2006 Chicago Bears

[JDOldSchool]

Originally Posted by The Professor

I think Rex has a way to go to trump Kramer's 1995 effort, though it does look like -- after next season -- he's likely to deserve praise as the franchise's best ever QB.

Not that that means much. It's like being the best ever QB for the Lions. Maybe even a worse case than that. I think there might be "fifth best" QBs for some franchises that would blow away the best the Lions and Bears can offer.

Still, Kramer had outstanding numbers for a less talented Bears team in 1995. Grossman has a ways to go in order to match or better them. And if we're counting the overall performance of the team against Kramer (or in favor of Grossman) then you'd almost have to annoint McMahon (or more obscurely Billy Wade) the "all-time" best QB for at least the moment.

Assuming Grossman carries this pace into the next season...I'll buy him as the best. Until then, with only a season of work to gauge, I'd take Kramer first and possibly even the [somewhat more] healthy version of 1985-McMahon.

I don't disagree with any of this. Kramer certainly had that one better season, and McMahon got to enjoy success with the greatest running back ever and that '85 defense, but I think Grossman is and will be a better overall QB than both. His 2006 season won't necessarily be the best in team history.

[Jordan]

From Dan Pompei of The Sporting News

Here's a heartwarming anecdote. Bears RE Alex Brown was eating in the team hotel's restaurant the night before their Week 11 game against the Jets with his agent, Joel Segal. A young fan named Ryan approached Brown and asked for his autograph. The accommodating Brown granted the request and struck up a conversation with the boy that went on for about 20 minutes. The kid had traveled from Chicago to New Jersey with his father to see his first Bears game but had yet to acquire tickets. Brown excused himself to go to the restroom and left Ryan and Segal to talk. When Brown returned, he asked about the boy's grades. Ryan said they were pretty good. Brown told him to improve the grades, then handed him two tickets for the Bears-Jets game. . . .

...pretty cool

[AnotherAlias]

I think the Bears need to start thinking about bringing Griese to the table.

Grossman's stats suck. His best games came against these teams and their respective defensive ranks against the pass:

Detroit #21
Seattle #19
Buffalo #18
San Francisco#24
Giants #20 (and they were full of injuries)

It isn't even worth taking the risk in letting him lose home-field advantage. The Vikes are tougher now than they were the first game the Bears faced them. I believe the Bears need to see how Griese manages the offense.

Let the QB controversy begin!

[Sandy K]

I think Bears fans have to realize what Grossman is capable of. He's a quarterback, if given time and a great running game, who can attack defenses and play great.

In games that Thomas Jones runs for 95+ yards:

11 TD, 1 INT for Grossman

Grossman does not have the ability to take over a game, and needs a running game to complement his passing.

[The Professor]

Originally Posted by Sandy K

I think Bears fans have to realize what Grossman is capable of. He's a quarterback, if given time and a great running game, who can attack defenses and play great.

In games that Thomas Jones runs for 95+ yards:

11 TD, 1 INT for Grossman

Grossman does not have the ability to take over a game, and needs a running game to complement his passing.

Agreed.

This is true, I think, of the vast majority of NFL QBs. Even guys who have the ability to consistently keep their teams competitive without a ground game would probably prefer it was not so.

It is not an insult to Grossman to suggest that he needs to play off the running attack or that when his surrounding cast falters, he stinks it up. There are Hall of Fame passers who were of similar design. I think he's an ideal fit for a team that can consistently run the ball where his aggressive, gambling, style serves to keep defenses honest.

I think the Bears have been exposed, though, as a team with a somewhat erratic running game. And if you can slam the door on that, Grossman hasn't proven that he can carry the offense -- he presses and makes mistakes. Poor line play and receiving gaffes only serve to exacerbate Grossman's ineffectiveness.

In a lot of ways I'm reminded of Boomer Esiason, to me the classic case of a QB who relied on the running game. When Cincinnati had a great line and a punishing two-back rushing attack, Esiason thrived. His unmatched ability to work the play-action fake and big arm were perfect compliments to a team that could dominate the line and run the ball at will. Hell, fitting so neatly into such a system earned him an MVP. When the running game dried up and the line deteriorated, Esiason could still throw the ball, but the mistakes were multiplied and the statistical decline was relatively sharp.

