"Da Bears" need to move on

The Game Room
21

That’s exactly the kind of band-aid move that’s made them a QB wasteland for the last 30+ years.

The answer is to draft QBs until you get it right. Draft QBs even when you already have a QB you like or are trying to build. The Jags drafted Minshew in spite of just signing Foles. The Patriots drafted Cassel, Brissett and Garappolo even though they had Brady.

Pace’s biggest mistake was not drafting Mitch, and it wasn’t going all-in before Mitch proved he could handle it. His biggest mistake was not drafting middle round QBs (or even signing UDFAs) in the intervening years so that you at least have a couple lottery tickets that might bail you out. You sign high-priced veteran backups like Chase Daniels when you have a contending team with a Drew Brees, Pat Mahomes or Aaron Rodgers and you want to make sure you survive a fluke injury. When you have a starter that may not be the guy, you don’t back him up with a guy that you know isn’t the guy but just isn’t a garbage fire.

Seriously, what’s the fucking point of keeping Tyler Bray around for the last 2 seasons? GMs are smart enough to draft for depth at every other position but can never seem to get it in their head that it might be smart to over-invest in the most fucking important position on the team.

22

During the Brett Favre years in Green Bay, the Packers, too, consistently drafted other quarterbacks, a number of whom went on to be at least serviceable starters for other teams: Mark Brunell, Matt Hasselbeck, Ty Detmer, and Aaron Brooks. (Not to mention the guy they drafted to be Favre’s eventual replacement, who rode the bench for three years. :smiley: )

23

Yup. I’d forgotten about those other guys before Rodgers. Also Matt Flynn after Rodgers.

It’s like most GMs have somehow internalized the meme “if you have 2 starting QBs, you have no starting QB” to the point that they will avoid the potential of a QB controversy even if it undermines the franchise.

I know this is cherry picking, but the Bears took Riley Ridley in the 4th round last year. Most people thought he was a great value pick there and would be “another weapon” for Mitch. And I get it, we didn’t exactly have a rock solid #2 opposite Robinson and if Gabriel/Miller couldn’t stay on the field Ridley might be a contributor with star potential. However in retrospect, we could have taken Stidham or Minshew (or a few other guys who maybe suck) but if Mitch panned out the guy would never get any snaps, so he’s viewed as a “wasted” pick or worse shows a “lack of confidence” in Mitch.

Similarly in 2018 Kyle Allen was floating around as a rookie UDFA and we knew Mitch was a coin flip at that point, but the Bears invested in guys like Kevin Tolliver, Ryan Nall and Abdullah Anderson instead. Anderson became a major contributor, and the others looked at the time like potential depth players at need positions. But that meant rolling with Bray as your PS scout QB, and we know what Bray is at this point. No opportunity at the position which is most difficult to scoop up off the street.

24

Bingo! (and I thought I’d read somewhere online a while back that Jay Cutler’s time in Chi-town left a bad taste in just about every Bear fans’ mouth)

25

There were folks in Seattle who actually believed that Matt Flynn would beat R.W. out for the starting QB job. After R.W. won that job I don’t believe I’ve heard a thing about Matt Flynn since.

26

Though I’m a Packer fan, I’ve lived in the Chicago area for the past 30 years. What you describe is pretty much accurate – most Bears fans I know soured on Cutler pretty quickly (because of his inconsistent play, as well as his lousy personality), and were ready to see him go years before the Bears finally gave up on him.

Bear in mind that, when the Seahawks signed Flynn as a free agent, they didn’t even have Wilson yet – they drafted him in the 3rd round that year, several weeks after signing Flynn. My recollection is that, at that time, it was actually a surprise to most people that Wilson beat Flynn for the starting position by the end of preseason.

Flynn spent one year (2012) as backup to Wilson, then was traded to the Raiders, who thought he might be their starter for 2013. Flynn lost the job to Terrell Pryor, played in a game-and-a-half after Pryor got hurt, then was cut by Oakland.

Buffalo picked him up for a few weeks, then cut him, as well, at which point the Packers (who were down to their third-stringer, Scott Tolzien, due to injuries) brought him back in. He started four games for the Packers down the stretch in 2013, went 2-2, served as Rodgers’ backup again in ‘14, bounced around on a few teams’ rosters in '15, and retired.

