Who holds the Bear's record for most pass attempts without an interception?

by californiabearfan on Dec 24, 2008 7:36 PM CST Comment 138 comments

Nope, its not Erik Kramer. And it sure ain't Grossman. The answer is Kyle Orton, who broke the record this season. The reason I am reminding everyone of this is because for some reason Bears fans seem to have turned on Kyle Orton. Which to me is just plain madness. Lets take an objective look at Kyle Orton's season as a whole:

Teams we have played and their defensive ranks by passing defense and their ranks of interceptions from NFL.com:

IND: #10 in yards, #9 in INTs (Orton 13-21, 150 YDs, 0 TD, 0 INT)

CAR: #11 in yards, #24 in INTs (Orton 19-32, 159 YDs, 0 TD, 0 INT)

TB: #5 in yards, #4 in INTs (Orton 22-34, 268 YDs, 2 TD, 2 INT)

PHI: #2 in yards, #13 in INTs (Orton 18-34, 199 YDs, 3 TDs, 2 INT)

DET: #26 in yards, #32 in INTs (Orton 32-48, 442 YDs, 2 TDs, 0 INT) 2 games

ATL: #22 in yards, #26 in INTs (Orton 26-43, 286 YDs, 1 TD, 0 INT)

MIN: #18 in yards, #19 in INTs (Orton 32-61. 436 YDs, 4 TDs, 3 INT) 2 games

GB: #12 in yards, #5 in INTs (Orton 27-53, 305 yds, 1 TD, 2 INTs) 2 games

STL: #23 in yards, #26 in INTs (Orton 17-28, 132 yds, 1 TD, 0 INT)

JAC: #19 in yards, #16 in INTs (Orton 20-34, 219 yds, 2 TDs, 1 INT)

NO: #21 in yards, #9 in INTs (Orton 24-40, 172 yds, 0 TDs, 2 INTs)

There are some very important things to gather out of this information. First of all, take a look at the strength of defenses we have played against. Its not like he is throwing against the bottom dwelling defenses. Kyle Orton has thrown 12 INTs this season. Here are the games:

Tampa Bay: 2 INTs (#5 in yards, #4 in INTs)

Philadelphia: 2 INTs (#2 in yards, #13 in INTs)

Minesota (Game 2): 3 INTs (#18 in yards, #19 in INTs)

Jacksonville: 1 INT (#19 in yards, #16 in INTs)

New Orleans: 2 INTs (#21 in yards, #9 in INTs)

Green Bay (Game 2): 2 INTs (#12 in yards, #5 in INTs)

Three out of the six were against teams who are in the Top 10 in the league in causing interceptions. The other three (Philadelphia, Minnesota, and Jacksonville) are all considered some of the top defenses in the league. There is also something else to take away from this: Out of the 14 games played, Kyle Orton has only thrown interceptions in six of them.

There is also something else very important to look at. Kyle Orton hurt his ankle badly against Detroit in Week 9. Initial reports had him out 4 to 6 weeks. Because Orton is a pretty tough guy and was able to play through the pain, he was back out on the field after one week. But anyone that has ever sprained an ankle will tell you that while its easy to play through an ankle injury, its very hard to play at the same level you once did and that ankle will never become fully healed until after the season. The quarterback position relies a lot on foot position, balance, and movement in the pocket. Being able to plant properly will also strongly affect the accuracy and strength of your throws.

Four out of the six games Kyle Orton has thrown interceptions in are post ankle injury.

Give the guy a chance. We finally have a good quarterback that helps us win games and can make all the throws when healthy. We as Chicago Bear fans have got to loosen up a little bit. We are all so scarred from so many bad quarterbacks that we just can't trust anyone at all. Some of the same people who were saying we should resign him long term are now saying we should get rid of him? Come on.

I was so fired up after the Bears won. I came on this website hoping to see the same excitement and all I saw a list of players that we need to sign next year instead and negative views all around. Orton made some good throws and made plays when he needed too. He threw two picks on a freezing cold day when his receivers could barely get off the line to one of the top passing defenses in the league. It happens.

Young quarterbacks who are in their 30th start are going to have bad games. Quarterbacks in their 70th start are going to have bad games. Peyton Manning is going to have bad stretches of games. Drew Brees is going to have bad stretches of games. Brees almost led the league an interceptions last year and now he is about to break Dan Marino's record for yards. Imagine being a Green Bay fan all those years with Brett Farve regularly tossing balls to the opposing team game after game. Brett Farve always could win though. And Kyle Orton's record as a starter is 20-11.

Lets have some fun with this guys. We have a chance to go to the playoffs! Have a good time with it. Shove it in your non-Bears fan friend's (which are almost all of mine) faces that our team is 9-6 and is a team NO ONE would want to face in the playoffs. We almost beat the Carolina Panthers, remember? And the Buccaneers! And the Falcons! And does anyone think we wouldn't destroy the Cardinals? What about matching up against the Giants without Plaxico with the way our run defense plays? The Cowboys would be a tough matchup for us but it definitely wouldn't be a forgone conclusion. Every NFC team has their flaws and issues. Quarterback is not one of them for us.

3 recs | Comment 138 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

ORTON IS NOT THE ANSWER, HE IS JUST AS INCONSISTENT AS GROSSMAN. LEAST REX COULD THROW THE LONG BALL, LOOK AT MY OTHER POST UNDER THE "ORTON HATING" AND YOU"LL SEE THE STATS TO PROVE GROSSMAN HAD THE OFFENSE RANKED HIGHER AND HIS STATS WERE BETTER. WE NEE

BEAR DOWN!

by DaBears2234 on Dec 24, 2008 7:44 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

I would just like to say that the games Grossman was allowed to play this season...

that he threw the ball horribly. He could not throw the short, medium, or the long passes. IMO, Grossman is a higher liability than Orton, as Orton can throw the short passes pretty well and he does a very good job of not fumbling.

by aznsensation on Dec 24, 2008 8:15 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Yep....you nailed it all.

I'M A MAN! I'M 22!

by ChiFan13 on Dec 24, 2008 9:21 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

That comment is ridiculous

If you think that Orton is a more accurate passer, your on something. Orton does many things better but accuracy short, medium, long, inside, and outside are not any of them. The guy hadn’t been throwing to that group of WR’s for 8 weeks he played one game against the best defense in the league at the time. Rusty is what you can call that. Wow, you really give a guy a chance. Orton throws terribly against Carolina and Tampa Bay at the beginning of the year and has one game all year where he hits a deep pass and you give that guy 1 million chances.

Kick it to me... I'm open!

by #23 on Dec 25, 2008 9:49 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

you actually think grossamn is accurate?

do you watch the games?

by mike b on Dec 25, 2008 10:11 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

do you?

The dock on rex has always been decision making, not accuarcy. He can make throws kyle and previously griese could only dream of.

by rahulsriram on Dec 25, 2008 12:19 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

yep

thats why his career completion is so high.

are you honestly saying grossman is an accurate passer, especially over the last two years? he routinely misses receivers.

just becuase people on blogs keeping saying what the knock is doesn’t meant that’s actually case.

by mike b on Dec 25, 2008 12:50 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

If he isn't throwing bombs all day

and if he had a running back making some catches to up his completion percentage then yeah, his numbers would look good. He looked very accurate last year. Too bad he had 1.5 seconds to make a decision.

Kick it to me... I'm open!

by #23 on Dec 25, 2008 1:43 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

And if he could handle a snap to save his life :)

I'M A MAN! I'M 22!

by ChiFan13 on Dec 25, 2008 2:59 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Oh you mean like Griese and Orton?

Oh wait!

