The Bears Offseason Thread

[Chocolate Milk]

 

All I'm saying is that it is very rare for a QB to develop into a good QB in year 5 or later. By the end of 4 years, if that QB has played all 4 years or sat on the bench for 1, 2, or 3 of those years-at the end of the 4th year it is known if the QB will develop or not. Maybe with Rex's injury history that will give him to the end of year 5-maybe. It's also possible that some QB's are simply given up on too soon. It's just true that it's not likely that a QB will suddenly break through so late into their career (yes, just 4 years in that sounds strange, but it's true), no matter how many years experience they have actually playing. It's happened to a few, but for most it doesn't.

 

your strange and pointless micro-analysis does little to shed light on the issue, here.

 

I think the reason that most QB's don't have a performace jump in their 5th year is clear and it doesn't apply to Grossman. By the 4th year, most QB's have played enough games to see what they have to offer and most development will probably have occured by then. Not the case with Grossman.

 

That's why I tried to show a page ago about QB's who came in during their 3rd season or so for the first time. Those QB's had more success then either Grossman or a QB who starts from his rookie year. All I'm saying is that Grossman is behind the curve. He doesn't have the same amount of success that normally a player who is just starting for the first time in his 3rd or 4th season usually does. That certainly could be because of his injuries though.

 

As I said also, one of the reasons that I'm skeptical of Grossman's development is completion percentage. Here are the QB's with under 57 percent completion percentage since 2002:

 

2002: Blake, Vick, Brooks, Plummer, Carr, Matthews, Ramsey, Hutchinson, Harrington

2003: Collins, Blake, Carr, Johnson, Harrington, Gannon, Ramsey, Boller, Stewart

2004: Bledsoe, Vick, Collins, Harrington, Boller, Dorsey, Feeley, Brunell

2005: Bollinger, Brooks, Collins, Eli Manning, Ferotte, Orton, Losman

2006: Leinhart, Hasselbeck, Favre, Plummer, Grossman, Gradkowski, Walter, Vick, Young

 

There are some good names on this list that were good prospects. In 2002, Brooks was in his 3rd year and having a good year except for a bad completion percentage. Carr, Ramsey, and Harrington were in their rookie years.

2003-the 3 rookies appear again, and Boller is a rookie.

2004-Feeley is being developed in this year, along with Harrington, Boller, and Vick

2005-Eli appears, along with Losman, who only threw 228 passes that year.

2006-Leinhart and Grossman appear in their first year starting.

 

There's one big thing on this list-nobody who started out with such a bad completion percentage is developing, with the possible exception of Losman (who was only in for a few games the year he made the list).

Brooks, Carr, Ramsey, Harrington, Boller, Feeley, Eli, Vick-all supposed to be great QB's, none could improve their completion percentages. It's not easy to do, which is why you see very few here who appear on this list and then develop. That's the other big reason why Grossman is in trouble unless he can break the mold.

 

Why just take those few years? That's hardly a signifigant sample size. In any event, many QB's have had poor completion % and have improved them over the course of their careers.

 

Matt Hassleback had a 54.8 completion % in his first year starting.

 

Alex Smith had a 50% completion % in his first year and a 58.1% this year. Quite an improvement.

 

McNabb had a 58% and a 57% in his first 2 years starting.

 

Delhomme had a 59.2% his first year with the Panthers and a 58.2 the next year. He had a 61% last year.

 

Drew Bledsoe had a 49.9% in his first year starting.

 

Troy Aikman 52.9% and a 56%, before posting a 65.3% in his third year.

 

Carr went from 52.5% to 56% the 61% and has improved to a 68% this year

 

Trent Green had a 54.6% his first year a 60% his second year and a 56% his third year

 

Jesus man, even Peyton Manning had a 56.7 completion % his first year starting.

 

Do I need to keep going? What tend does Grossman have to buck here exactly?

[CubColtPacer]

Grossman is pretty much on par with most QBs that have had under 25 starts.

 

Exactly.

 

CubColtPacer, the point you're ignoring in saying that most QBs don't make a jump in their 5th season is that Rex hasn't been on the field as much as any of these QBs. If you look at starts or games played, Rex is exactly where he should be and has a great chance of progressing and developing further.

