons! That negates quite a bit of the 8276 yards he's racked up. Also, it has the benefit (from a stat standpoint) of putting the team in a 3rd and 10+ and gaining 10- yards. He lost 700 yards being sacked in those two seasons. Which is still quite a few yards gained each season, but they play from behind a lot. More so in '06.
May 16, 2008
#21 Phil from SATX said . . .Nor can I. I like Rex as the best QB but he's still an unknown (even though he's been in the league, what, 5 years) as is Tjack and Rodgers. Kitna is the only guy you know what you get with, and thats a pretty solid QB who makes decent decisions. If consistency is your logic for choosing on this list, then Kitna is #1, I dont mind the guy, he doesnt scare anyone like Good Rex can but he is a solid QB year in and year out so I might put Kitna at the top of the list.
Tjack nobody knows about, maybe he's good, probably not but he's too unknown to be judged at this point. Same with Rodgers, he's been around seemingly for years but never plays, he's also injury prone but bottom line, he's unknown too
#1 Rex-if he stays consistent like the stretch he had post benching, hes #1 with a bullet
#2 Kitna-consistent year in and year out, good numbers too, but that might change now that "pass happy" Martz is out so we'll see.
#3 Rodgers- mainly cuz I think Tjack is HORRIBLE
#4 Tjack-unknownON another note, isnt it going to be great, for the 1st time in like 17 years we get to lineup against the pack and #4 isnt under center. Rodgers is going to get a rude awakening playing the NFC north consistently as Wale, Brown, Tommie and Co. along with the Williams wall and Jared Allen in MN are going to crush this kid 4 times this year. Welcome to the NFC North kid.
Oh yeah and animal eats eskimo dick
May 16, 2008
#22 mikebdot said . . .animal and PO'd need to make up, let's get beyond name calling. I am also not bothered by Lovie's non-answer, because it's my premise that Lovie already knows who's going to be the starter, and providing the world with specifics that may come back to bite you when you install Rex despite Orton looking good does Lovie no good at all.
1) Rex
2) Kitna
3) Rodgers
4) JacksonKitna really should get the nod because of his consistency and years in, but there's so much more upside to Rex it's not a hard choice for me as to which I'd rather have on my roster - but I might really say it's a wash between those two. Rodgers I think will be good for the very short amount of time he survives on the field before being hurt. He'll make Rex look like the Cal Ripkin of football.
TJackson is like an upgraded Quincy Carter, and folks, that's not good. Don't see it, AT ALL, with him. On the other hand, I'm just a wee bit nervous about both Minny's and GB's QB pickups in the draft - both should have a chance to start this year, and then we'll see if we missed anything.
I love the signals being sent by Lovie re: Hester. I think it means they're thinking like I'm thinking - that sober minds may be mulling over the high degree of difficulty involved in turning Hester into an elite every-down receiver and the impact it can have on his ST role. The more the other (real) receivers look good, the more we'll hear this. Note, however, that this may be contract negotiation strategy too - floating out the fact that he might not be used as much at receiver. Hester's camp is going to want to get paid for the upside of him as receiver (since kick returners only get so much).
Despite Tjax sucking, Minny seems to be the real threat this year. They are a well-run team and pretty 3 dimensional, with the best runner in the game and now the frightening addition of the (21st) best receiver in the league! (naw,
B-mice, not scared of you yet, just can't wait to have Mike Brown scare you into running away from the ball, not that Tjax can get it close to you anyway).But good rushing D, good Oline, best rusher, better receivers, strong home dome advantage, make them a scary matchup.
May 16, 2008
#23 JWilson said . . .Phil: Rodgers hasn't been hurt any more frequently than Rex's first few seasons...
If Rex doesn't finish this season, can we all agree he should not be signed again? Unless it's for real cheap and is in a backup role? He hasn't finished 3 or 4 seasons. Kitna is far more durable, even after getting murdered in the backfield the past few seasons.
The only upside for Rex is his age. When Kitna is throwing the ball well, I see no difference between his "upside" and Rex's. That is why I would give the nod to Kitna.