Kick it to me... I'm open!

by #23 on Dec 25, 2008 3:57 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

well said

how we forget about fumbled snaps on the goal line…oh i dont know say vs. the saints.

and to the earlier point.. if you look at his turnovers after his benching, rex is much improved and alot of the issues of 06’ have been corrected…but whats the point in arguing with an already convinced opposition… im out, happy holidays.

by rahulsriram on Dec 25, 2008 4:02 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

much improved

but still shitty.

by mike b on Dec 25, 2008 4:54 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

shitty means more turnovers than touchdowns btw.

by mike b on Dec 26, 2008 8:32 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Orton holds onto the ball better than Grossman

The problem with your argument is all the “ifs.” IF he had a line. IF he had a RB that could catch. IF he had time to make a decision.

So, I’ll flip it.

IF Orton had a stellar line. IF Orton had a solid WR corps. IF Orton had a playmaking receiver.

I'M A MAN! I'M 22!

by ChiFan13 on Dec 25, 2008 4:24 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

heres the problem with your argument

“IF Orton had a stellar line. IF Orton had a solid WR corps. IF Orton had a playmaking receiver.”…… he still wouldnt be able to throw a 30 yard pass to him….and we have 15 games to prove that. Or Im sorry he could underthrow a 50 yard route, 40 yards and draw a pass interference call.

ortons strengths are the no huddle and the no huddle alone, hence the sucess late in the games the last couple of weeks.

by rahulsriram on Dec 25, 2008 10:03 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

The if's I used were based on what Orton's cards look like.

I wasn’t just making up random stuff. Grossman had many good games when he had a running back and offensive line. At the end of 06 he was exposed as teams got more pressure on him. In 07 he was pummled and we all know that QB’s look bad in those situations.

This year Kyle has an OL to block on passing. He has a running back that is a beast and who raises his completion percentage a lot. With that, I believe Rex would do much better. Orton’s completion percentage as bad as it is would be worse if it were not for the 5 dump passes to Forte every game.

Kick it to me... I'm open!

by #23 on Dec 26, 2008 1:10 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

funny thing about numbers

2006 RB Receptions: 75
2008 RB Receptions: 78

so yeah, only orton benefited from dump offs to running backs, which is of course not all that either did when passing to the running back.

by mike b on Dec 26, 2008 8:55 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

running back and fullback

if one would want to differentiate

by mike b on Dec 26, 2008 9:27 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

First of all the season isn't over

second of all, we all know that Forte has hardly missed a chance to catch a pass. Third of all Ron Turner’s play calling has changed a ton.

You like to split hairs.

Kick it to me... I'm open!

by #23 on Dec 26, 2008 11:10 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

are you serious?

you really think showing you that the running backs caught almost the same amount of balls under both quarterbacks is splitting hairs?

just becasue you want to spew shit without checking a single number doesn’t mean the rest of us have to.

He has a running back that is a beast and who raises his completion percentage a lot. With that, I believe Rex would do much better.

he had that.

by mike b on Dec 29, 2008 8:56 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

You split lots of hairs Mike B.

You miss the point on lots of issues because you don’t try to understand what someone is saying. You just take it for what you want it to really mean and run with it.

How many passes did Forte drop? I would say that he helped Orton completion percentage a ton. Do I think that Turner changed his play calling from 2006? Yes absolutely. He was much more creative this year except on the full back dive. If I’m wrong that is fine. I’m not sure you have ever been wrong about anything. I don’t have a problem admitting that.

By the way, you’ve sold me on needing safety help after this past game. You were right.

Kick it to me... I'm open!

by #23 on Dec 29, 2008 12:30 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

answer this....

How was Forte any different than what Grossman had in 2006?

You say Forte made a huge difference – how so?

Bringing moderation to a place I don't moderate.

visit the mindful mission

by big_lowitzki on Dec 29, 2008 2:18 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I think I only remember 2 passes dropped from Forte in the 5 yard range.

That is pretty awesome if that number is close!

Benson was in on probably 25-30% of plays depending on what part of the season and we know he dropped tons of passes out of the backfield.

Yes TJ did well and was helpful to Grossman, but I will also say that 2006 was Grossman’s first year as a full time starter and he had little game experience. He would have benefitted more from having that be his second full year then his first.

I’m shocked that receptions are the similar from that group, but my guess is attempts to that group are different. I have no idea how to look it up.

Kick it to me... I'm open!

by #23 on Dec 29, 2008 2:58 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Fwiw...

via Football Outsider Rankings for RB Receptions

J. Mckie – 47 in DYAR, DVOA, 38 for 162 yrds, 79% catch rate
T. Jones – 53rd in DYAR, 50th in DVOA, 47 passes for 154 yards at a 72% rate
Benson – 10 catches for 54 yrds at a 78% rate

(FO has a different leaderboard for 10-24 and then 25+)
They have something called True Yards which I believe is the same as effective yards, but they were all rather similar in 2006.

Total: 75 for 458 yrds

M. Forte – 2nd in DYAR, 8th in DVOA, 76 catches for 477 yrds – 83% rate (735 effective yards)
McKie – 15 for 64 yrds – 73% rate
Peterson – 10 for 45 yrds – 60%

83 catches for 603 yrds

Effective yards: Translate DVOA into a yards per attempt figure. This provides an easy comparison: in general, players with more Effective Yards than standard yards played better than standard stats would otherwise indicate, while players with fewer Effective Yards than standard yards played worse than standard stats would otherwise indicate. Effective Yards are not the best way to measure total value because they are more dependent on usage than DYAR.

Man, I don’t remember that many throws to Jason McKie in 2006….but it does seem that Forte was more useful and better than Jones, Benson and Mckie in 2006 at catching the ball out of the backfield. They pretty much used him exclusively and he’s definitely going to get some more yards on his own over Jason McKie.

Visit The Cub Reporter (thecubreporter.com)

by thecubreporter on Dec 29, 2008 4:14 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Wow, thanks.

I’m glad to see all those catches weren’t to Jones. That makes a lot more since. McKie doesn’t pick up first downs, he picks up 1-2 yards. I guess if that is what you were looking for then that would be helpful.

I’ll take Forte and his catches over McKie. That will help you move the chains. Plus their is a 4% difference in receptions. That will make your completion percentage go up a little, don’t you think?

Kick it to me... I'm open!

by #23 on Dec 29, 2008 4:30 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

well

either Forte is that much better at catching the ball or Orton was that much better at getting Forte the ball than Grossman was….

my guess is the answer lies somewhere in the middle….

but I do think that throwing it primarily to Forte over splitting it between Jones and McKie did help Orton’s yard stats at least.

McKie’s average was 4.26 ypc, Jones 3.28, Forte 6.28

Visit The Cub Reporter (thecubreporter.com)

by thecubreporter on Dec 29, 2008 4:37 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

more yards...

…. is different than what #23 has been saying. #23 has been saying that Forte increased Orton’s completion %. The % difference is not huge, but probably would make a difference.

Bringing moderation to a place I don't moderate.

visit the mindful mission

by big_lowitzki on Dec 30, 2008 8:13 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

well

if you have a better option to throw it to, you’ll throw it more often there…

i messed up the #’s a bit above…those were total times thrown to…

2006
Mckie 25/38 (catches/thrown at)
Jones 36/47
Benson 8/10

69/95 = .726

Peterson also caught 6, but I don’t have the attempts

2008
Forte 63/76
Mckie 11/15
Peterson 6/10

80/101=.792

K. Jones caught 2, J.Davis 1 as well

that’s about a fifth of the pass attempts (although some are Grossman’s).

It’s not a huge difference in pass attempts, even with the missing data, but it helped Orton’s completion %. Of course, rarely throwing the ball more than 30 yards probably helped it more.