 

I don't believe that's true-I think he's behind other QB's who have gone into years 3 and 4 with few professional starts, and I tried to show that with the stats of their first full years a page or two ago. I do understand though the dead horse argument though, so I'll try to find the stat I'm looking for and not keep hitting the same point over and over :D

[CubColtPacer]

 

All I'm saying is that it is very rare for a QB to develop into a good QB in year 5 or later. By the end of 4 years, if that QB has played all 4 years or sat on the bench for 1, 2, or 3 of those years-at the end of the 4th year it is known if the QB will develop or not. Maybe with Rex's injury history that will give him to the end of year 5-maybe. It's also possible that some QB's are simply given up on too soon. It's just true that it's not likely that a QB will suddenly break through so late into their career (yes, just 4 years in that sounds strange, but it's true), no matter how many years experience they have actually playing. It's happened to a few, but for most it doesn't.

 

your strange and pointless micro-analysis does little to shed light on the issue, here.

 

I think the reason that most QB's don't have a performace jump in their 5th year is clear and it doesn't apply to Grossman. By the 4th year, most QB's have played enough games to see what they have to offer and most development will probably have occured by then. Not the case with Grossman.

 

That's why I tried to show a page ago about QB's who came in during their 3rd season or so for the first time. Those QB's had more success then either Grossman or a QB who starts from his rookie year. All I'm saying is that Grossman is behind the curve. He doesn't have the same amount of success that normally a player who is just starting for the first time in his 3rd or 4th season usually does. That certainly could be because of his injuries though.

 

As I said also, one of the reasons that I'm skeptical of Grossman's development is completion percentage. Here are the QB's with under 57 percent completion percentage since 2002:

 

2002: Blake, Vick, Brooks, Plummer, Carr, Matthews, Ramsey, Hutchinson, Harrington

2003: Collins, Blake, Carr, Johnson, Harrington, Gannon, Ramsey, Boller, Stewart

2004: Bledsoe, Vick, Collins, Harrington, Boller, Dorsey, Feeley, Brunell

2005: Bollinger, Brooks, Collins, Eli Manning, Ferotte, Orton, Losman

2006: Leinhart, Hasselbeck, Favre, Plummer, Grossman, Gradkowski, Walter, Vick, Young

 

There are some good names on this list that were good prospects. In 2002, Brooks was in his 3rd year and having a good year except for a bad completion percentage. Carr, Ramsey, and Harrington were in their rookie years.

2003-the 3 rookies appear again, and Boller is a rookie.

2004-Feeley is being developed in this year, along with Harrington, Boller, and Vick

2005-Eli appears, along with Losman, who only threw 228 passes that year.

2006-Leinhart and Grossman appear in their first year starting.

 

There's one big thing on this list-nobody who started out with such a bad completion percentage is developing, with the possible exception of Losman (who was only in for a few games the year he made the list).

Brooks, Carr, Ramsey, Harrington, Boller, Feeley, Eli, Vick-all supposed to be great QB's, none could improve their completion percentages. It's not easy to do, which is why you see very few here who appear on this list and then develop. That's the other big reason why Grossman is in trouble unless he can break the mold.

 

Why just take those few years? That's hardly a signifigant sample size. In any event, many QB's have had poor completion % and have improved them over the course of their careers.

 

Matt Hassleback had a 54.8 completion % in his first year starting.

 

Alex Smith had a 50% completion % in his first year and a 58.1% this year. Quite an improvement.

 

McNabb had a 58% and a 57% in his first 2 years starting.

 

Delhomme had a 59.2% his first year with the Panthers and a 58.2 the next year. He had a 61% last year.

 

Drew Bledsoe had a 49.9% in his first year starting.

 

Troy Aikman 52.9% and a 56%, before posting a 65.3% in his third year.

 

Carr went from 52.5% to 56% the 61% and has improved to a 68% this year

 

Trent Green had a 54.6% his first year a 60% his second year and a 56% his third year

 

Jesus man, even Peyton Manning had a 56.7 completion % his first year starting.

 

Do I need to keep going? What tend does Grossman have to buck here exactly?

 

Most of their QB's were actual rookies-those numbers have to be taken with a grain of salt.

Mcnabb's completion percentage is actually still quite low, but he makes up for it with his deep passes and by running the ball well.

 

Those are some good numbers though, and some good examples of QB's who broke through-I just went with the info I had in front of me.

[Chocolate Milk]

I think the conclusion you should draw from those guys is that they turned out to be crappy QB's not that it's hard to increase completion %. It is probably hard to increase completion % when you are a crappy QB. Hopefully that doesn't turn out to be the case with Rex.

[CubColtPacer]

That would be great if the Bears did run a different style of offense than most teams, many teams use the short passing game as their run, the Bears have one of the highest, if not the highest yards per completion in the NFL b/c they don't use a short passing attack. With that style, you're going to have plenty of incompletions. It's similar to the Pittsburgh Steelers of the 70s without as much talent.