Kitna
Rex
Orton
Rodgers
TJaxMay 16, 2008
#24 LOL said . . .Kitna is washed up. His better days are behind him. And he better not fall back on his fortune telling skills for his future.
T Jax and the Vikes are going to have a bad and disappointing year. (for Vikings fans) Now that defenses around the league know what kind of runner AP is they are going to adjust to it and stop him! Plus he is going to hurt his knee and be out 6 or 7 games. TJ will still make a lot of mistakes. He will take a lot of sacks, and throw a ton of INT's. Plus the Vikes have how many QB's on the roster? Does that spell confidence in the starter??
Rogers is not Farve! Rogers is not the second coming. He'll average 3 INT's a game. He'll take a few sacks on Lambeau Field and realize he's not fit to be Green Bays QB. Or any teams starting QB. Brohm will be starting at some point during the season, and he's not Farve either!
All of the Bears fans here, and not a lot of confidence in Rex or Kyle as far as the best QB in the division. WHAT'S UP WITH THAT?!! We have 2 proven winning QB's. Two guys that know they belong in this league as starters and have proved it! Two guys who, can be at the top of the league if they just tweak a few things in their games. Two guys who will fairly compete for a starting job. One guy guy who will get it. That guy will have success this season. That guy will still be a Bear, and the other will be let go at the end of the season. Rex will still be a Bear next year!
One QB in the NFC North will be in the playoffs. And he don't wear a yellow,purple, or light blue jersey.
May 16, 2008
#25 mikebdot said . . .Are you kidding us, Jeff? Kitna is Joe Montana-esque compared to Grossman or Orton. I know he's not very good, but he at least can see over the line and hit some talented receivers. I know, I know, maybe if RG and KO had somebody decent to throw to, it might be different.
Nobody knows how good Aaron Rodgers will be, but until he plays in an actual "game", we will have to suspend judgment. Tarvaris Jackson looks like a project, but he too has some REAL weapons, like Peterson and that monster line.
Hope for the best for the Bears? YOU BET! But think our QB situation is better than anybody else's? Don't make me LOL.
May 16, 2008
#26 beardown1982 said . . .Meant to say 3 OF 4...
May 16, 2008
#27 Phil from SATX said . . .wow...that is an embarrassing conference of quarterbacks. I don't think it even deserves ranking...let's just muck them all into one category of not very good.
May 16, 2008
#28 mikebdot said . . .I remember going over this earlier in the offseason - Rogers has been in two NFL games and got injured in both. He has no history of playing and not getting hurt, so there is no comparison with Rex. He's been healthy riding the bench.
Hell yes, if Rex gets injured and has more than 4 games lost to injury this season, he's done with us.
Jon Kitna can see over lines and has great receivers and still threw more INTs than TDs last year. I'm tired of hearing about Rex's height and small hands - we all know those are his negative attributes. We've also seen great things that he's done on the field.
May 16, 2008
#29 mikebdot said . . .Phil: Rex started his career by breaking his finger in game number 3. Then in game #3 of season #2 he is injured for the season. Then in preseason (not in a game) he breaks his ankle and missed the season.
So, Rex is beating him by one at this point in his career.
Rodgers has appeared in (not started) 7 games throwing 59 passes and was hurt twice. Rex threw 122 passes and was hurt 3 times. That's regular season numbers. Both played in preseason for three seasons as well. So, they're about equal.
May 16, 2008
#30 Pissed Off said . . .And, once again, meaning to say "not in a game where he could acquire statistics". I added that after including the number of passes. Anyhow, it was in a preseason game, not in a regular season game. I was meaning to stress that preseason games actually should account for some amount of contact that could injure either.
May 16, 2008
#31 Phil from SATX said . . .I read that response from Lovie again and it horrible. He didnt even answer the question, not one bit. He just sidestepped, what the hell Lovie? I guess maybe I shouldnt be that upset cuz I think we all know who's going to be starting week one. The weird thing is what if for some freakish reason, both are healthy and Orton gets the nod week one. We've almost made it a foregone conclusion, or at least I have, that Rex will be #1 but if he did go with Orton would that restore faith in the BT by the fans?