Fun stat:
Grossman sacked 21 times in 2006 and loss 142 yrds in 480 PA’s and 16 games

Orton sacked 27 times in 2008 and loss 160 yards in 464 PA’s and 15 games.

Visit The Cub Reporter (thecubreporter.com)

by thecubreporter on Dec 30, 2008 12:44 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs

i know exactly

what you are trying to say and what you want to be true, just tryingto show you with actual data its not. if numbers and proof are spiltting hairs, well that explains a lot then.

by mike b on Dec 29, 2008 5:29 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

how can you predict what grossman can do?

With that, I believe Rex would do much better.

or is it only people who predict good things?

How can you predict how many int and fumbles he would have had in that game? That is stupid

http://www.windycitygridiron.com/2008/12/22/700276/bears-alive-somehow-beat-p#

by mike b on Dec 26, 2008 9:26 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

My problem with this whole thread

is that people want Orton to receive no criticism for his similar failures as Grossman to be effective or consistent. I think you’re missing my point and hopefully that clears it up. I’m pretty sure you are an equal opportunity QB criticizer.

No I do not believe you can predict that Grossman would have that many turnovers against Green Bay when in the two games he played he never fumbled first of all. And his picks were not horrible picks.

Kick it to me... I'm open!

by #23 on Dec 26, 2008 11:14 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

running cirlces

if other people can’t project grossman’s success or failures neither can you.

by mike b on Dec 29, 2008 8:51 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I have not predicted 5 TD's against a certain team, I'm predicting scoring more points.

If they want to predict more Int’s, that is fine with me, but to say absolutely have 6 turnovers is ridiculous to me oh wise one.

I believe that Grossman would have put up more points this season than Orton. That is my prediction. He would probably have about 15 ints. I will also guess that about 5 of those Int’s would have looked like punts from forcing a deep throw. Those Int’s are better than Ortons 5 yard down the field Int’s. Orton had a good and bad streak with ints. Overall he wasn’t low on ints.

Would points of won us games? I don’t really care, I just am claiming that Rex would score more points.

Is that ok with you?

Kick it to me... I'm open!

by #23 on Dec 29, 2008 12:40 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

He had all of that in 06.

by mike b on Dec 25, 2008 4:55 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

And he had a lot of great games and it was his first full year.

Kick it to me... I'm open!

by #23 on Dec 26, 2008 1:11 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

a lot? really?

by mike b on Dec 26, 2008 8:13 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I count playoff comeback wins as good games

I would say almost half of his games were ok to great. A few were below average and like 4 were awful.

Kick it to me... I'm open!

by #23 on Dec 26, 2008 11:15 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

NO, THE RECEIVERS DROPPED THE DAMN BALL ALL OF LAST SEASON.

Clutch: A measurement of how much better or worse a player does in high leverage situations than he would have done in a context neutral environment. http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/glossary/

by bs.uf15bosox9bears23 on Dec 31, 2008 11:37 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I know you are very excited but you need to lay off the CAPS lock and stop writing the same stuff in every single post. We get the point, you don’t think Orton is the answer.

by purpleliner on Dec 25, 2008 10:19 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I don't know where you got that stat on Orton, but

I was watching that stat this season and I was under the impression he fell short by about 20-25 passes. Erik Kramer holds the Bears record. I could be wrong, so could you post a link to where to find that info?

Kick it to me... I'm open!

by #23 on Dec 25, 2008 9:51 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/89269-outlook-on-bears-quaterbacks-next-season

Don’t you remember when he broke it? It was against the Lions when he hurt his ankle.

by californiabearfan on Dec 25, 2008 10:03 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

There must of been a second record he was going for that he missed.

Thanks for the link.

Kick it to me... I'm open!

by #23 on Dec 25, 2008 1:45 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I thought Orton,

Just because I remember thinking week after week for a while there that he was not turning the ball over, and it really surprised me. But alas, the law of averages caught up with him. I love how easy it is to get folks riled up into a Orton vs. Rex argument…lol.

Residence: Portland, Oregon Pro Team: Da Bears NCAA Football: LSU Baby!! Make sense?

by GeauxBears on Dec 26, 2008 9:07 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

It just blows me away that people want Orton to be able to be terrible and look past it and not Grossman.

At least Grossman when he is average scores points. Orton does nothing when average or bad. I’m not for canning either QB personally, but I find it funny that the ones who slammed Grossman don’t want the same standards for Orton.

Kick it to me... I'm open!

by #23 on Dec 26, 2008 1:13 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Ehhh

I’m not even so sure about the scoring points bit.

Rex had his shot this year and sucked it up. It’s great that he can throw the long ball, but he couldn’t hit a receiver on a short out from 5 yards away? I’m sorry, THAT’S not good either.

I'M A MAN! I'M 22!

by ChiFan13 on Dec 26, 2008 1:49 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

sucked it up is harsh

I made a post after the titans game and compared Rexs numbers to other qbs who had played the titans to that point and he had believe it or not, one of the better games…stats wise. And given the position he was placed against detroit, i thought he did ok, well good enough to lead a comeback win.

Remember forte and orton were having 3 and outs consistently in that first half vs. detroit, and when Rex came in, Forte was able to rip some big runs…i dont think thats a coincedence

I mean you still cant name one great game Kyle has put together against a Good defense.He’s had good halves, good quarters, but nothing to indicate this guy is the real deal.

One last point, i think Rex could go to another team next year and win a job and do alright. But this is the best situation for Kyle. Everything sets up for his strengths:recievers, the type of RB, the field position the defense/spec. teams gets for him(giving him a short field), right down to the style of play calling. He should be doing better, in his 4th year..

by rahulsriram on Dec 26, 2008 4:00 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

If we had a better line and WR corps, BOTH would be better QB's.

I totally agree with you on that…which is kind of why arguing Orton/Grossman will be irrelevant if Lovie and Jerry actually figure out a semblence of an NFL-caliber offensive line.

I'M A MAN! I'M 22!

by ChiFan13 on Dec 26, 2008 7:19 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

You know I don't know what we can really expect from our talent evaluation

After missing on Bazine, Okwo, and possible Jamar Williams (although I still think the guy has looked good), I’m not sure what they are good at seeing. Maybe they have just been too patient in the past with player development. I think that has changed this season so maybe they’ll improve, but I don’t know what position they can draft well.

Kick it to me... I'm open!

by #23 on Dec 26, 2008 11:23 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Chifan13, you are not being realistic.

Rex’s accuracy was horrible in that game, true. But do you really see him as always throwing the ball that far off target or could he have been rusty. If he through the ball that bad, we wouldn’t even be on the team or would have started another game. His accuracy was pitiful. We all know he’s more accurate than that.

Orton played 14 1/2 games this year. He’s been in the league for 4 years. He has started for 2 full seasons and got playing time in 3 games last year as well. Orton, I think has actually played more games. I would say that Rex is much more accurate.

The reasons why Orton’s numbers appear better than they are is because of all the dump passes and screens to Forte who can catch. If Rex through dump passes and screens this year his completion percentage would rise as well.

Orton is not accurate, we all know it. Rex when he gets into rhythm is very accurate, not just on the long ball. That is why he gets more chances. He moves the ball and scores when he gets in rhythm. Rex’s problem is not accuracy (although he is always good for a couple wild throws which I think most qb’s miss a couple bad ones a game), his problem is risk taking, mobility, and getting shaken up from a strong pass rush.

Kick it to me... I'm open!

by #23 on Dec 26, 2008 4:31 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Wait a sec tho

If he through the ball that bad, we wouldn’t even be on the team or would have started another game.

I assume you mean that if he was that bad, he wouldn’t be on the team. I was pretty irate when Jerry signed him to a year extension last year. This is also the same management that traded away a Pro Bowl safety. I’m not real trusting of their “all-knowing judgement.”