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/BradTe00.htm

 

That's a very good point-I'm off to look for that stat now to see what it holds.

 

I'm calculating the numbers for the QB's because I can't get the stat anywhere:

Average Y/C (2006)

Mcnabb: 14.7

Romo: 13.19

Bledsoe: 12.93

Warner: 12.75

Huard: 12.69

Big Ben: 12.55

Palmer: 12.45

Brees: 12.41

Cutler: 12.36

Grossman: 12.18

Peyton Manning: 12.15

Vick: 12.12

 

Grossman is up there-there are some interesting names on that list, that's for sure.

[soapy]

Grossman is pretty much on par with most QBs that have had under 25 starts.

 

Exactly.

 

CubColtPacer, the point you're ignoring in saying that most QBs don't make a jump in their 5th season is that Rex hasn't been on the field as much as any of these QBs. If you look at starts or games played, Rex is exactly where he should be and has a great chance of progressing and developing further.

 

I don't believe that's true-I think he's behind other QB's who have gone into years 3 and 4 with few professional starts, and I tried to show that with the stats of their first full years a page or two ago. I do understand though the dead horse argument though, so I'll try to find the stat I'm looking for and not keep hitting the same point over and over :D

 

Something else to consider is not only was he not playing games (Grossman) he was not practicing much of that time because of the injuries (unlike the other guys you mentioned).

[CubColtPacer]

Grossman is pretty much on par with most QBs that have had under 25 starts.

 

Exactly.

 

CubColtPacer, the point you're ignoring in saying that most QBs don't make a jump in their 5th season is that Rex hasn't been on the field as much as any of these QBs. If you look at starts or games played, Rex is exactly where he should be and has a great chance of progressing and developing further.

 

I don't believe that's true-I think he's behind other QB's who have gone into years 3 and 4 with few professional starts, and I tried to show that with the stats of their first full years a page or two ago. I do understand though the dead horse argument though, so I'll try to find the stat I'm looking for and not keep hitting the same point over and over :D

 

Something else to consider is not only was he not playing games (Grossman) he was not practicing much of that time because of the injuries (unlike the other guys you mentioned).

 

That also is a very good point, and certainly a reason for optimism.

[soapy]

Grossman is pretty much on par with most QBs that have had under 25 starts.

 

Exactly.

 

CubColtPacer, the point you're ignoring in saying that most QBs don't make a jump in their 5th season is that Rex hasn't been on the field as much as any of these QBs. If you look at starts or games played, Rex is exactly where he should be and has a great chance of progressing and developing further.

 

I don't believe that's true-I think he's behind other QB's who have gone into years 3 and 4 with few professional starts, and I tried to show that with the stats of their first full years a page or two ago. I do understand though the dead horse argument though, so I'll try to find the stat I'm looking for and not keep hitting the same point over and over :D

 

Something else to consider is not only was he not playing games (Grossman) he was not practicing much of that time because of the injuries (unlike the other guys you mentioned).

 

That also is a very good point, and certainly a reason for optimism.

 

maybe. maybe not. but it's worth considering.

[Handlebar McSkullet]

 

All I'm saying is that it is very rare for a QB to develop into a good QB in year 5 or later. By the end of 4 years, if that QB has played all 4 years or sat on the bench for 1, 2, or 3 of those years-at the end of the 4th year it is known if the QB will develop or not. Maybe with Rex's injury history that will give him to the end of year 5-maybe. It's also possible that some QB's are simply given up on too soon. It's just true that it's not likely that a QB will suddenly break through so late into their career (yes, just 4 years in that sounds strange, but it's true), no matter how many years experience they have actually playing. It's happened to a few, but for most it doesn't.

 

your strange and pointless micro-analysis does little to shed light on the issue, here.

 

I think the reason that most QB's don't have a performace jump in their 5th year is clear and it doesn't apply to Grossman. By the 4th year, most QB's have played enough games to see what they have to offer and most development will probably have occured by then. Not the case with Grossman.

 

That's why I tried to show a page ago about QB's who came in during their 3rd season or so for the first time. Those QB's had more success then either Grossman or a QB who starts from his rookie year. All I'm saying is that Grossman is behind the curve. He doesn't have the same amount of success that normally a player who is just starting for the first time in his 3rd or 4th season usually does. That certainly could be because of his injuries though.