So, bottom line, I think you're exactly right. If the Bears support Grossman by establishing a consistent running game and provide him good protection, I think he's capable of lighting any defense up. He's just not Dan Marino or Dan Fouts. He can't carry a team alone. :shrugs: And that doesn't mean he is a bad NFL QB. I wouldn't classify him as a "game manager", but he is probably something of a "system" QB at this stage.

[JDOldSchool]

Originally Posted by AnotherAlias

I think the Bears need to start thinking about bringing Griese to the table.

Not to be rude, but this would be the stupidest thing the Bears could do outside of cutting Brian Urlacher or something. Brian Griese is a backup quarterback on his 4th team in 5 years for a reason.

Grossman's stats suck. His best games came against these teams and their respective defensive ranks against the pass:

Detroit #21
Seattle #19
Buffalo #18
San Francisco#24
Giants #20 (and they were full of injuries)

It isn't even worth taking the risk in letting him lose home-field advantage. The Vikes are tougher now than they were the first game the Bears faced them. I believe the Bears need to see how Griese manages the offense.

Let the QB controversy begin!

For having stats that suck, he sure is having one of the best seasons of any Bears quarterback EVER. The Vikings are not tougher now than before. The Vikings are much, much worse now. The Vikings were predicted by many to be a 10-win team at the start of the season. They were 2-0 when they faced the Bears. Now they can barely maintain a home lead against the Cardinals.

There is no QB controversy, except among the meathead Bears fans who would be much better served practicing their Super Fan impressions than they would actually trying to understand what's happening in a football game.

[JDOldSchool]

Originally Posted by Sandy K

I think Bears fans have to realize what Grossman is capable of. He's a quarterback, if given time and a great running game, who can attack defenses and play great.

In games that Thomas Jones runs for 95+ yards:

11 TD, 1 INT for Grossman

Grossman does not have the ability to take over a game, and needs a running game to complement his passing.

Can you imagine if they'd let the better running back start?

A prime example of exactly why Benson isn't just better, but he's far superior to Jones: Last night Benson had something like a 14 yard gain on a play where the hole was small. The hole required Benson to make a little contact. It was there, but he had to hit it hard and fast. Thomas Jones would never, ever, ever in a million years have hit that hole. He would've danced and then fallen down for a 2 yard gain.

[AnotherAlias]

Originally Posted by Sandy K

In games that Thomas Jones runs for 95+ yards:

11 TD, 4 INT for Grossman

.

Fixed it for ya!

Originally Posted by JDOldSchool

Not to be rude, but this would be the stupidest thing the Bears could do outside of cutting Brian Urlacher or something. Brian Griese is a backup quarterback on his 4th team in 5 years for a reason.

Having an opposing opinion isn't rude, don't worry.

Griese has much more experience than Grossman. 4 bad games out of the last six shows that they should at least be looking at a possible change. Look at Dallas...they changed and Romo has been doing great. It's not stupid to take players out that aren't producing. It is stupid sticking to something that clearly isn't working.

Originally Posted by JDOldSchool

For having stats that suck, he sure is having one of the best seasons of any Bears quarterback EVER.

Being 4th in the NFL by throwing 14 interceptions hasn't fazed you yet, eh? His 77.6 QB rating doesn't bother you?

[Sandy K]

Originally Posted by AnotherAlias

Fixed it for ya!

What game did I miss?

[The Professor]

Originally Posted by AnotherAlias

...His 77.6 QB rating doesn't bother you?

I'm not sure, but QB rating might be one of the most useless statistical barometers in existence.

It would be a knee-jerk, armchair quarterback, reaction to yank Grossman at this point. Wait and see what next week brings at the very least.

[AnotherAlias]

Originally Posted by Sandy K

What game did I miss?

Yesterday's. Thomas ran for 99 yards and Grossman had 3 INTs.

Originally Posted by The Professor

I'm not sure, but QB rating might be one of the most useless statistical barometers in existence.