We all know he’s more accurate than that.

I sure don’t. I’m not sayin Orton’s the man by any stretch, but Rex isn’t that accurate either. If he was/is, why isn’t he starting?

The reasons why Orton’s numbers appear better than they are is because of all the dump passes and screens to Forte who can catch. If Rex through dump passes and screens this year his completion percentage would rise as well.

Those are the same dump passes that Rex didn’t make this year. There’s no way you can tell me he’s rusty on short-yardage plays but he’s just terrific on the long ball. That’s a huge jump in logic.

The bottom line is that Rex would’ve gotten eaten alive this year. Our line in terrible, and when Rex is rushed, he makes horrid decisions. Orton doesn’t get as flustered, so he was able to keep his head (most of the time).

I'M A MAN! I'M 22!

by ChiFan13 on Dec 26, 2008 7:17 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

amazing

that grossman can hit a few deep balls to wide open receivers…not great passes to even semi covered receivers…and suck in EVERy OTHER REGARD and people still want to trot him out there.

by mike b on Dec 26, 2008 8:13 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I'm not saying put him out there, I'm just saying

that the little we saw Rex this year was not worth a real diagnosis. I think the Orton babies are making a big deal about fair criticism, and that Rex does some things better than Orton. I’m fine with Orton staying, but I’m tired of the Orton babies asking for Orton to get zero criticism. I see Orton has some strengths and Rex has some strengths and both are not great and I’ll admit all of that.

Kick it to me... I'm open!

by #23 on Dec 26, 2008 11:18 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Well

I think I can speak for mike b and myself when we say that Orton doesn’t deserve criticism. He certainly does. He can’t throw the long ball.

What we’re saying is that in our current scheme, Orton is the guy to get the most out of it. We’ve all bitched about the offensive scheme and I’m pretty sure none of us are satisfied with it. We’ve all seen the fullback dives, the piss-poor offensive game planning, etc. etc. But honestly, Orton is the one who can manage it.

If Rex didn’t get as flustered under pressure and he didn’t fumble as much, yeah, he’d be the guy. I’d be arguing for Grossman. But in our current scheme (which will continue if Turner stays on), Rex is a fish out of water.

I'M A MAN! I'M 22!

by ChiFan13 on Dec 27, 2008 2:31 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

And I agree with you completely on that

I’ve said several times that Orton was the right guy for this year. Do I think Grossman does some things better. Yes. Does Orton do some things better? Yes. Orton going into the season was a better fit because of the shaky line.

I will say that as good as they did pass blocking (my opinion is pass blocking was mostly good), Grossman would have helped us this year but that is hindsight. I also think that Orton is starting to not be the low turnover guy and that basically makes him worthless. If he fixes that, he’s acceptable, if not, he is much worse than Orton. We can’t have a mistake prone QB who doesn’t score points. With Rex I think he is less mistake prone than 2006, and checks down more often, but still will turn it over. It is the nature of the beast. The good side is that he has been clutch on game ending drives, he hits the long ball to add scores, and he is more accurate then Orton. Another thing that Orton was good at early was getting first downs as opposed to 3 and outs. Now Orton is a 3 and out machine. If he can limit his turnovers and 3 and outs to a couple times a game then I’m fine with Orton. If not, he doesn’t add much to our team besides being a backup QB.

Kick it to me... I'm open!

by #23 on Dec 29, 2008 12:47 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

lol

Rex when he gets into rhythm is very accurate, not just on the long ball. That is why he gets more chances. He moves the ball and scores when he gets in rhythm. Rex’s problem is not accuracy

in his 2006 “really good year” grossman never passed at a completion rate above 60%, 56.5 at the most, in any of these grooves. i’m sure you’ll say he his groove lie in the range not broken down here though. he has some decent percentages 07-08, but sample sizes that small don’t mean too much to me and even then the only one above 60 is out of 7 attempts. so where was he ever “very accurate?”

http://www.nfl.com/players/rexgrossman/situationalstats?id=GRO597298&season=2006

by mike b on Dec 26, 2008 9:10 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I agree that small sample sizes aren't fair but to clarify what I was referring to

I meant on drives not full games. He gets into a rhythm and nails every pass to score points. That is something that happened for like 3 games for Orton. He is mostly off all game long on everything not named TE or RB. That is the absolute truth.

Rex does make some great throws which I have yet to see Orton make to WR’s. When and if it happens once in a game, I’m convinced it was luck.

Kick it to me... I'm open!

by #23 on Dec 26, 2008 11:21 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Wait

He is mostly off all game long on everything not named TE or RB. That is the absolute truth.

At the same time #23, be fair. What WR’s do we have to speak of? ALL of them were inconsistent. Every single last one of them.

Rex at least had Berrian.

I'M A MAN! I'M 22!

by ChiFan13 on Dec 27, 2008 2:33 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

while your point about the wrs is fair

you are a little off and kind of contradicting yourself.

you said earlier,“Orton is the guy to get the most out of it. "…. and then you said,”What WR’s do we have to speak of? ALL of them were inconsistent. Every single last one of them….“Rex at least had Berrian.”

well, in this offense the tight ends and rbs are the focal point. To my point earlier, this is why Kyle should not be the starter next year. This offense is perfect for his strengths and in his 4th year, he’s struggling….pretty badly.

Its like Bernard Berrian said after he left, he was the #1 reciever but rarely the #1 read. So you could give orton a reciever and i dont think it would make a difference. Olsen,Clark and forte are the engines to this offense and those three are great players.

by rahulsriram on Dec 28, 2008 8:43 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

hmm

weird that orton only played 33 games in 4 years, season must have been shorter back then.

by mike b on Dec 29, 2008 8:49 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

He played 05 all season, 06 - zero, 07 - 3 games, and all of 2008.

Kick it to me... I'm open!

by #23 on Dec 29, 2008 12:52 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

sarcasm

it is important around here apparently to point out that grossman missed so much time (another reason to let him walk) but suddenly orton is finishing up his 4th year, as if he’s been the starter all along.

by mike b on Dec 29, 2008 5:35 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Ok, sorry I missed the sarcasm. Grossman is gone anyway.

The fight will be if he does well somewhere. If not, most of us will have to just shut up. He’s flawed I know.

Kick it to me... I'm open!

by #23 on Dec 29, 2008 5:40 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Berrian sucked in 07 and that is where I'm comparing Orton and Grossman

They both played that year with the same roster.

In the first 3 games Gross played Moose and Berrian sucked it up and killed Grossman’s chances. The line giving him 1.5 seconds and Cedric the Entertainer meant no first downs.

Later in the season Gross and Orton both played solid.

Kick it to me... I'm open!

by #23 on Dec 29, 2008 12:50 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

define solid

more turnovers than touchdowns to me is not solid. its not even serviceable.

by mike b on Dec 29, 2008 5:32 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

For me given no running game, and finding ways to compete and win, I thought they played ok.

That 07 offense was much worse talent wise than 08. The line and RB’s killed us. It is hard to pass when they drop everyone back and dare you to run and you can’t.

Kick it to me... I'm open!

by #23 on Dec 29, 2008 5:42 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

they lost games,

and he turned the ball over. nothing special at all.

by mike b on Dec 29, 2008 11:12 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

So you think Grossman was the problem in the first 3 games of 07, right?

You were fine with the play of the OL, RB’s and WR’s.

Kick it to me... I'm open!

by #23 on Dec 29, 2008 11:31 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

he was a problem

but i was trying to get you to deinfe solid or explain how grossman was better after his benching even though he still turned the ball over too much. you seem unable or unwilling to do that.

by mike b on Dec 30, 2008 8:45 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I'm not unwilling, I've talked about it several times.