 

As I said also, one of the reasons that I'm skeptical of Grossman's development is completion percentage. Here are the QB's with under 57 percent completion percentage since 2002:

 

2002: Blake, Vick, Brooks, Plummer, Carr, Matthews, Ramsey, Hutchinson, Harrington

2003: Collins, Blake, Carr, Johnson, Harrington, Gannon, Ramsey, Boller, Stewart

2004: Bledsoe, Vick, Collins, Harrington, Boller, Dorsey, Feeley, Brunell

2005: Bollinger, Brooks, Collins, Eli Manning, Ferotte, Orton, Losman

2006: Leinhart, Hasselbeck, Favre, Plummer, Grossman, Gradkowski, Walter, Vick, Young

 

There are some good names on this list that were good prospects. In 2002, Brooks was in his 3rd year and having a good year except for a bad completion percentage. Carr, Ramsey, and Harrington were in their rookie years.

2003-the 3 rookies appear again, and Boller is a rookie.

2004-Feeley is being developed in this year, along with Harrington, Boller, and Vick

2005-Eli appears, along with Losman, who only threw 228 passes that year.

2006-Leinhart and Grossman appear in their first year starting.

 

There's one big thing on this list-nobody who started out with such a bad completion percentage is developing, with the possible exception of Losman (who was only in for a few games the year he made the list).

Brooks, Carr, Ramsey, Harrington, Boller, Feeley, Eli, Vick-all supposed to be great QB's, none could improve their completion percentages. It's not easy to do, which is why you see very few here who appear on this list and then develop. That's the other big reason why Grossman is in trouble unless he can break the mold.

 

Why just take those few years? That's hardly a signifigant sample size. In any event, many QB's have had poor completion % and have improved them over the course of their careers.

 

Matt Hassleback had a 54.8 completion % in his first year starting.

 

Alex Smith had a 50% completion % in his first year and a 58.1% this year. Quite an improvement.

 

McNabb had a 58% and a 57% in his first 2 years starting.

 

Delhomme had a 59.2% his first year with the Panthers and a 58.2 the next year. He had a 61% last year.

 

Drew Bledsoe had a 49.9% in his first year starting.

 

Troy Aikman 52.9% and a 56%, before posting a 65.3% in his third year.

 

Carr went from 52.5% to 56% the 61% and has improved to a 68% this year

 

Trent Green had a 54.6% his first year a 60% his second year and a 56% his third year

 

Jesus man, even Peyton Manning had a 56.7 completion % his first year starting.

 

Do I need to keep going? What tend does Grossman have to buck here exactly?

 

Most of their QB's were actual rookies-those numbers have to be taken with a grain of salt.

Mcnabb's completion percentage is actually still quite low, but he makes up for it with his deep passes and by running the ball well.

 

Those are some good numbers though, and some good examples of QB's who broke through-I just went with the info I had in front of me.

 

You cant take those numbers with a grain of salt. The reason a qb is not as good his first year as subsequent years is game experience(the speed of the game, the progressions and reads, familiarity with the system including size of play book and terminology. The only way a quarterback becomes better is by playing in more games. The learning curve is different for some quarterbacks but the rule is the same. The more you play, the better you get.

 

A couple things that have not been disputed that I think are important:

 

1. He is still young with the "ability" to improve.

2. He can make every throw and possesses a better arm than most quarterbacks in the league.

[CubColtPacer]

 

All I'm saying is that it is very rare for a QB to develop into a good QB in year 5 or later. By the end of 4 years, if that QB has played all 4 years or sat on the bench for 1, 2, or 3 of those years-at the end of the 4th year it is known if the QB will develop or not. Maybe with Rex's injury history that will give him to the end of year 5-maybe. It's also possible that some QB's are simply given up on too soon. It's just true that it's not likely that a QB will suddenly break through so late into their career (yes, just 4 years in that sounds strange, but it's true), no matter how many years experience they have actually playing. It's happened to a few, but for most it doesn't.

 

your strange and pointless micro-analysis does little to shed light on the issue, here.

 

I think the reason that most QB's don't have a performace jump in their 5th year is clear and it doesn't apply to Grossman. By the 4th year, most QB's have played enough games to see what they have to offer and most development will probably have occured by then. Not the case with Grossman.

 

That's why I tried to show a page ago about QB's who came in during their 3rd season or so for the first time. Those QB's had more success then either Grossman or a QB who starts from his rookie year. All I'm saying is that Grossman is behind the curve. He doesn't have the same amount of success that normally a player who is just starting for the first time in his 3rd or 4th season usually does. That certainly could be because of his injuries though.