27

Do you have to walk around in disguise? :wink:

I compile “Greatest Players of All Time” rosters for each N.F.L. franchise for use in an old (but very good!) football simulation that I run on occasion. A while back I looked up “best Bears’ quarterbacks of all time” and while Jay Cutler has the numbers to be considered the 2nd best Bears’ QB of all time, what I gathered is that if one were to ask Bears fans who the 2nd best Bears QB is of all time, Jay Cutler wouldn’t even be in the conversation.

I believe that’s correct. But I’ve always thought that acquiring a player on the basis of a performance in ONE GAME is pretty stupid. The Seattle SuperSonics did that with (“household name”. . .NOT) Jim McIlvaine back in the '90s (on the basis of his performance in this game) and the Seahawks did that with Matt Flynn on the basis of his performance in this game.

Now that you mention it I do seem to remember him being sent to Oakland and then ending up back in Green Bay at some point. But that was pretty much the extent of my knowledge of Matt Flynn until I read your post.

28

Not usually, no, though I do get some good-natured teasing when I wear Packer gear. My wife is from here, and she’s a Bears fan; she now cheers for the Packers, as long as they aren’t playing the Bears. :smiley: (Full disclosure: I grew up in Green Bay, I have Packers season tickets, and a share of stock in the team.)

I think that that’s an accurate statement. I remember Cutler being described, more than once, as “just good enough to get his coach fired.” Even when he was playing here, most of the Bears fans I know were ambivalent, at best, about Cutler, and a lot of them really disliked him. I don’t think anyone’s become more fond of him since he left.

Cutler also often seemed to have negative body language while he was on the sideline, which didn’t help. While he was still with the Bears, someone came up with the meme of “Smokin’ Jay Cutler,” and would photoshop cigarettes into Cutler’s pouting mouth – there’s a huge Tumblr site with a lot of them.

As we were talking about in another thread here last week, a big part of the reason why Cutler’s numbers look so good, relative to other Bears quarterbacks, is that he managed to last for eight seasons as the Bears’ starter, and that is far longer than anyone else has managed in the past 50 years.

If you asked Bears fans who the team’s best quarterbacks have been, Luckman would nearly always top the list, followed by Jim McMahon (for his personality as much as for the Super Bowl win)…and after that, there just aren’t a lot of candidates.

For sure, and Flynn managed to have that crazy-good game against the Lions just as his contract was up. Everyone knew that some team was going to overpay for Flynn; it’s an example of just how desperate half of the NFL is for a good quarterback.

29

In the Bears’ defense, the Cardinals haven’t been particularly great at obtaining top-notch QB talent over the decades, either. Nor, as I mentioned earlier in this thread, have the Lions. And what about the Browns?

{Snort} I’d say more like 2/3 to 3/4.

30

All three of those teams have been bottom-dwellers for most of the Super Bowl era, and have seemed to be perpetually making poor personnel decisions. That said, all three of them have had at least one (and maybe more than one) quarterback since 1970 whom I’d take over pretty much any Bears QB from the same time frame:

Cardinals: Jim Hart, Neil Lomax, Kurt Warner, Carson Palmer
Lions: Matthew Stafford
Browns: Brian Sipe, Bernie Kosar

And, it’s not like the Bears haven’t been good at drafting other positions – it’s good talent at quarterback (and, interestingly, wide receiver) that’s often eluded them.

31

Believe me - after all the research I’ve done for all of those “Greatest Players of All Time” rosters - I know. It’s almost as if the Bears have never strayed from the belief that a strong run game and strong defense (especially up front) are the best combination for success in the N.F.L.

32

For a long time, at least through most of the nineties, that was true. But along about 1999, they (like most of the NFL) began putting more draft and free agency assets into the offense. They drafted a QB in the first round in 1999 and 2 WR’s in the 3rd that year. 2 more thirds on a WR and TE the next year. They drafted another QB in the first round in 2003. They drafted a WR in the first round in 2001, and a first round TE in 2007. While it certainly waned under Lovie, they also traded 2 first round draft picks and a third rounder for Jay Cutler (I’m sorry, but typing that still makes me smile!) , they drafted another WR in the second round, then drafted another WR in the top 10, and traded more assets away to get Brandon Marshall and Martellus Bennett. They certainly went all in on building an offense then.