I’m trying to understand you and where you are coming from so I can answer it right the first time and not get bashed for missing your point. I’m also making a point that QB’s suck in those conditions young or old and we’ve been that road. Even good QB’s suck in those conditions.

I felt that Rex came into 07 still trying to go deep too often. When Griese came in, he didn’t try to go deep and often checked down to the RB which really helped Griese do better. Griese’s problem was throwing picks in the endzone and coming away with no points, but he did move the ball.

When Rex came back in 07, he didn’t try to force the big play nearly as often, he made faster reads and when nothing was there he got rid of it quickly to his check down. That saved him from some sacks, ints, and fumbles and also helped him keep the chains moving longer. in general he made much quicker decisions. He hiked the ball looked and threw quickly which helped keep him from getting hit all the time. He also all 07 held onto the ball better when getting hit. For as often as he got hit and as hard as he did, his fumbles were way down. Fumbles were 1/3 of his problem. I think he moved from bottom of the pack to the middle on fumbling which is positive. What you want to see is a guy minimize mistakes which I believe he did with the fumbles. Another place he minimized mistakes was by not forcing the long ball so many times a game. He started throwing it more like 2-3 times down the field instead of 5-6. That will reduce his ints. Also using the check down instead of throwing over the middle into bad coverage will help the check down.

My thing about 06 with Grossman was that if he could have eliminated 5 ints over the year, and elimanated half of the fumbles that he would have shown a lot of improvement. Imagine if those 4-5 turnover games were 2-3. Sure it would have been a bad game, but not horrendous. So I felt he was making progress by correcting part of what was causing so many turnovers. I also feel with any QB the more games you play the better your reads will get because you know more of what is happening. Kyle should be more comfortable with reads next season as well.

Kick it to me... I'm open!

by #23 on Dec 30, 2008 11:56 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

all that's great

but when the numbers show more turnovers than touchdowns; i don’t see any really valuable improvement. i think the “new and improved grossman” was mostly make believe.

by mike b on Dec 30, 2008 1:08 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I think that the talent sucked in 07.

I judge players against themselves. I saw changes in the way he played that led me to believe he was learning and could lower his turnovers.

He still stunk at pocket presence, he ran backward when pressured, and will force a ball here and there, but all QB’s make some mistakes. What killed Grossman was making them all in the same game.

My hope for him was to see him lower his fumbles to like 4 for the season and have his TD/Int ratio closer to 2-1 then 1-1. His fumbles were down, but his int ratio wasn’t great, but I attribute that more to talent. Hester and Berrian both caused about 4 of those picks by giving up on the route all together or running the wrong one. Don’t forget that he didn’t necessarily throw every pick. Orton had a few drops that became picks as well this year.

Kick it to me... I'm open!

by #23 on Dec 30, 2008 1:32 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

nope

its pretty easy to look at who threw what, i’m not lookign at the totals and assuming, i’m looking up who threw what. i liek to do that instead of pretend i know what route was supossed to be run so i can blame it on somone else.

by mike b on Dec 30, 2008 4:42 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I know for sure that Berrian didn't run 2 routes all the way through that were picked

it is obvious on the replay and with Hester mistakes were pretty obvious. These plays weren’t scrutinized, they were very obvious. Do you count balls that WR’s tip up in the air for easy picks against your QB and your evaluation of him making good decisions too. Some things aren’t the fault of the QB just because it ends up on his stats. I don’t hold Rashied Davis tips for picks against Orton either.

I think we are just different on those issues. I’m not going to fire my QB if I have a WR issue and I’m not going to try to replace Forte because his ypr was low. It is a team game.

Kick it to me... I'm open!

by #23 on Dec 30, 2008 5:14 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

the difference

is that you explain away every mistake the guy ever made as either not his fault, “not a bad mistake” or some other explanation, usually without any method of backing it up.

by mike b on Dec 31, 2008 8:55 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Did you not read anything I wrote about

his poor mobility, taking bad sacks, forcing a few too many balls a game, getting rattled when pressured. I see the flaws, I see the strengths, I also understand that you put blame on the player that screwed up the play, and I also understand that no QB is perfect and that they all will have 2-3 bad games a year. I understand that young QB’s need games under their belt to get better.

Look I don’t think Grossman is perfect. I think he has some valuable skills and others where he still can get better. Can he step up into the pocket better. Yeah with practice, can eliminate a couple forced balls a game, yeah. Can he read coverages better with more experience, yeah. Will he ever be mobile, no. Will he ever be completely conservative, no. But giving up on a guy 3 games into his second season is silly to me. I won’t give up on Orton either.

Orton has to get better fast because his natural skills suck. Grossman has to make small progress here and there because his natural skills cover his weaknesses by scoring some points.

Kick it to me... I'm open!

by #23 on Dec 31, 2008 11:10 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

natural skills

mean nothing if you can’t use them well, see the hundreds of nfl busts.

by mike b on Dec 31, 2008 2:18 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Ok, I'm going to stop this thread

and start it up on a farther up one, so you all don’t have to continue reading in such small areas.

Being Who You Thought We Were Since 2005!

by WCG on Dec 31, 2008 2:19 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Continuation Thread

Being Who You Thought We Were Since 2005!

by WCG on Dec 31, 2008 2:20 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I'm going to tell what this comes down to.

You want a guy to reach his potential within one season and show you that he is for sure the man. I believe young guys need to show that they are improving and have the natural skills to do what you are asking.

I think Rex was improving in 07 and he had the natural skills of a strong arm, good deep passes and short outs, solid seem passes and slants and bad 15 yard comebacks and 15 yard in- routes. I would have liked to see a young QB with a lot of talent, but some bad decision making skills, improve on holding onto the ball which he did, and cut down on forcing passes and throwing deep, which he did. His reads will only improve by getting more games. This guy had one full season and a few random games, it isn’t like he played in that many games.

I think Orton’s natural skills were pocket presence, patience, 10 yard or less passes, and good decision making. He has shown a regression of what helped him succeed early in the year and that concerns me. Especially the bad decision making and not seeing defenders.

Kick it to me... I'm open!

by #23 on Dec 31, 2008 3:30 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

false

You want a guy to reach his potential within one season and show you that he is for sure the man.

i do not believe this one bit.

i also disagree with almost every grossman strength you cite.

i do not think the guy is very good, as a pro or at florida. the bears should stop wasting their time. end of story.

by mike b on Dec 31, 2008 3:51 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I'm fine with getting rid of him

This team is not for him. The city boos him every incomplete pass. We have no receivers currently, and it is time for him to move on.

I do think you write guys off very early. You don’t really give them a shot to prove anything different than you already feel. No game will change your mind or stretch of games. Once you’ve decided something that’s it.

This year, Vince Young, Matt Lienart, and Jay Cutler should be written off along with Derek Anderson, Carson Palmer, Jason Campbell and Tavaris Jackson. Last season Eli Manning, Donavon McNabb, Phillip Rivers, Kurt Warner, Chad Pennington, Ben Rothlesburger, were thrown out. Oh wait, all of the latter rebounded to have solid or very good years.

Patience is a virtue. Sometimes injuries, talent, schemes, inexperience and other factors also play into a players season.

Kick it to me... I'm open!

by #23 on Dec 31, 2008 4:19 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

again

I do think you write guys off very early. You don’t really give them a shot to prove anything different than you already feel. No game will change your mind or stretch of games. Once you’ve decided something that’s it.

you don’t know what the f your talking about.

by mike b on Dec 31, 2008 5:12 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

again you think you know everything and are always right oh wise one

all I see of you is a bunch of trolling and attacking people. It is fine to disagree, but say something positive and maybe admit when you are wrong once in a while.