 

As I said also, one of the reasons that I'm skeptical of Grossman's development is completion percentage. Here are the QB's with under 57 percent completion percentage since 2002:

 

2002: Blake, Vick, Brooks, Plummer, Carr, Matthews, Ramsey, Hutchinson, Harrington

2003: Collins, Blake, Carr, Johnson, Harrington, Gannon, Ramsey, Boller, Stewart

2004: Bledsoe, Vick, Collins, Harrington, Boller, Dorsey, Feeley, Brunell

2005: Bollinger, Brooks, Collins, Eli Manning, Ferotte, Orton, Losman

2006: Leinhart, Hasselbeck, Favre, Plummer, Grossman, Gradkowski, Walter, Vick, Young

 

There are some good names on this list that were good prospects. In 2002, Brooks was in his 3rd year and having a good year except for a bad completion percentage. Carr, Ramsey, and Harrington were in their rookie years.

2003-the 3 rookies appear again, and Boller is a rookie.

2004-Feeley is being developed in this year, along with Harrington, Boller, and Vick

2005-Eli appears, along with Losman, who only threw 228 passes that year.

2006-Leinhart and Grossman appear in their first year starting.

 

There's one big thing on this list-nobody who started out with such a bad completion percentage is developing, with the possible exception of Losman (who was only in for a few games the year he made the list).

Brooks, Carr, Ramsey, Harrington, Boller, Feeley, Eli, Vick-all supposed to be great QB's, none could improve their completion percentages. It's not easy to do, which is why you see very few here who appear on this list and then develop. That's the other big reason why Grossman is in trouble unless he can break the mold.

 

Why just take those few years? That's hardly a signifigant sample size. In any event, many QB's have had poor completion % and have improved them over the course of their careers.

 

Matt Hassleback had a 54.8 completion % in his first year starting.

 

Alex Smith had a 50% completion % in his first year and a 58.1% this year. Quite an improvement.

 

McNabb had a 58% and a 57% in his first 2 years starting.

 

Delhomme had a 59.2% his first year with the Panthers and a 58.2 the next year. He had a 61% last year.

 

Drew Bledsoe had a 49.9% in his first year starting.

 

Troy Aikman 52.9% and a 56%, before posting a 65.3% in his third year.

 

Carr went from 52.5% to 56% the 61% and has improved to a 68% this year

 

Trent Green had a 54.6% his first year a 60% his second year and a 56% his third year

 

Jesus man, even Peyton Manning had a 56.7 completion % his first year starting.

 

Do I need to keep going? What tend does Grossman have to buck here exactly?

 

Most of their QB's were actual rookies-those numbers have to be taken with a grain of salt.

Mcnabb's completion percentage is actually still quite low, but he makes up for it with his deep passes and by running the ball well.

 

Those are some good numbers though, and some good examples of QB's who broke through-I just went with the info I had in front of me.

 

You cant take those numbers with a grain of salt. The reason a qb is not as good his first year as subsequent years is game experience(the speed of the game, the progressions and reads, familiarity with the system including size of play book and terminology. The only way a quarterback becomes better is by playing in more games. The learning curve is different for some quarterbacks but the rule is the same. The more you play, the better you get.

 

A couple things that have not been disputed that I think are important:

 

1. He is still young with the "ability" to improve.

2. He can make every throw and possesses a better arm than most quarterbacks in the league.

 

The reason I take those numbers with a grain of salt is that it can be shown that QB's who sit on the bench for a year or longer have better first years than QB's who start immediately-therefore QB's who start as rookies are on average going to have lower numbers anyway. I agree fully with your two points.

[Handlebar McSkullet]

Cant I just like Grossman, and think that he getting unfairly "stepped on" by the media because of essentially one game (against the Packers).

 

I really believe that all of this hostile rhetoric stems from the last game, and if he would have delievered a mediocre performance, we would NOT be talking about replacing grossman. Lets disregard his post game statement for the time being.

 

I hate doing the "if you throw that game away he..." argument but I think the Bears-Packers game is one game that warrants this treatment because: 1. it was a meaningless as a game gets, pack out of playoffs, bears clinch home field. 2. Grossman, and all other injury prone starters should not have been playing anyway(I was one of the people who thought they should play for "momentum", and they proved that it was a moot point anyway by playing terrible and still going to the super bowl.)

 

Lets throw it out or augment the stats for the game for illustration purposes.

