Game 10 - BEARS @ San Francisco 49ers - 7:30 MNF

[jersey cubs fan]

there are 4 teams in the league who have made fewer pass attempts than the Bears, and 4 teams in the league who have given up more sacks.

 

There are loads of teams out there who realized long ago that you win consistently in this league through the air. The Bears have paid lip service to that notion only recently but still live with a defense/special teams/running game commitment before passing.

 

I guarantee you Tom Brady would not be Tom Brady if he was drafted by the Bears. Drew Brees would not be Drew Brees in Chicago. Roethlisberger may have been able to do many of the same things he has, although he'd have had to do it with far less at receiver and in the coaching department. Rodgers is a special player, but it helps that he was drafted by a high powered offensive team like Green Bay with a commitment to winning through the air. This is not baseball. Your team, teammates and coaches matter. You cannot simply bring a QB to an offensively inept organization and expect him to put up numbers that QBs on passing-centric teams put up.

 

I'm definitely not disagreeing with you, but I am trying to think of examples of historicaly inept passing teams acquiring a pro bowl caliber QB and the results they got from it. The only thing I can think of is Kurt Warner going to the Giants and watching his career go down the tubes, only to be resurrected in Arizona. I can think of examples of QBs starting their careers at more offensively inept teams and getting traded/cut and then signing with the right team and blowing up. Steve Young and Brett Favre come to mind.

 

There are also a few journeymen QBs that I can think of that get passed around the league and every few years have a revival with the right team. Vinny Testaverde and Kerry Collins are 2 that might fit that mold.

 

New England went to the Super Bowl with Bledsoe a few years after getting past the Eason, Grogan, Wilson, Flutie era. The Rams spent many a year in the throes of mediocrity before Warner changed things. New Orleans never had much.

[Banedon]

But Rivers has deteriorated himself with bad footwork, mechanics and forcing throws into double coverage.

 

...

 

Yes, those are things that happen when protection breaks down.

[cubbyvirus00]

But Rivers has deteriorated himself with bad footwork, mechanics and forcing throws into double coverage.

 

...

 

Yes, those are things that happen when protection breaks down.

 

Rivers looks like [expletive] and his arm strength is in question. That is not due to protection issues.

[jersey cubs fan]

If a better option than Cutler came along of course I'd like to see the Bears pursue it if it was realistic to do so. I don't, however, think that's likely for the foreseeable future so I'd prefer it they tried to fully capitalize on Cutler's strengths as opposed to just assuming he can make do with whatever they go with. Worrying that Cutler can't make things work out of the team they've constructed is backwards.

 

Yeah, this is what matters most here. It's pretty pointless to talk about going after Rodgers if you have the chance. The Bears are lucky they had the opportunity to get Cutler. They aren't going to stumble into another franchise's elite QB. I'm a believer in drafting QBs on a somewhat regular basis in the middle of drafts and trying to develop them. It helps if you have a competent offensive staff to do the work. But it's useful. I hate wasting millions on veteran backup QBs. If in the next draft there's an intriguing QB available, go ahead and take him.

[Guest]

But Rivers has deteriorated himself with bad footwork, mechanics and forcing throws into double coverage.

 

...

 

Yes, those are things that happen when protection breaks down.

 

Rivers looks like [expletive] and his arm strength is in question. That is not due to protection issues.

 

It absolutely IS due to protection issues. He lost 2 of his best linemen last year and his game has suffered. Confidence levels suffer when you know before the snap that you cannot trust your linemen, which results in off balance throws, quicker throws to less open receivers and abandoning long throws due to not having the time for those plays to develop. If I recall correctly, the two linemen he lost last year are still gone and they were pro bowl caliber linemen. I believe one retired and the other never found gainful employment due to the severity of his injuries.

 

Rivers has no mobility to avoid would be tacklers and without an offensive line protecting him, and he's vulnerable to more interceptions and tackles for loss than he's ever had before. Taking away some of his premium talent athletes only furthers his problems.

[Soul]

It's hard for *us* to acquire QB talent. It's really not a league-wide problem.

 

How could you possibly say this seriously.

 

Because of the Packers, and the 49ers of old, the Colts. Broncos had Cutler, did better with him than we have, then managed to get Manning. Falcons go from Vick to Ryan. Teams do much better than we do, even if it is difficult.