Whatever man. You want to cuss and be a jerk. I guess that’s your thing.

Kick it to me... I'm open!

by #23 on Dec 31, 2008 7:09 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

you don't know a damn thing about me

so you have no idea if any of that is true.

I do think you write guys off very early. You don’t really give them a shot to prove anything different than you already feel. No game will change your mind or stretch of games. Once you’ve decided something that’s it.

by mike b on Jan 1, 2009 10:22 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I know that your one of the most negative people I've seen on here.

I also know that you go around and mock everyone.
I also can’t remember a single time that you have changed an opinion or admitted your were wrong.

Kick it to me... I'm open!

by #23 on Jan 1, 2009 10:53 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

you can't remember it

must not have happened then huh. i was wrong about grossman being good a couple years ago.

by mike b on Jan 1, 2009 11:17 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I'm not sure if that is sarcasm or if you were wrong in your mind two seasons ago.

Either way, I’m love to dissect the game and watch and read as much as possible. I enjoy debate, but cussing at me acting like it is wrong to have opinions is over the top and unnecessary.

You know, I’m very curious about your opinions and ideas and I try to ask but I just can’t seem to find out. I have no idea what you believe we do positive, who on our team is good. Who is in development and worth keeping, nothing.

Your opinions seem hidden to me. You mostly just say everything sucks or someone is wrong for their opinion. Giving nothing substantial of your own does make you more free from being wrong, but I am curious you overall perspective on this team, players, management, and ideas for the future. That is often why I comment to you. But I’m still lost as ever.

Maybe you don’t want to put it out there. Or maybe it is just as simple as fire everyone and everyone sucks and there is nothing we can do to help this team move forward.

Kick it to me... I'm open!

by #23 on Jan 1, 2009 12:14 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

it isn't wrong to have opinons

its annoying as hell to present your opinion as fact, then show no data to back it up or wait for others to do it. if your argument is based on what you remember or things that are not quantitative, you should expect people to question it and demand proof, or outright dismiss it. there seems to be an issue on wcg with that, and blogs in general. a psychologist friend of mine always tells people that it only take someone being right 20% of the time to reinforce the belief in them that they are “almost always right”

yes, i thought grossman had a good future a couple years ago.

as far as giving my opinion on every aspect of this team (which i assure you noone really wants to hear since there are about 1000 different ones on the site) i’m sure a lot of it will be brought up piecemeal as the season go on. a 40,000 word essay doesn’t seem necessary.

the fact that there is a large amount of negativity towards this team by a lot of people on here is because they are not, in fact, not very good.

by mike b on Jan 1, 2009 1:12 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

My apologies for being annoying to you

There aren’t a large number of people on here that are overly negative. I can think of 3.

Many people on here present positive and negative views.

As far as facts, I didn’t know how to look up screen passes. Your idea of completions to backs was good, but lacked attempts to backs. I asked for helping on where to find that and someone knew where it was.

Kick it to me... I'm open!

by #23 on Jan 1, 2009 1:22 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

You also said that about the running back and screen pass thing and somebody else called you out and you went into hiding.

Kick it to me... I'm open!

by #23 on Dec 31, 2008 7:11 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

called out huh?

unless someone found my numbers to be false my point stands just fine.

sorry, small differences don’t make your point any better:

Orton’s completion percentage as bad as it is would be worse if it were not for the 5 dump passes to

especially when you let everyone one else do the work.

It’s not a huge difference in pass attempts, even with the missing data, but it helped Orton’s completion %

by mike b on Jan 1, 2009 10:28 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Not to me, maybe to you I was

I don’t have to sit and study every possible number to form an opinion. I watch the games and I read articles. I’m not making my hobby a homework assignment.

On that issue I felt that the play calling involved the RB more than in 06 on passes. You found the completions and they were similar, I said that it doesn’t take in account attempts, and someone else found the attempts and it was about 5% less and half the passes were to McKie which of course you left out. You were wrong dude. I’ll take 5 extra percentage points all year from Forte over McKie. Yes, Forte has helped his completion percentages. The yards per catch are ridiculously different and have helped Orton move the chains as well.

You’re a coward and can’t admit your wrong. I’m calling you out!

Kick it to me... I'm open!

by #23 on Jan 1, 2009 10:59 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

said it right here

running back and fullback
if one would want to differentiate

same thread and everything.

where are you getting 5 percent?

you also keep assuming that the completion percentage difference is the result of the running backs being better at catching the ball. although partially the case, the throws to those running backs are better now that they were in 06. less throws 5 feet over a running backs head and all that.

call me whatever you want.

by mike b on Jan 1, 2009 11:22 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

ha

i’m sure you’ll say he his groove lie in the range not broken down here though

I meant on drives not full games.

figures. what you’re describing happens to all qbs at some point. if you don’t have anything that proves it happens more for one than another then its hard to not just laugh it off as ramblings.

by mike b on Dec 29, 2008 8:47 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Thank you wise one.

Rhythm is an important part of football. Look it up.

Kick it to me... I'm open!

by #23 on Dec 29, 2008 12:54 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

right

and most qbs get into them. you have no evidence that grossman gets into any better rythm than anyone else.

by mike b on Dec 29, 2008 5:18 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

You're right. It is my opinion that Rex gets into rhythm more often than Orton.

Kick it to me... I'm open!

by #23 on Dec 29, 2008 5:43 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Someone rec this thread.

I'M A MAN! I'M 22!

by ChiFan13 on Dec 27, 2008 2:45 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

This wasn't a Rex vs Orton thread...

…so please stop that debate.

Kyle Orton is not a great quarterback right now but he is developing and you got to give him some time. That was the whole point of the post. Quarterbacks do not develop overnight, you got to have some patience. He has shown enough to give him a shot.

Every year in the draft, there is around 2-3 quarterbacks out of the ones that are drafted that actually end up doing anything at all. Once you find one that can play decently well, is young and has some upside you got to ride it for all its worth because they rarely come along.

The year Kyle Orton was drafted these were the other quarterbacks drafted:

Alex Smith Utah San Francisco 49ers
Aaron Rodgers California Green Bay Packers
Jason Campbell Auburn Washington Redskins
Charlie Frye Akron Cleveland Browns
Andrew Walter Arizona State Oakland Raiders
David Greene Georgia Seattle Seahawks
Kyle Orton Purdue Chicago Bears
Stefan LeFors Louisville Carolina Panthers
Dan Orlovsky Connecticut Detroit Lions
Adrian McPherson Florida State New Orleans Saints
Derek Anderson Oregon State Baltimore Ravens
Matt Cassel USC New England Patriots
Ryan Fitzpatrick Harvard St. Louis Rams

Aaron Rodgers is the top guy so far. Matt Cassell, Jason Cambell and Kyle Orton come in next as decent starters (calm down Matt Cassell fans, I have seen his stats, but I think a lot of quarterbacks would look good in that offense). The rest of the draft picks are career backups (technically Dan Orlovsky and Ryan Fitzpatrick aren’t backups right now but you get what I mean). Of the four that I picked out, we still aren’t even sure who is for real and who isn’t. Aaron Rodgers is the only rock solid pick so far of the group. My point here is that QB is an extremely difficult position to scout and NFL teams barely ever get it right. If you are able to find a young guy that shows some ability to win and lead a team then you got to be patient and hope for the best. Just ditching a guy right away once he has a stretch of bad games is ridiculous.