 

If he didnt play against the pack, he would have ended with these numbers:

 

260 comp 468 att 56% 3160 6.8 ypa 23td 17int qbrating 77.8

 

Lets say he played the packers with his season average/ a half of football(he wouldnt have played the whole game)<18 for 30 213 2 td 1int> to put him in a fair light and because his 4th quarter numbers are much worse than his first quarter lets say he threw 9 comp 15 att 106 yards 1 td 0 int

 

269 comp 483 56 % 3266 6.8 24td 17int qbrating 78.6

 

OR lets throw out GB but add his playoff numbers to his overall performance in '06, then average them over a 16 game season.

 

272 comp 496 att 55 % 3328 6.7 YPA 25 td 18 int qbr 77.4

 

That one meaningless half dropped his qb rating by 3 points!!! It doesnt mean he wasnt at best..average... but it doesnt make him the worst qb to ever start a full 16 game season(I know no one is saying this, but the tone of grossman analysis is close to this). He also leap frogs 6 qbs in quarterback rating for the year: manning, vick, hasselbeck, smith, big ben, leinart.

 

What does it all mean? Probably nothing but the green bay game was disastrous for public opinion of the guy, and it shouldnt be and I hope the Bears realize this.

 

Imagine if grossman went into the playoffs without the green bay game hanging over him:

 

1. If he didnt play against the packers his last three qb ratings going into the playoffs were 114, 104, and 80.

 

2. If he played green bay with his season average, his last four games qb rating would be 114, 104, 80, and 152(or to be fair lets give him and int and say) 113....

 

Do you think they would have asked questions that would have resulted in grossman saying he was unprepared, etc..?

 

What about the seahawk game? Instead of people saying, grossman played to not lose, or didnt hurt the team. Maybe they would have said... Grossman leads winning drive, or maybe Don Banks doesnt say he threw a costly interception and instead recognizes that in the forth quarter, he lead the team to three drives that ended in a dropped pass that was intercepted(would have been a touchdown), a dropped pass that would have been a touchdown, and a drive that led to Gould's game tying fg.

 

How did the other young qb's fare in the playoffs this year? Eli Manning, other hugely criticized young qb had an 85 qb rating. Tony Romo had an 89 qb rating and led them to a game winning fg drive(that didnt end up winning the game). How bout Phil Rivers? a 55 qb rating, and his team lost despite going 14-2 in the regular season, and who Peter Kings says has a better team than the Bears regardless of the Bears going to the super bowl.

 

My point in all this is, maybe the bears qb situation isnt as bad as it is made out to be, maybe Grossman had a pretty solid year for his first full season. The best part of all this is what are the chances he plays that poorly like he did against green bay? what if his five worst games get leveled out next year, and he improves on his game averages? its possible, maybe even probable.

[CubColtPacer]

Without quoting the post directly above me by carniby (which is detailed and a nice analysis)-let me address one point real quickly.

 

I don't think the Green Bay game changed much nationally for Grossman. Truthfully, it really didn't even get watched by that many people. Everyone was off to their parties for New Years Eve, there was nothing to play for, and many people (like me) didn't want to hear Favre retirement talk for 3 hours when everybody knew he was coming back. Good Rex and Bad Rex had already been firmly established by that time. Grossman's reputation became bad because of the Arizona game-and then it exploded with the Miami, NE, and Minnesota games. By the time of the Green Bay game, no one was sure what to expect out of him. I really don't think the stories would have changed whatsoever or anybody's perception of him now if he hadn't played GB or if he had a decent game against them.

[Soriano12]

Bears fire 2 coaches...

 

http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/football/bears/cs-070208bearmoves,1,7789851.story?coll=cs-home-headlines

 

The NFC champion Bears shook up their coaching staff Thursday, saying defensive line coach Don Johnson and assistant offensive line coach Harold Goodwin won't return and that another assistant has left to take a college job

 

Interesting.

[rawaction]

Bears fire 2 coaches...

 

http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/football/bears/cs-070208bearmoves,1,7789851.story?coll=cs-home-headlines

 

The NFC champion Bears shook up their coaching staff Thursday, saying defensive line coach Don Johnson and assistant offensive line coach Harold Goodwin won't return and that another assistant has left to take a college job

 

Interesting.

 

I like it. The Bears didn't sit on their 15 win, SB runner up season, and got rid of the coaches for the 2 most inconsistent units.

[da bears]

Bears fire 2 coaches...

 

http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/football/bears/cs-070208bearmoves,1,7789851.story?coll=cs-home-headlines

 

The NFC champion Bears shook up their coaching staff Thursday, saying defensive line coach Don Johnson and assistant offensive line coach Harold Goodwin won't return and that another assistant has left to take a college job

 

Interesting.