 

Mostly, the overall point is that the strong likelihood is we will go back to poor QB play after Cutler leaves, barring some kind of organizational overhaul. It's just not a strength of the team.

 

Drafting and developing defense is. Other teams can't do that very well.

[Banedon]

It's hard for *us* to acquire QB talent. It's really not a league-wide problem.

 

How could you possibly say this seriously.

 

Because of the Packers, and the 49ers of old, the Colts. Broncos had Cutler, did better with him than we have, then managed to get Manning. Falcons go from Vick to Ryan. Teams do much better than we do, even if it is difficult.

 

Mostly, the overall point is that the strong likelihood is we will go back to poor QB play after Cutler leaves, barring some kind of organizational overhaul. It's just not a strength of the team.

 

Drafting and developing defense is. Other teams can't do that very well.

 

So because 5 teams have had some reasonable luck with QB's, finding QB talent isn't a league wide problem? The Colts didn't have to do any major evaluation or anything to get their 2 QB's. They just managed to suck in the correct years. Neither Manning or Luck are sneaky out of nowhere QB's.

 

This is a terrible argument.

[Soul]

It's hard for *us* to acquire QB talent. It's really not a league-wide problem.

 

How could you possibly say this seriously.

 

Because of the Packers, and the 49ers of old, the Colts. Broncos had Cutler, did better with him than we have, then managed to get Manning. Falcons go from Vick to Ryan. Teams do much better than we do, even if it is difficult.

 

Mostly, the overall point is that the strong likelihood is we will go back to poor QB play after Cutler leaves, barring some kind of organizational overhaul. It's just not a strength of the team.

 

Drafting and developing defense is. Other teams can't do that very well.

 

So because 5 teams have had some reasonable luck with QB's, finding QB talent isn't a league wide problem? The Colts didn't have to do any major evaluation or anything to get their 2 QB's. They just managed to suck in the correct years. Neither Manning or Luck are sneaky out of nowhere QB's.

 

This is a terrible argument.

 

It's a terrible argument to dismiss it as luck. Plenty of teams hit on a top QB in the draft and blow it in development/scheme.

 

Sorry, I just don't think it's pure luck.

[Banedon]

It's hard for *us* to acquire QB talent. It's really not a league-wide problem.

 

How could you possibly say this seriously.

 

Because of the Packers, and the 49ers of old, the Colts. Broncos had Cutler, did better with him than we have, then managed to get Manning. Falcons go from Vick to Ryan. Teams do much better than we do, even if it is difficult.

 

Mostly, the overall point is that the strong likelihood is we will go back to poor QB play after Cutler leaves, barring some kind of organizational overhaul. It's just not a strength of the team.

 

Drafting and developing defense is. Other teams can't do that very well.

 

So because 5 teams have had some reasonable luck with QB's, finding QB talent isn't a league wide problem? The Colts didn't have to do any major evaluation or anything to get their 2 QB's. They just managed to suck in the correct years. Neither Manning or Luck are sneaky out of nowhere QB's.

 

This is a terrible argument.

 

It's a terrible argument to dismiss it as luck. Plenty of teams hit on a top QB in the draft and blow it in development/scheme.

 

Sorry, I just don't think it's pure luck.

 

Come on! Andrew Luck comes out last year and the Colts don't get him. How is that not luck?

[jersey cubs fan]

It's a terrible argument to dismiss it as luck. Plenty of teams hit on a top QB in the draft and blow it in development/scheme.

 

Sorry, I just don't think it's pure luck.

 

There are a handful of teams who have done a great job getting QBs. The Colts are not among them since they lucked into it, without question. Most teams struggle with it, and some teams are horrible at it. It is a league wide issue.

[Soul]

The point isn't that they were around to make the pick. The point is, certain teams are better at doing the right things with the pick -- others are much more likely to blow it. And the same holds true for teams who acquire a QB. Some will make it work better than others. Brees becomes a success in New Orleans because the Saints have (had) a great coach/scheme for a QB to flourish. If he goes to the Browns, probably not so much.

 

There's not enough good QBs to go around, definitely. But there are teams who know how to make QB work, much better than others. It's not just luck.