And it didn’t work. Because they almost always sucked at evaluating QB’s and WR’s. Cade McNown. David Terrell. Kevin White. Rex Grossman. And now Mitchell Trubisky. It’s not that they didn’t try. They just weren’t good at it. But imagine an offense with John Tait instead of Cade McNown. And Reggie Wayne or Drew Brees instead of David Terrell. Or Dallas Clark or Anquan Boldin instead of Rex Grossman. Or Jeremy Maclin, Mike Wallace, and Demaryius Thomas (or Dez Bryant) instead of Cutler. That kind of thinking can really hurt.

33

And, that was one where they actually made a good draft choice – Greg Olsen. Whom, the Bears decided to cut bait on after four seasons, and traded him to Carolina, where he’s still their starter.

34

Obligatory “Fuck Mike Martz.”

35

Olsen’s had a fantastic career as a non-Bear.

36

No, not really. McMahon was the 5th overall pick in '82. Harbaugh was the 26th overall pick in '87 and in the same year they rolled the dice with Flutie. In '94 they went out and signed the top free agent QB for what was at the time a sizable deal to get Erik Kramer from the rival Lions. They shipped the 11th overall pick to Seattle for Rick fucking Mirer in 1997. In 1999 it was Cade McNown at the 12th overall pick. In 2003 it was Rex Grossman 22nd overall and they did a vaguely wise thing by going back to the well with Kyle Orton two years later in the 4th round as insurance. This ultimately led to the Cutler trade and the Mitch pick.

So to say the Bears haven’t “valued” QBs is flat out wrong. The problem seems to be twofold (or threefold) - they never truly bottomed out to get a top 3 QB pick until Mitch, they by and large drafted and developed QBs one at a time, and they traded away assets for the wrong guy multiple times. Toss in multiple failed reclamation projects like Jim Miller, Chris Chandler, Kordell Stewart, Jason Campbell and the Bears have burned a lot of calories on the QB position but have done so without a clear strategy. In my opinion, they biggest issue is that they’ve always treated QB like any other position…get one when you need one, nbd.

37

Mitch. David Fales. Nathan Enderle. Dan LeFevour. Kyle Orton. Craig Krenzel. They seem to be willing to use draft capital to grab QB prospects and hoping they develop. Unfortunately, the Bears ability to develop QB’s is just about as bad as they are drafting them.

Though we do agree that teams should, by and large, draft a QB every year. The trading of future draft picks makes that harder for some teams to do, though. (cough, Bears, cough)

38

Mitch was unfortunately anointed the starter by virtue of the draft pick. He’s no different than McNown, Grossman or Harbaugh. Not the same thing as what I’m saying. And yes they dabbled in developmental QBs during the Cutler run, but it’s never been part of a sustained strategy. Orton wasn’t even drafted so much as a developmental guy, at the time Rex was coming off one of his many season ending injuries, he was injury insurance (which proved needed).

I know it’s probably cherry picking, but a great example is the Seahawks signing Matt Flynn and then still taking Russell Wilson that same year because they saw something in him, not just because “they needed another arm”. The Redskins for how terrible a franchise they are, wisely took RGIII and Kirk Cousins in the same draft. These teams needed a QB and they doubled down.

The Bears haven’t taken a single QB since Mitch, that’s fucking lunacy when you consider that he’s never really looked the THE guy for more than a game or two in a row and everyone knew he had limited experience in college. I don’t hate the fact that Pace picked him, QB evaluation is a crap shoot at best, but the unwillingness to entertain the idea you might be wrong is negligent to me. If I were the GM of a team, I’m not just taking a QB every year, I’m spending a 1st or 2nd rounder on a QB every year until I have a starter I like. Then I ratchet back to spending a 3rd or 4th rounder on a QB at least every other year. Taking a string of 6th round talents makes it look like you’re “developing” QBs but those guys are such longshots that it’s probably just window dressing. Praying you find the next Brady is better than nothing, but that’s not a plan, it’s a wish.

39

Add Cincinnatus to the list of teams that appear to be moving on from veteran QBs: Report: Bengals bench QB Andy Dalton on his birthday - Yahoo Sports

40

Benching Dalton on his birthday. That’s cold.