 

I like it. The Bears didn't sit on their 15 win, SB runner up season, and got rid of the coaches for the 2 most inconsistent units.

 

I like it too, although I dont know much of either.

[dew1679666265]

Jeff Garcia sucks. Winning the NFC East is no great accomplishment. That division was criminally overrated.

 

Bears fans should be careful what they pine for if they clamor for Garcia. He's going to make them beg for Rex.

 

Considering that Garcia has had 1 season out of 8 where he played worse than Rex this year (and that year he only played 6 games behind one of the worst offensive lines I've seen with a huge deficit most of the time-otherwise known as the Lions :D )-I'm not sure how you can make such a definitive claim.

 

Grossman is far more likely to improve than Garcia.

 

Garcia is a bond while Grossman is a stock. IMO the Bears need a bond type QB with that defense.

 

while completely depreciating the stock when it could become the centerpiece of their portfolio?

 

That's the key Sully, know when to sell and know when to keep it. I would invest on a different stock myself if a stock is what is wanted/needed.

 

so, instead of keeping in my mind what other good stocks have been in the beginning the bears should just panic and sell after the stock has performed reasonably well in it's first full year?

 

For being not a rookie when he started, Grossman was really bad in his first full year. Most QB's who come in their second or third year do better than Grossman's performance this year-he's already behind the curve a little bit.

 

name some of them for me. and for the sake of your argument, leave out the great ones.

 

I'm just going to put all the QB's stats that started after their first year that was also a starter this year: (there aren't all that many of them I do believe):

 

Tony Romo: 65.3%, 2903 yards, 8.6 Y/A, 19TD/13INT, Rush: 102

Garcia: 60.0, 2544 yards, 6.8 Y/A, 11TD/11INT, Rush: 221, 2 TD

Pennington: 68.9%, 3120 yards, 7.8 Y/A, 22TD/6INT, Rush: 49, 1 TD

McNair: 52%, 2665 yards, 6.4 Y/A, 14TD/13INT, Rush: 674, 8 TD

Bulger: 63.2%, 3845 yards, 7.2 Y/A, 22TD/22INT, Rush: 75, 4 TD

Losman: 62.5%, 3051 yards, 7.1 Y/A, 19TD/14INT, Rush: 140, 1 TD

Rivers: 61.7%, 3388 yards, 7.4 Y/A, 22TD/9INT, Rush: 49

 

Ok, I'm going to stop there-there were more than I thought for sure! There are still a few more, including Brady, Delhomme, and others, but this should give us a good list.

 

Here's Grossman: 54.6%, 3193 yards, 6.7 Y/A, 23TD/20INT, Rush: 2

 

His passing stats line up fine with McNair, but McNair as seen by the rushing yards was primarily a rushing QB. Grossman is definitely behind in his first year, especially in completion percentage.

 

looks like he threw more TDs than any of those guys, actually.

 

so the only real stat you're looking for is completion percentage? if grossman had the recivers that those guys did he might be around that percentage. wow, he threw less interceptions and more touchdowns than bulger? with those receivers? that's impressive. i just don't see how he doesn't stack up to those guys.--especially since rex spread the ball around to many different players and didn't rely on one or 2 great ones.

 

btw- brady's lucky he got a chance with the patriots and delhomme was thought so highly of after being given the starting job in new orleans that he was cut and ended up in NFL europe (in short, he developed), so probably not a good comparison.

 

your research doesn't really support your hypothesis, except the fact that rex needs to improve his completion percentage, and he will.

 

Just for clarification sake, in McNair's first year his receivers were significantly worse than Berrian and Muhammed.

In 1997, McNair's first full year as a starter, we had Derrick Mason (rookie), Isaac Byrd, Willie Davis, Malcolm Floyd, Joey Kent, Roderick Lewis, Michael Roan, Chris Sanders and Derek Russell.

Our receivers were awful (with the exception of Sanders).

[BigSlick]

CubsColtsPacers, its a little too easy to say a blanket statement like "he's got to improve his completion percentage"

 

I hate hate hate to use the "Good Rex" "Bad Rex" terminology, but his relatively low completion percentage stems completely from his inconsistent games. Like he said before, he has 12 games he's really proud of and 5-6 games he really would like back, and in those 12 games when he's on he has a fine completion percentage.