[Sammy Sofa]

It's hard for *us* to acquire QB talent. It's really not a league-wide problem.

 

How could you possibly say this seriously.

 

Because of the Packers, and the 49ers of old, the Colts. Broncos had Cutler, did better with him than we have, then managed to get Manning. Falcons go from Vick to Ryan. Teams do much better than we do, even if it is difficult.

 

Mostly, the overall point is that the strong likelihood is we will go back to poor QB play after Cutler leaves, barring some kind of organizational overhaul. It's just not a strength of the team.

 

Drafting and developing defense is. Other teams can't do that very well.

 

Somehow you managed to think my response was towards the former and not the latter.

[Banedon]

The point isn't that they were around to make the pick. The point is, certain teams are better at doing the right things with the pick -- others are much more likely to blow it. And the same holds true for teams who acquire a QB. Some will make it work better than others. Brees becomes a success in New Orleans because the Saints have (had) a great coach/scheme for a QB to flourish. If he goes to the Browns, probably not so much.

 

There's not enough good QBs to go around, definitely. But there are teams who know how to make QB work, much better than others. It's not just luck.

 

Brees was a success in San Diego before he ever had success in New Orleans. I have no doubt that Drew Brees would have been a good quarterback on the Browns.

[UMFan83]

It's hard for *us* to acquire QB talent. It's really not a league-wide problem.

 

How could you possibly say this seriously.

 

Because of the Packers, and the 49ers of old, the Colts. Broncos had Cutler, did better with him than we have, then managed to get Manning. Falcons go from Vick to Ryan. Teams do much better than we do, even if it is difficult.

 

Mostly, the overall point is that the strong likelihood is we will go back to poor QB play after Cutler leaves, barring some kind of organizational overhaul. It's just not a strength of the team.

 

Drafting and developing defense is. Other teams can't do that very well.

 

Out of the 32 NFL teams in the NFL, here are a list of teams that are currently likely satisfied with their starting QB as a long term answer:

 

Patriots, Ravens, Steelers, Colts, Broncos, Texans, Giants, Redskins, Bears, Lions, Packers, Falcons, Saints. That's 13 teams. You can argue the inclusion of the Cowboys, Panthers and Chargers, but you could also argue the exclusion of the Colts and Redskins since their QBs are rookies (good ones though).

 

Here is how the other 19 teams feel about their QB situation:

 

1. Young QB that hasn't proven he's the long term answer but could be: Dolphins, Bengals, Browns, Titans, Vikings, Pathers, Buccaneers, Seahawks, Rams

 

2. QB that's in no major danger of being benched but will definitely consider upgrade opportunities that come up: 49ers, Cowboys, Chargers, maybe Raiders

 

3. Starter is inconsistently mediocre at best, but can't do much because we stupidly signed them to a huge extension: Bills, Eagles

 

4. Our starter is pure garbage and could be replaced any week: Jets, Jaguars, Chiefs, Cardinals

 

Even if you take out the first category, you are still looking at 10 teams who have no particular long term solution at QB that they are currently satisfied with. And I guaranetee you based on past history that roughly half the QBs in that first category will not succeed and will be benched, cut or signed to a massive extension by the Bills at some point in the future.

 

So after all of that, tell me again why it's only the Bears that have trouble getting a quality QB (pre-Cutler)?

 

PS, and just for fun, the Bears have had starting QBs in all 4 categories (number 1 (Grossman 2005-2006), number 2 (Orton 2008), number 3 (Grossman/Greise w/o the contact extension thing - 2007), and number 4 (Quinn/Krenzel/etc - 2004)) all in the last 8 years.

Edited November 15, 2012 by UMFan83

[Soul]

Hmmm, I didn't mean to say that I think it's only the Bears who struggle with it.

[UMFan83]

Hmmm, I didn't mean to say that I think it's only the Bears who struggle with it.

 

You said its not a league wide problem, yet I pointed out 19 teams that are currently less than satisfied with their starting QBs as a long term answer.

[jersey cubs fan]

The point isn't that they were around to make the pick. The point is, certain teams are better at doing the right things with the pick -- others are much more likely to blow it. And the same holds true for teams who acquire a QB. Some will make it work better than others. Brees becomes a success in New Orleans because the Saints have (had) a great coach/scheme for a QB to flourish. If he goes to the Browns, probably not so much.