Apparently, not everyone agrees. What is a better measurement? Completion Pct? TDs vs. INTs? Wins -losses? Yards per completion/pass? What method would you prefer?

Originally Posted by The Professor

It would be a knee-jerk, armchair quarterback, reaction to yank Grossman at this point. Wait and see what next week brings at the very least.

Isn't that what Drew Bledsoe fans were saying in Dallas, until they got a look at Tony Romo?

Next week he's at home, where his performance has been outstanding, so I'm hoping for better output. I have a great feeling we are going to be completely underwhelmed with his numbers, come Sunday. I would imagine we'll see more of the passing game and less running plays, considering the fact that the Vikes are tough against the run.

We should see Grossman pick apart the Minnesota secondary, but don't let that accomplishment fool you, if it weren't for the Bengals scraping at the bottom of the defensive passing barrel, the Vikes would be right there. Their pass defense is ranked at 31.

So, a great game from Grossman is what's needed for me to agree with sticking with him. A mediocre, or even just a decent game against Minnesota doesn't cut the mustard with me.

If he performs poorly against the Vikes, at home...and they don't change to Griese, heads will roll!

[JDOldSchool]

Originally Posted by AnotherAlias

Griese has much more experience than Grossman. 4 bad games out of the last six shows that they should at least be looking at a possible change. Look at Dallas...they changed and Romo has been doing great. It's not stupid to take players out that aren't producing. It is stupid sticking to something that clearly isn't working.

By my count, Rex has had 2 great games, 1 good game, and 3 poor games. Has you ever actually watched Brian Griese? I have no reason to believe that wouldn't be his performance, at best. Rex is their quarterback for now and the future. You don't give up on a project in the middle of it because it's not going 100% perfectly. I can't understand why people think Brian Griese is the offspring of God and Dan frickin' Marino because that's how people talk.

For what it's worth, NOBODY in the Bears organization thinks Griese is better. They see him all the time. Desmond Clark played with him in his best season ever. They all think Rex is the guy.

Romo is a different story. He is the young guy. He's the Rex of the Cowboys. Bledsoe is nearing the end of his career. Apples and oranges.

The bottom line is that Rex has been producing this year. He's had a few awful games, but that happens with young quarterbacks. Ever look at Peyton Mannings first season in the NFL? No, Rex is not now and never will be Manning, but young guys have bad games. The Bears thankfully realize they need to deal with it.

Being 4th in the NFL by throwing 14 interceptions hasn't fazed you yet, eh? His 77.6 QB rating doesn't bother you?

Trent Dilfer's rating was worse the year the Ravens won the Super Bowl. Rex is a better player than Trent Dilfer.

[AnotherAlias]

Originally Posted by JDOldSchool

By my count, Rex has had 2 great games, 1 good game, and 3 poor games. Has you ever actually watched Brian Griese? I have no reason to believe that wouldn't be his performance, at best. Rex is their quarterback for now and the future. You don't give up on a project in the middle of it because it's not going 100% perfectly. I can't understand why people think Brian Griese is the offspring of God and Dan frickin' Marino because that's how people talk.

For what it's worth, NOBODY in the Bears organization thinks Griese is better. They see him all the time. Desmond Clark played with him in his best season ever. They all think Rex is the guy.

Romo is a different story. He is the young guy. He's the Rex of the Cowboys. Bledsoe is nearing the end of his career. Apples and oranges.

The bottom line is that Rex has been producing this year. He's had a few awful games, but that happens with young quarterbacks. Ever look at Peyton Mannings first season in the NFL? No, Rex is not now and never will be Manning, but young guys have bad games. The Bears thankfully realize they need to deal with it.



Trent Dilfer's rating was worse the year the Ravens won the Super Bowl. Rex is a better player than Trent Dilfer.

Here's the deal...the Bears defense may not be as good next year, or the year after that. This is the year they need to make an honest effort to go to the big game. When McMahon went down, Fuller filled in and got them some wins, and he wasn't a great QB either.

The Vikes have a piss-poor pass defense and if Grossman throws a couple of early picks and they don't switch to Griese, then something is most definitely wrong with management.