And I hate lighting another fire here, but if you look at the 2003 Draft when Rex Grossman was drafted, he was the second best QB drafted. Take a look:

Carson Palmer USC Cincinnati Bengals (obviously the best)
Byron Leftwich Marshall Jacksonville Jaguars
Kyle Boller California Baltimore Ravens
Rex Grossman Florida Chicago Bears
Dave Ragone Louisville Houston Texans
Chris Simms Texas Tampa Bay Buccaneers
Seneca Wallace Iowa State Seattle Seahawks
Brian St. Pierre Boston College Pittsburgh Steelers
Drew Henson Michigan Houston Texans
Brooks Bollinger Wisconsin New York Jets
Kliff Kingsbury Texas Tech New England Patriots
Gibran Hamdan Indiana Washington Redskins
Ken Dorsey Miami (Fla.) San Francisco 49ers

Who do you take instead (as second best)? Byron Leftwich? Seneca Wallace? Grossman is the only one out of that class to have won more then one playoff game and gone to the Super Bowl. Pretty crazy huh?

The other QB Jerry Angelo has ever drafted was Craig Krenzel, who wasn’t any good. So far though, he is 2 for 3 at picking one of the “best” QBs in the draft. Having said that, in the land of the blind the one eyed man rules king. Both those QB draft classes were pretty crappy.

by californiabearfan on Dec 27, 2008 6:52 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Just look through the lists yourselves...

…its pretty bad

http://www.nfl.com/draft/history/fulldraft?type=position

by californiabearfan on Dec 27, 2008 7:02 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

i dont get it

why is Rex not the best qb from that class? we should be basing this on wins and changing the team around. Carson hasnt even come close.

its a double standard in this league. Farve has worse numbers and wins this year than rex of 06’ going into the last week but Farve gets named to the pro bowl…and rex is on the bench….i’ll never get it.

by rahulsriram on Dec 28, 2008 8:52 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

really?

its not that hard. favre made it on name and past deeds. it isn’t right but its not hard to figure out. rex is benched because you learn before 25 not to throw into triple coverage off your back foot while back peddling from the rush.

by mike b on Dec 29, 2008 9:10 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Do you think if Rex has an offensive team with weapons like Farve and Palmer that his good outways his bad and he keeps playing?

Kick it to me... I'm open!

by #23 on Dec 29, 2008 12:58 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

if the rest of the team is great

will rex be decent? maybe. he’ll be what he was in 06, unimpressive as a whole.

by mike b on Dec 29, 2008 5:33 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

He was impressive for a first year starter to me in 06. I expected him to have bad games.

4 were worse than I expected, but all in all I was satisfied with what he did. I think there was a lot to be impressed about in 06. Moose and Berrian weren’t all that. I’d take Berrian back, but he isn’t the only fast guy who won’t go over the middle in this league. He does some now, but he didn’t in 06 and 07.

Rex made the passing game happen in 06, the receivers didn’t. TJ, set up the passing game which did help, but Rex has never had a probowl receiver or a great WR corp. He should try to go Arizona and wait for Warner to retire.

Kick it to me... I'm open!

by #23 on Dec 29, 2008 5:49 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

the only deep balls

grossman connected on were to wide open berrian. he did nothing else to “create something.” he threw to wide open guys, nothing more.

he would be great in arizona, until they needed the qb to carry the team or at least hold his own.

by mike b on Dec 29, 2008 11:16 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I remember a couple big throws to Rashied Davis and 2-3 to Clark.

Hitting the open guy deep is very helpful. He did an awesome job of leading Berrian on those throws as well so that Berrian would stay on his feet and run on in. I see a lot of QB’s turn open deep into jump balls.

Kick it to me... I'm open!

by #23 on Dec 29, 2008 11:33 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

sure it is

so is doing it more than a handful of times in 3 years. more than a few balls to berrian were short or out of bounds down the sideline, not to mention the hundreds of overthrown short to medium passes. but ksk doesn’t write about those so they get ignored.

by mike b on Dec 31, 2008 8:57 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Hundreds made me laugh, sorry

With the exception of a drive in 2005 and a playoff game. Grossman played all of 2006 and 3 games before losing his job in 2007. I feel that those 3 games all QB’s would have sucked. I’ve never seen a QB get jacked up that quick and that often. I still have flashbacks of the Sean Phillips creaming him. It was ridiculous, not to mention Berrian dropping a wide open by 10 yards TD pass that was floating and no running game. The offense was the worst thing I’ve ever seen. So if I’m counting right, Grossman has about 2 seasons of games if you include all the playoff appearances. Do I blame Grossman for how bad his teammates played? Nope. Could he have done better. Yes, but man the dude was lucky to not be on a stretcher.

Kick it to me... I'm open!

by #23 on Dec 31, 2008 11:17 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

he didn't get benched

just because of 07. he got benched becasue he was not very good, even when he had a good team around him.

by mike b on Dec 31, 2008 2:16 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Man, I hate when them first year starters

don’t play lights out every game of the season. Give me a break. They benched him because they blamed him for the offensive woes. The fans were still ticked about losing the Superbowl and everyone wanted change, but the problems continued all year as we found out has bad the line & rb’s were and Moose and Berrian did play better but started off slow.

I saw lots of good in 06, and lots to work on. In 07, I saw a guy get put in an impossible situation. And he did. Late in 07, I saw a guy that had made some changes and threw deep less and checked down more often. He also through the ball away when there was nothing there and he made quicker reads. To me that was all improvement. Also, he held onto the ball when getting sacked much, much better. All of those things should have lowered his turnovers and improved him.

This preseason neither QB did anything to win the job, but I will say the line did not block for Rex and it looked obvious. I know I sound crazy and I may be paranoid but it appeared night and day to me. Seattle and San Fran blew up that line and they were Rex’s games. Let’s not argue the conspiracy theory though I may very well be wrong.

Kick it to me... I'm open!

by #23 on Dec 31, 2008 3:21 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

yaaawn

Late in 07, I saw a guy that had made some changes and threw deep less and checked down more often. He also through the ball away when there was nothing there and he made quicker reads. To me that was all improvement. Also, he held onto the ball when getting sacked much, much better. All of those things should have lowered his turnovers and improved him.

and after all that, he still had more turnovers that touchdowns in that “improved span”.

by mike b on Dec 31, 2008 3:53 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

whatever dude. You're right, he should have been lights out in 07.

Kick it to me... I'm open!

by #23 on Dec 31, 2008 4:21 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I see your point...

…but I don’t think anyone would take Rex Grossman over Carson Palmer. If we had Carson Palmer on our team in 2006 we win the Super Bowl. Not to say that game is completely Rex Grossman’s fault at all because it wasn’t but Carson Palmer was just more advanced in his career by then and a better talent.

Brett Farve going to the Pro Bowl is the most ridiculous things I have seen in a long time with the NFL. Phllip Rivers deserves to go over him. And the media gives him a pass from throwing INT after INT.

by californiabearfan on Dec 28, 2008 10:28 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

No one takes Rex, but Palmer is a turnover machine as well. I have had him on my fantasy teams a couple of times.

He just throws a lot of TD’s because he has 2 big pro bowl receivers. One that is very fast to go with big.

Kick it to me... I'm open!

by #23 on Dec 29, 2008 12:59 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

what?

Palmer is hardly a “turnover machine”. In his 2 seasons of starting before suffering his season ending knee injury in the first round of the playoffs he threw a combined 60 touchdowns to 25 interceptions. Did he have a down year last year? sure, but i’m still putting him in the top 5-10 qbs in the league hands down.

and to end the rex/orton comparisons, they both have essentially a 1-1 touchdown to interception ratio. orton’s one major strength that was supposed to make him a safer play than grossman was his ability to manage a game and not kill us with turnovers, but he did the exact opposite of that down the stretch. the one similarity is that the defense actually stepped it up when he was turning the ball over and won those games for us (new orleans, green bay, jacksonville) similar to the way they won games when grossman turned the ball over in 06. hell, maybe we should just get a qb in there who constantly turns the ball over and we’ll get something more than mediocrity out of our vastly overpaid defense.

by lopey986 on Dec 29, 2008 2:36 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

LOL.