 

There's not enough good QBs to go around, definitely. But there are teams who know how to make QB work, much better than others. It's not just luck.

 

Brees was a success in San Diego before he ever had success in New Orleans. I have no doubt that Drew Brees would have been a good quarterback on the Browns.

 

I have plenty of doubt. Going to a dome team with a high powered offense mentality was perfect for him. At the same time, it's not like New Orleans has a great history of making QBs. It was just the right place at the right time for all involved.

[jersey cubs fan]

Hmmm, I didn't mean to say that I think it's only the Bears who struggle with it.

 

you said league wide

[sneakypower]

Hmmm, I didn't mean to say that I think it's only the Bears who struggle with it.

 

You said its not a league wide problem, yet I pointed out 19 teams that are currently less than satisfied with their starting QBs as a long term answer.

lol Tampa

 

"oh god it's terrible having the NFL leader in YPA as our QB"

 

2. QB that's in no major danger of being benched but will definitely consider upgrade opportunities that come up: 49ers, Cowboys, Chargers, maybe Raiders

fwiw, all these guys have higher qb ratings than Cutler

[Banedon]

The point isn't that they were around to make the pick. The point is, certain teams are better at doing the right things with the pick -- others are much more likely to blow it. And the same holds true for teams who acquire a QB. Some will make it work better than others. Brees becomes a success in New Orleans because the Saints have (had) a great coach/scheme for a QB to flourish. If he goes to the Browns, probably not so much.

 

There's not enough good QBs to go around, definitely. But there are teams who know how to make QB work, much better than others. It's not just luck.

 

Brees was a success in San Diego before he ever had success in New Orleans. I have no doubt that Drew Brees would have been a good quarterback on the Browns.

 

I have plenty of doubt. Going to a dome team with a high powered offense mentality was perfect for him. At the same time, it's not like New Orleans has a great history of making QBs. It was just the right place at the right time for all involved.

 

I have no doubt that he'd struggle more in Cleveland than he has in NO. And I'm not trying at all to minimze what coaching/scheme means to an NFL team and it's quarterback. But even if you have that coaching/scheme, you need a good QB to work with, and that's where the luck element comes into play. Some teams manage to get that, and others don't.

[UMFan83]

Hmmm, I didn't mean to say that I think it's only the Bears who struggle with it.

 

You said its not a league wide problem, yet I pointed out 19 teams that are currently less than satisfied with their starting QBs as a long term answer.

lol Tampa

 

"oh god it's terrible having the NFL leader in YPA as our QB"

 

Good thing teams don't decide on long term answers based on the last 9 games. If they did, they'd be ignoring last year's poor performance following a really good 2010. I'm sure the Bucs are thrilled with Freeman's performance this year, and think he might be the long term answer, but I can't yet put him in the completely satisfied as long term answer camp of the list I spent 2 minutes putting together.

[UMFan83]

2. QB that's in no major danger of being benched but will definitely consider upgrade opportunities that come up: 49ers, Cowboys, Chargers, maybe Raiders

fwiw, all these guys have higher qb ratings than Cutler

 

Its not a list of QB ability, it's a list of where teams stand on their QB situation. I thought I made that pretty clear. I'm almost positive the Bears have no reservations about Jay being their long term answer, righty or wrongly, while the 49ers spent last offseason rolling out the red carpet for Peyton Manning.

[Banedon]

2. QB that's in no major danger of being benched but will definitely consider upgrade opportunities that come up: 49ers, Cowboys, Chargers, maybe Raiders

fwiw, all these guys have higher qb ratings than Cutler

 

Its not a list of QB ability, it's a list of where teams stand on their QB situation. I thought I made that pretty clear. I'm almost positive the Bears have no reservations about Jay being their long term answer, righty or wrongly, while the 49ers spent last offseason rolling out the red carpet for Peyton Manning.

 

The Bears might have a few reservations based on concussions.

[Banedon]

Saw this and thought I'd post it since were talking about the difficulty of filling the QB position....

 

 

http://i.imgur.com/3dSLcl.jpg

 

[Guest]

Has to sting to know they passed on Drew Brees.