May 16, 2008
#32 jeff said . . .Mike, if you're comparing early Rex injuries with early Rodgers injuries, then I completely agree - no one had reason to think that Rex could ever stay healthy back then. Then he was healthy for two games plus 19 games plus 7 games before being hurt again. So he's at least proven he can go a stretch without being injured.
Rodgers may well show the same thing, but he may also be a chronic injury waiting to happen. He has gone through no proven stretch.
May 16, 2008
#33 Phil from SATX said . . .lol, i'm basing this on pure data. kitna? has he won a playoff game? funny how the playoff game argument is only used to prove people's points when it's, well, helpful. it's very easy to say rex sucks, kyle sucks, bears don't have a quarterback. but it's (a) not true and (b) find me the guy in the division you feel more comfortable with starting against the colts in indy.
May 16, 2008
#34 Pissed Off said . . .PO'd, let's say you're Lovie and you know that as the coach of the Bears, you've already decided who's better between Rex and Kyle. Can you say that? No - you've told everyone that there will be an open QB competition and you've promised the same to Kyle in order to induce him to sign that contract.
So then some inquiring mind asks you to clarify how the QB competition will work, exactly. What are you supposed to say? Give details on how his scoresheet's going to work? There is no such thing for Lovie. He already knows how these two guys play - they've been his players for 4-5 years now. He's seen both of them play in games. This doesn't mean there's not going to be a competition - there's always a competition, for every single position. But the only way Kyle has a chance to win this competition is if Rex inexplicably looks like complete shit in preseason and Kyle looks like the second coming of Sid Luckman. Without such a glaring disparity, it ain't gonna happen - Rex will be the starter. He already has his formed opinion of who's better, and only giant deviations from his previously held opinion would work to change his mind. We're not going to see those deviations, ergo Rex.
We all know Lovie knows how to sidestep a question as good as anybody, and he had no choice but to sidestep that one.
May 16, 2008
#35 Phil from SATX said . . .Lovie may be thinking he's gonna with Rex at this point cuz he's seen them both before in preseason and in training camp and Rex is clearly the better guy so why would he think different at this point? However, Lovie may truly be open to an open competition....he's just pretty confident Rex will be the guy cuz he's seen that Rex is better. What I'm arguing as well is that he still could have answered the question. He could have said we're going to base in on accuraccy, ability to make quick decisions, better knowledge of the system/plays, etc, etc. I dont understand why he couldnt list a few of the criteria.
May 16, 2008
#36 mikebdot said . . .I think there's just no incentive for him to answer in a way that someone could use to trap him or put him in a corner later. He wants to be able to use his own judgement and not provide people with ammo to question him when he makes his decision whenever that happens.
I thought a more significant answer related to his comments on Metcalf. He said "he's been around us and we like his potential." Fuck that Lovie - he's had 25 starts in five of six seasons. He flat out sucks. His only potential is of being a lameass crappy lineman.
Lovie says "no plans to sign Ruben" - hopefully he's lying there. I guess we'd better hope for Beekman to be good at this point, because Metcalf gives us NOTHING.
Bad news there Bear fans.
May 16, 2008
#37 Phil from SATX said . . .I actually have as little confidence in Beekman/Metcalf as I have with Tait moving back to the right and performing well at such an old age.
Phil: fair enough regarding Rodgers, just sayin', the starts are actually very similar regarding the injury bug. Though, Rodgers still has all his ligaments in his knees. Well, I have no idea what his injury history is prior to the Packers, so that might not be true either...
jeff: Honestly, I'd almost rather have Kitna. He's never had a defense that was worth a shit. Ever. I'd be half tempted to take that chance if it were presented somehow. It won't be, but hypothetically, sure, I'd just asoon have Kitna out there. He has more than 2 games from last season to say "wow, those were good".
As for playoff experience, once again, he had no D. Defense wins playoff games. Devin Hester helps too! :) Well, at least helps you get there and get homefield advantage.