Palmer turned the ball over a lot the last two seasons.

Kick it to me... I'm open!

by #23 on Dec 29, 2008 3:00 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

i realize i'm a little late to this party

but congratulations kyle orton for being mired in mediocrity and stuck in chicago lore as being the least bad quarterback the bears have had!

by lopey986 on Dec 29, 2008 12:01 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

He won't be the starter in 2009.

Residence: Portland, Oregon Pro Team: Da Bears NCAA Football: LSU Baby!! Make sense?

by GeauxBears on Dec 30, 2008 2:40 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Any ideas on who might replace him?

I could see him starting the year and Hanie coming in either because of an injury or inefficiency.

Kick it to me... I'm open!

by #23 on Dec 30, 2008 5:15 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

No

Hanie isn’t ready.

I was in the car listening to the Score during Angelo’s presser. I’m not pissed at what he said. I’m furious that Angelo and Lovie aren’t on the same page. Lovie says one thing, Angelo power-plays and says the other.

I'M A MAN! I'M 22!

by ChiFan13 on Dec 30, 2008 8:00 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Angelo was going off on the QB position

He sounds like he wants to make a big move there. He basically said any WR will do and WR’s aren’t that valuable. The QB is everything and it must be fixed. And I like Orton and we need to fix the QB position and Orton is making strides and he needs to get better and we’re bringing in competition. He was talking in big circles but spent a lot of time talking about QB. He also mentioned how it was the year of the Veteran and rattled off Collins, Garcia, and Ferrotte and how they helped those franchises. Sounds like he is tipping his cap. Forget WR, we’re focusing on QB on offense. I would assume the OL would go with fixing the offense as well, but you might not see any other big offensive moves.

Kick it to me... I'm open!

by #23 on Dec 31, 2008 12:01 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Which is horrible!

Tom Brady couldn’t have a Pro Bowl year throwing to our wideouts. Hester? Yeah, he’d benefit. Olsen? Definitely. Rashied Davis? Marty Booker? Brandon Lloyd? Earl Bennett?

I can already tell Angelo’s really gonna irritate me this offseason.

I'M A MAN! I'M 22!

by ChiFan13 on Dec 31, 2008 12:10 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I'm sure you'd see it soon enough anyway,

but here’s a good article about it, I think he probably nailed what Angelo was doing. Trying to avoid having to negotiate a long term deal with Orton this offseason…

http://www.suntimes.com/sports/football/bears/1355803,CST-SPT-mully31.article

by lindemrm on Dec 31, 2008 1:08 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Ah, if true, he's a smart man.

Kick it to me... I'm open!

by #23 on Dec 31, 2008 11:20 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I'll defend Lloyd

On the field that guy made plays. I loved him as a wide out this year. As a teammate and his injury thing, that wasn’t cool, but on the field what did that guy do bad? He was the only guy who could find a way to haul in the crazy eratic Orton underthrown balls. He should called Pretzel Lloyd.

Kick it to me... I'm open!

by #23 on Dec 31, 2008 11:21 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I agree

I think we resign him for next year as long as we get him under a similar contract to this years.

by lindemrm on Dec 31, 2008 12:07 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

you're fooling yourself

before last year Tom Brady had shit for WR’s and RB’s for years and won 3 SB’s and made an AFC championship game…

please stop spewing this crap that no QB would have done well last season…hell Orton did well for half a season with the crap talent around him.

it starts and ends with the QB…..

Visit The Cub Reporter (thecubreporter.com)

by thecubreporter on Jan 4, 2009 1:40 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Yikes

it starts and ends with the QB…..

You’re starting to sound like Jerry Angelo.

My point is that our defense is getting older by the minute and we all know about the offensive holes this team has. Getting Orton a receiver that will actually catch the ball (think the opposite of Rashied Davis) will help tremendously in and of itself.

You are fooling yourself if you think that a QB, any QB, would do wonders with the crap WR talent we have right now. Our WR corps is atrocious. Hester as a #1? Booker’s still playing? And Earl Bennett, Mr. Surprise of training camp, couldn’t crack the lineup.

I agree that we need QB competition, but if all we’re focusing on this offseason is a QB, Angelo deserves to be fired. We need to get a #1 WR.

I'M A MAN! I'M 22!

by ChiFan13 on Jan 4, 2009 2:03 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Tom Brady?

What a ridiculous comparison? Because, really… you think the offensive line for the Bears did nearly the job that the Patriots did. Our offensive line was the worst in the league in my opinion last year. Our QB’s had no time, our RB’s had no holes.

The Patriots. Yeah. Nice. Actually I saw how well Brady did when he was getting hit and it didn’t matter that he was throwing to a HOF, it was called the Superbowl. Blocking matters. You don’t have to be the best blockers, but you can’t be the worst either.

Kick it to me... I'm open!

by #23 on Jan 4, 2009 4:48 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

BTW, I assume you referring to 2007

Because in 2007, I’ve mentioned that no one would do well on our team at QB. This year, yeah a good QB would have mattered. I don’t think WR’s are everything, but they do help make average QB’s look like good QB’s. Orton may be average, but the verdict is still out.

Kick it to me... I'm open!

by #23 on Jan 4, 2009 4:52 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I didn't necessarily get that from the conference-

He said there has to be competition at every position, which is true. Without competition, you get complacency, which is never good. I think They’ll bring in someone Griese-esk as a backup, who could still want to play enough to keep Orton on his toes.

by lindemrm on Dec 31, 2008 1:01 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

If I am not mistaken this is the

first Fan Post that was not a game thread to break the 100 comment mark.

Being Who You Thought We Were Since 2005!

by WCG on Dec 31, 2008 9:12 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

Not true

CaliforniaBearFan wrote one this summer that surpassed 100. It was the first Rex-Kyle argument of my WCG career….remember it like it was yesterday :)

I'M A MAN! I'M 22!

by ChiFan13 on Dec 31, 2008 1:58 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Orton needs help

Orton could be really good if the bears do a few things.

1 = Sign or improve the OL to increase the effectiveness of the running game and the play-action pass,
2 = Sign a legitimate WR threat,
3 = Believe in the guy as his confidence needs to be looked after as he’ll play better.

by Bears118 on Jan 6, 2009 1:16 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

How will that help his accuracy over 15 yards down the field?

Also, he keeps forgetting that their are players that play in zones in the middle of the field. Those two things will take Orton from a top 25 QB to a top 15 QB. After that, getting the players you mentioned would get him into the top 10.

Kick it to me... I'm open!

by #23 on Jan 6, 2009 1:22 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I agree with the first two

But I tore Rex a new one last year for us worrying about his widdle feewings. If he doesn’t have a sense of urgency to play, doesn’t put in the time doing what he needs to do to be successful, he doesn’t deserve to play.

I'M A MAN! I'M 22!

by ChiFan13 on Jan 6, 2009 1:37 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I agree with californiabearfan

Kyle Orton is a tough guy. He’s blue collar and he is a winner. I “think” and I “hope” he is who we think he is. We have nothing to lose with calling him the starter in ‘09. Orton is the best QB we have had since Kramer. Now, let’s focus on our more pressing needs which are many.

californiabearfan, I also am currently residing in CA, Ventura County. Bear fans are few and far between in this neck of the woods. Keep fighting the Good Fight!

Passion For The Game, Loyal To The Name, Chicago Bears, I Trust In Thee, Standing Strong Since 1983.

by Haightminow on Jan 6, 2009 3:38 PM CST reply actions 0 recs