 

I also am of the opinion that those 5 "bad" games aren't completely his fault. (Though he seems to lack the ability to "cut his losses" and turn a bad game into just a mediocre one)

 

I also like the points brought up by others concerning the offense we run and the high Y/P/C that Grossman has.

[cubweiser03]

Bears fire 2 coaches...

 

http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/football/bears/cs-070208bearmoves,1,7789851.story?coll=cs-home-headlines

 

The NFC champion Bears shook up their coaching staff Thursday, saying defensive line coach Don Johnson and assistant offensive line coach Harold Goodwin won't return and that another assistant has left to take a college job

 

Interesting.

 

I like it. The Bears didn't sit on their 15 win, SB runner up season, and got rid of the coaches for the 2 most inconsistent units.

 

I like it too, although I dont know much of either.

 

Lovie is definetly not cut from the same ilk as Jauron. Jauron and his loyalty to his coaches was freaking assanine.

 

Feb 22 is the deadline for the Bears to designate Briggs as a Franchise Player.

[CubColtPacer]

CubsColtsPacers, its a little too easy to say a blanket statement like "he's got to improve his completion percentage"

 

I hate hate hate to use the "Good Rex" "Bad Rex" terminology, but his relatively low completion percentage stems completely from his inconsistent games. Like he said before, he has 12 games he's really proud of and 5-6 games he really would like back, and in those 12 games when he's on he has a fine completion percentage.

 

I also am of the opinion that those 5 "bad" games aren't completely his fault. (Though he seems to lack the ability to "cut his losses" and turn a bad game into just a mediocre one)

 

I also like the points brought up by others concerning the offense we run and the high Y/P/C that Grossman has.

 

I would both agree and disagree with this statement. Most of the problem is his awful games, yes. If he could turn those into average games, he'd be a much better QB. At the same time, there are some games that aren't mentioned in his awful games or even close where Grossman had a low completion percentage.

 

Minn (first game)-56%

Seattle-54.8%

Giants-60%

Jets-50%

STL-56.5%

Det (second game)-55.5%

Seattle-55.2%

NOR-42.3%

 

None of these games are mentioned under awful rex, but they are all poor completion percentage games (really with the exception of the Giants game, but I threw that one in there for comparison). Now, a QB can survive some poor completion percentage games-I'm not saying that he had bad games in all of these games, or even most of them (in fact, in a couple of them he was quite good). It's not just the awful games that are bringing his completion percentage way down though-his average games would have him around a 55-56 percent anyway, which needs to improve if he's not at all a threat to run either. Otherwise, defenses will do like the Colts did-rush only 4 each play, drop 7 back in coverage, take away the deep ball, and make Grossman dink and dunk for small gains and see if he can move the chains that way.

[Mark Priors Calves]

Here's a John Clayton article from ESPN about the offseason and how each team is looking heading into 2007.

 

Two interesting/maybe false things he mentions about the Bears.

 

-1. The Bears want to re-sign Rueben Brown

 

-2. The team is "nowhere close" to getting a an extension done with Lovie Smith.

[rawaction]

Here's a John Clayton article from ESPN about the offseason and how each team is looking heading into 2007.

 

Two interesting/maybe false things he mentions about the Bears.

 

-1. The Bears want to re-sign Rueben Brown

 

-2. The team is "nowhere close" to getting a an extension done with Lovie Smith.

 

Nevermind. Says they have the cap room to franchise Briggs and that's it.

[cubweiser03]

Here's a John Clayton article from ESPN about the offseason and how each team is looking heading into 2007.

 

Two interesting/maybe false things he mentions about the Bears.

 

-1. The Bears want to re-sign Rueben Brown

 

-2. The team is "nowhere close" to getting a an extension done with Lovie Smith.

 

Nevermind. Says they have the cap room to franchise Briggs and that's it.

 

I didnt read it that way about Briggs.

 

Arizona looks to be interested in Ian Scott.

Washington might release Adam Archuletta. I bring that up because the Bears were interested in him last year.

Id be happy with R. Brown for a one year deal.

[Butterscup1679666578]

Taking a TE in the first round would be the worst possible (plausible) move Angelo could make. I honestly don't see the Bears taking anyone, and instead trading it away for more picks. Edited February 9, 2007 by Butterscup

[Handlebar McSkullet]

Eric Steinbach might as well find a house in lake forrest. Edited February 9, 2007 by Handlebar McSkullet

[Transmogrified Tiger]

"There's no need to shout"

 

"I'M NOT SHOUTING!...ALL RIGHT I AM, I'M SHOUTING! I'M SHOUTING! I'M SHOU-"