I understand Grossman is the QB of the future, and to make a change will damage his confidence, but this isn't about Rex's feelings...it's about winning. If Rex is throwing INTs, then they need to make a change, IMHO.

[JDOldSchool]

Originally Posted by AnotherAlias

Here's the deal...the Bears defense may not be as good next year, or the year after that. This is the year they need to make an honest effort to go to the big game. When McMahon went down, Fuller filled in and got them some wins, and he wasn't a great QB either.

The Vikes have a piss-poor pass defense and if Grossman throws a couple of early picks and they don't switch to Griese, then something is most definitely wrong with management.

I understand Grossman is the QB of the future, and to make a change will damage his confidence, but this isn't about Rex's feelings...it's about winning. If Rex is throwing INTs, then they need to make a change, IMHO.

You're right, it's about winning. Brian Griese is not a good quarterback. I really think it's that simple.

I can't believe how quickly people forgot about last year. The Bears went from 16.2 points per game with Kyle Orton to 26.8 ppg (I know special teams/defensive points are included in that, but it wouldn't change the point I'm making here) with Rex. He's the ONLY difference in the offense. Oh, and Thomas Jones went from a career year to being one of the worst running backs in the league. Rex is the reason they're scoring more points. Rex has made the offense better.

How many people demanded Michael Vick sit down when he sucked up the joint for the past few years? Rex has a better career passer rating, not that passer rating means anything useful. If you throw 3 passes and complete none of them, your rating is 39.5. It's the same if you throw 100 incompletions. You get nearly 40 points for doing nothing? The formula is nonsense and not really based on any legitimate math.

[AnotherAlias]

Originally Posted by JDOldSchool

You're right, it's about winning. Brian Griese is not a good quarterback. I really think it's that simple.

I can't believe how quickly people forgot about last year. The Bears went from 16.2 points per game with Kyle Orton to 26.8 ppg (I know special teams/defensive points are included in that, but it wouldn't change the point I'm making here) with Rex. He's the ONLY difference in the offense. Oh, and Thomas Jones went from a career year to being one of the worst running backs in the league. Rex is the reason they're scoring more points. Rex has made the offense better.

Rex has thrown more crucial interceptions recently than Orton did last year. Orton stretched his INTs - 13 out over a span of 15 games. Grossman has 14 in 11 games. His QB pct = 59.7 last year, which is only 18 points lower than Rex right now. (I don't care if you think the rating is useless, until you come up with a better formula, this is what we have)

I'm not making a case for Orton, I know that's what you're thinking. I'm simply showing you that Grossman is losing games for us right now and his numbers aren't that much better than Orton. Grossman has more comps, and yardage, but his mistakes are piling up. One of the problems he's having is adjusting to the pressure that defenses are putting on him up the middle. They blitz up the middle and his lack of height hindures his ability to see the middle of the field well enough. Until the Bears' coaches find a way to counter this, be it thru some boot-legs, or by quicker slants, Rex is going to have trouble.

Griese is taller and has way more experience. Perhaps his mediocre stats were a product of his surrounding cast, we'll never know unless he's given a look.
His pre-season stats were better than Grossman from what I recall. His career completion pct is 63.2 %. Grossman is hovering somewhere near 55%.

Grossman is near even in terms of career TDs to INTs (22-20)
Griese is (103-78)

I'm not saying Griese is the QB of the future, but Grossman's performance has been inconsistent and poor in 4 of the last 6 games. As I say, if he performs poorly against such a terrible pass defense like the Vikings have, wouldn't you agree that changes need to be made?

I'll say this...if the coaches do something to reign in Grossman a little, in terms of a more run oriented offense, throw in a few bootlegs, or figure out how to utilize a few screens and if he cuts out the turnovers (fumbles, too) then let him lead. If not, heads will roll!

[JDOldSchool]

Originally Posted by AnotherAlias

I'm simply showing you that Grossman is losing games for us right now and his numbers aren't that much better than Orton.

No need to comment on the rest of it. This is enough. Rex was not the main reason the Bears lost Sunday.