May 16, 2008
#38 mikebdot said . . .That brings up a fact about the end of the season in the Rex/Kyle comparison - I seem to remember the D playing MUCH better in those last two games that were wins for us with Kyle at the helm. This certainly helped his cause.
And bad D has had an impact in nearly all our losses last year.
Bottom line, with our D playing like it did in early 2006, I believe we will be winning most of our games whether it be Rex, Kyle or even the late great Brian Greaseman behind center. All of those guys were capable of directing the team to wins.
May 16, 2008
#39 Max said . . .You know, fuck it, I'd rather have Grossman or Orton.
Kitna's defense was ok in Seattle and they had Ricky Watters. His weapons there weren't good at WR, but still. He fumbles just as much, if not more than, Grossman or Orton. Plus, he's kind of a douche.
I think I'll be satisfied by what we get out of either Grossman or Orton this season. I still have faith in them, even though I probably shouldn't.
May 16, 2008
#40 mikebdot said . . .Jeff. . . I wouldnt be confident with any of our QB's against the Colts. . . thats not to say that I would be more confident with Kitna, but come on. I wouldnt feel confident against the Colts unless we had a legit superstar QB. (Brady, maybe Anderson, although I know it was just one year, Drew Brees, Romo maybe) Not a fair question.
I hope they give me reason to believe, but to many injuries and to much inconsistency will make me sweat come game time.
May 16, 2008
#41 Max said . . .More Lovie crap:
http://www.chicagobears.com/news/NewsStory.asp?STORY_ID=4700
You can’t let one guy take you out of your game plan. (re: Hester and the prospect of kicking to him or not if he were on the other team).
Two Words: Steve Smith
Change your fucking game plan to squash the player. I'm still pissed off about that game against Carolina. Grrr.
May 16, 2008
#42 Pissed Off said . . .And to hell with Trey Wingo. . . just took a cheap shot at the Bears on NFL Live about our quarterback situation. . . Douchebag
May 16, 2008
#43 mikebdot said . . .Oh my God is it hard to read Lovies responses. How boing and nondescript can a guy be?
May 16, 2008
#44 Decatur Staleys # 7 said . . .PO'd: Do Okwo or Williams have a shot at beating out Hunter? We won't know 'til camp. Fucker. I just want to know if they even have a 10% shot. Or 5%. Tell me something, anything but "Hunter is good".
"I like tater tots!"
May 16, 2008
#45 Al In Wi said . . .I'm not being sarcastic but could somebody explain"Why Grossman has more upside?" Because I feel you about seen everything Grossman got as far as talent.
As far as the division ranking
1 Kitna(based on the fact he was able to finish the season behind center)
2 T Jaxx (what does he really have to do except hand the ball off)
3 "Cannon" &"Neckbeard"(There sucess depends on the oline.period)
4 Rodgers (bias I can't pick anything from GB over the Bears)May 16, 2008
#46 Gimme a break said . . .Tavaris Jackson is the worst quarterback I've ever seen a team intentionally start. Yes, there have been worse in the league but those guys were starting because of injury or a lost season somewhere along the way. This guy is brutal. The fact that the vikings are chosing to start him is unreal. The ego of Brad Childress...
Rodgers has played in three games and been hurt twice. He is basically a rookie at this point. Since it's his first year he's due for the ups and downs that go with that.
Kitna is a excellent backup quarterback, but get's exposed the longer he plays. He lacks the arm to be a good starter.
Leaving Rex Grossman a player who has taken his team to the super bowl as the best in the division at this point.
May 16, 2008
#47 Z said . . .I love how everyone says Grossman "took" the Bears to the Super Bowl.
John Kitna, Aaron Rodgers or any other mediocre QB would have "taken" the Bears to the Super Bowl in 2006.
May 17, 2008
#48 Z said . . .Interesting QB debates. I know I will take Rex and Orton over any other team in our division's 2 QB's. At the worst Orton is a decent game manager.
When I talked about picking up some of the likely washed up FA's that are still out there in the last thread, my thinking was that with a D that will at least be good if not great or elite and #23 instantly giving us the #1 ST in the league we only need an O that can move the chains to spell the D and chew up time and hit some FG's and eventually pound a few in because their O can't stay on the field instead of ours.