The Bears lost because the Patriots defense, namely Samuel, outplayed Bears receivers. In addition, (quoting from a previous post in this thread) they threw way too much, the defense allowed too many third down conversions, the receivers again ran horrible routes, and the offensive line was awful with the pass blocking he gets all the blame. And Nathan Vasher is not very good at anything but intercepting a pass now and then. His coverage and tackling are mediocre and he allowed far too many plays to the Patriots receivers.

Rex was bad Sunday, but he was only a part of the bad. I still don't think that last interception was his fault. Davis ran one of the worst-looking routes I've ever seen. Plus, it's stupid to have Davis running that route.

Just because Orton didn't throw lots of interceptions doesn't mean he was bad. You used rating again, but I proved that rating doesn't penalize for incompletions. It also rewards for little 3 yard passes. The Bears won in spite of Orton last year. They're winning games BECAUSE OF Rex this year. Griese would just be a better version of Orton.

To minimize pass-happy Rex, the coaches need to play certain games like the Jets game. The best part is that those "certain games" won't happen till January. I'm hoping the coaching staff is smart enough to tone it down against certain teams in the playoffs.

With that said, I expect a two touchdown victory this Sunday against the Viqueens.

Edit: Just noticed this part:

As I say, if he performs poorly against such a terrible pass defense like the Vikings have, wouldn't you agree that changes need to be made?

Absolutely not. I don't take Rex out unless he gets hurt or it's a total blowout either way. And I only take him out in a blowout loss when all hope is gone. Backup quarterbacks are not relief pitchers.

[The Professor]

Originally Posted by AnotherAlias

Rex has thrown more crucial interceptions recently than Orton did last year. Orton stretched his INTs - 13 out over a span of 15 games. Grossman has 14 in 11 games. His QB pct = 59.7 last year, which is only 18 points lower than Rex right now. (I don't care if you think the rating is useless, until you come up with a better formula, this is what we have)

I've already contended that QB Rating is a poor barometer of performance, but for the sake of playing along. An 18 point difference in rating is pretty significant, the difference between a Pro Bowler and a mediocre, at best, passer.

I still don't think you've made a very convincing case for Griese. Grossman deserves at least one more week, if not more, to right the ship. The Bledsoe comparisons are weak because 1) as already pointed out, Bledsoe is considerably older and 2) the Bears are 9-2 despite (or because of) Grossman's play, the Cowboys were sinking out of contention when the Romo switch occurred.

The only reason heads will roll is if the Bears cater to the whims of overzealous fans.

[AnotherAlias]

Originally Posted by The Professor

I've already contended that QB Rating is a poor barometer of performance, but for the sake of playing along. An 18 point difference in rating is pretty significant, the difference between a Pro Bowler and a mediocre, at best, passer.

So, Griese's 84.9 (thru 8 seasons) is significantly higher than Grossman's 74.4 rating.

You can contend that the rating system is a poor barometer, but if it were so poor they wouldn't be using it. Do you have a better rating system? I'm interested in hearing about it.

Originally Posted by The Professor

I still don't think you've made a very convincing case for Griese. Grossman deserves at least one more week, if not more, to right the ship. The Bledsoe comparisons are weak because 1) as already pointed out, Bledsoe is considerably older and 2) the Bears are 9-2 despite (or because of) Grossman's play, the Cowboys were sinking out of contention when the Romo switch occurred.

Grossman deserves anotherstart, yes. However, they should work some reps with Griese at the helm, if for no other reason than to light a fire under Rex. If Rex starts making poor decisions and gets a couple of INTs, I wonder if Lovie will have the guts to make a change.

Originally Posted by The Professor

The only reason heads will roll is if the Bears cater to the whims of overzealous fans.

Yeah.

[AnotherAlias]

Originally Posted by JDOldSchool

Just because Orton didn't throw lots of interceptions doesn't mean he was bad. You used rating again, but I proved that rating doesn't penalize for incompletions. It also rewards for little 3 yard passes. The Bears won in spite of Orton last year. They're winning games BECAUSE OF Rex this year. Griese would just be a better version of Orton.

You still haven't shared a better rating system, so I'll keep using it until you do.

The Bears won in Arizona in spite of Grossman. If he performs this Sunday like he did in Foxboro, expect some changes.

[The Professor]

retro dola


See next post.