I think 18 points a game should get us in the playoffs if the D stays healthy and we don't 3 and out all game. Lovie's winning percentage drops dramatically at 17 (don't remember where I read that awhile ago). 23 a game sounds more Chicago appropriate but whatever gets the W.
I figure if we lock Hester up we can have this same scenario for the next 2-4 years B4 the D is over the hill. So on O we just need some people to do a consistent job, not spectacular or potential game breakers every time they touch the ball (ahh a Bears fan can only dream, thanks Walter for the memories).
That is what makes me nervous about needing so many rookies and unproven players to make the O decent. We don't need that much but we need it now while it's only 1/3 rd of our team that can afford to be OK and still have us win. So by having some vets that may be washed up but may be able to be rejuvinated for one heroic run B4 being set out to pasture if the rooks or unprovens aren't getting it done seems like an acceptable risk for a little postponement of developing some future prospects.
May 17, 2008
#49 Al In WI said . . .Plus as someone said earlier we had some spots pretty much wasted last year. I doubt many decent WR's will be cut by other teams but maybe some more O-line is my big wish. (Can a healthy Rueben Brown be worse than Metcalf?) I wouldn't complain about a RB, DT or S either even with the draft picks. We can't seem to get enough of those.
And if someone can pretty much guarantee a touchback, how many times a game will that come into play for an advantage of how many yards more than we give up on average now 10-15 yards times what 3-6 kicks (no idea). That could add up to a lot of yards each game in our advantage. This is a team that can win with the field position battle with our punter and good as "I'm rich bitch" Gould.
1 last thing, if you are going to give people shit for their spelling and/or grammar, don't F it up yourself in your correction/criticism. It is hard to top that on the douchebag scale. Have a nice day.
GO BEARS!!!
May 17, 2008
#50 BearsTransplant said . . .#46 you are right he had nothing to do with Bears going to the super bowl in 2006. He didn't lead the league in 100 plus rating games. He didn't move the offense with the same supporting cast from the bottom of the league to the top half. He didn't lead comeback wins against Minnesota, Tampa, and most importantly Seatle in the divisional playoffs.
Without Rex Grossman's play in that game against seatle, we're a one an done team that year. He led a game tying drive late in the fourth and the game winning drive in OT was all on his razor shot to Davis.
I agree gimme a break.May 17, 2008
1. Deception is part of football. That ends up including the fans. Most successfull coaches don't reveal any strategy whatsoever. Lovie and Co. have said one thing and then done another; it doesn't mean they weren't thinking about it. Do I place utmost trust in their decision making? Not really. I just have no real way to tell what it really is.
2. Please, don't get on the Ruben Brown train. He's so washed up, all he can do on running plays is try to wall-block since his knees are done, and can only pass block becuase he's so fat. Wathcing him on running plays last year was like watching Fat Albert play buck-buck. We desperately need young, aggressive run-blockers at the guard position. I know he was a locker-room favorite, but he's not very good. Seriously. John St. Clair makes a better guard than him at this point.
3. As far as the QBs go, it could always be worse; imagine, if you will:
Alex Smith/C. Weinke
J.P. Losman/J. Edwards
J. Beck/C. Lemon/McCown
D. Culpepper/ J. Russel
B. Croyle/Damon Huard
J. Flacco/Troy Smith/Kyle Boller
M. Ryan/Michael Vick
All 19 of the Buccaneers' QBsK. Warner/M. Leinert (Warner goes haywire when you look at him funny, Leinert is an undedicated USC party-boy)
Kellen Clemens/Chad Pennington (Oh, wait, they signed M. Tuisasopo. Vowels mean championships)
And that's OUTSIDE the NFC North. I'm no Rex apologist, but I like the two of them better than anyone on this list. You could even argue for a Vince Young or Jason Campbell. Above average D, O line should be good, special teams spectacular as always. Bear down, damnit.4. And thanks for bringing up the Seattle game Al in WI. Best/drunkenests/coldest, best Rex performance/footballgame that I have ever, and probably will ever attend.
May 21, 2008
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.