Windy City Gridiron: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:

Jerry Angelo Explains Lack Of QB

Windycity_tiny by WCG on

I  know many are wondering why the Bears did not select a QB in this draft.  This very question was asked on the Bears site to  Larry Meyer and he quoted some lines from Bears GM Jerry Angelo.

The Bears entered the 2008 draft determined to land as many players they viewed as eventual starters as they possible could regardless of position, and they accomplished that with their first five picks in left tackle Chris Williams in the first round, running back Matt Forte in the second round, receiver Earl Bennett and defensive tackle Marcus Harrison in the fourth round and safety Craig Steltz in the fifth round. The closest they came to selecting a quarterback occurred in the fourth round, but general manager Jerry Angelo explained that he “didn’t want to pass up a player that was a starter to take a quarterback that maybe could be a good backup.” Another key factor is that it was a very poor quarterback crop (other than Boston College’s Matt Ryan, who was selected third overall by the Atlanta Falcons). Said Angelo: “By our grades, I will agree that I didn’t think it was a great quarterback class. I thought earlier on it was going to be pretty good, but the more we did research and evaluation, we just felt it was going to be very mediocre and I think you saw that on how the players were picked.” Personally, I’m glad the way it played out. I’d rather seethe Bears draft a Nate Vasher than a Craig Krenzel!

So we know that Angelo at least was thinking about QBs.  He obviously was more interested in Matt Forte than he was Chad Henne or Brian Brohm, but it is really hard to tell what he would have done had 1 or both of them been available with the Bears 3rd round pick.

0 recs | Comment 69 comments | Add your comment

Read Related

Story-email Email | Print |

Comments

Display:

And...

That’s saying that he still didn’t view Andre Woodson as an eventual starter in the sixth round.

by GallopingGhost on Apr 30, 2008 2:15 PM CDT reply reply   0 recs

Oh Jesus.

Why do people do this to make a point? Brian Brohm is not fucking Craig Krenzel. And Craig Steltz has a ways to go to be Nate Vasher. Why don’t I just counter and say I’d rather draft Drew Brees instead of Tank Johnson? Can people seriously not understand things in anything other than extremes?

Why can’t people just admit the obvious? They really have no fucking clue, and they’d rather screw up on an obscure defensive tackle than a highly-noticeable quarterback? Sheesh. If Harrison and Steltz never end up being anything, will anyone notice? No. But if Brohm flops, everyone will. Scaredy-cats.

"I've got a class (coming in) here, we've got a chance to do some things." --Tom Izzo on why he might not consider the Bulls coaching vacancy.

by tyger1147 on Apr 30, 2008 2:19 PM CDT reply reply   0 recs

Jerry Angelo's

drafts always strike me as someone wanting to never make a noticeable mistake. He’s willing to take risks, but only later in the draft, and only on players at peripheral positions. Expect to always be a solid team, but never a great or terrible team with him as the GM, because he always takes high floor guys over high ceiling guys. He’d rather be 9-7 2 years in a row than 13-3 one year and 3-13 the next.

DEJESUS!!!

by tomas21 on Apr 30, 2008 3:46 PM CDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

Very Good Points, but I think you missed the point

The comparisons aren’t fair, but they are trying to predict the future and how can you communicate your thoughts without using names familiar to your audience. I don’t think they are saying the QB’s are Craig Krenzel, but I think they are saying that they appear that they might be in that category of a pick. I don’t think they are say, Steltz is Vasher, but Angelo can pick Vasher’s this deep in the draft. We all know he is a good evaluator of not only defense but especially the secondary. You still made me laugh hard at the Brees/Tank comparison. Good choice.

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

by #23 on Apr 30, 2008 4:12 PM CDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

The difference is vast

1. there is only one qb on the field at a time. there are 3 – 4 defensive linemen.
2. dlinemen often rotate in and out of plays while the qb generally takes every snap
3. if a dlineman isn’t playing well, it won’t have a huge impact on the team. A bad game for a qb will lose a game.
4. If a draft pick is a defensive lineman who is not that good, he still may have use as the margin of error is greater for a dlineman then a qb.

by tempchad on Apr 30, 2008 5:06 PM CDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

to make an analogy

if a airplane loses and engine, it can still fly/land. if an airplane loses a pilot, it crashes. would you rather fly on a plane with 1 bad engine or a bad pilot?

by tempchad on Apr 30, 2008 5:07 PM CDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

I'd rather have...

a DT that could help me make that position dominant and possibly make my defense incredible instead of just really good. There is a better chance that JA is right about a DT than a QB. Heck, who really does know how to pick a QB. Is JP Lossman, Eli Manning, Phillip Rivers, Alex Smith, Kyle Boller, Cade McCown, Joey Harrington, David Car, Byron Leftwich. or Patrick Ramsey any better than Rex or Kyle. All these guys were drafted in the first round since 2000 and your arguing over guys that every team in the league passed on for 2, 3, 4, even 5 rounds. Give me a break!I’I

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

by #23 on Apr 30, 2008 5:31 PM CDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

Excellent reply to follow. Be prepared!

The plane is the Bears. The Bears have a good d-line. The Bears have a horrible QB situation. The Bears have 3 of their 4 engines working right now. They have a pilot who’s likely to crash-land.

I have a chance to fix my situations in mid-air. (Assuming the two are mutually exclusive) Do I go fix that fourth engine right now or do I send the mechanic with some limited pilot training into the pilot’s seat? Well, shit, I need someone to get the plane landed, so I better send him up front. Maybe he won’t do it, but if we don’t take the chance, we’re dead anyway. But maybe he’s a natural born pilot that no one thought could do it and we get lucky.

We’ll send a stewardess to go fix that fourth engine. Sure, the engine capacity isn’t as good as it could be, but at least we can land the plane.

Now that was an excellent analogy.

"I've got a class (coming in) here, we've got a chance to do some things." --Tom Izzo on why he might not consider the Bulls coaching vacancy.

by tyger1147 on Apr 30, 2008 11:32 PM CDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

That's certainly the best point about it I've seen made.

Of course, that’s a minimizing-risk strategy that goes along with what Tomas was saying. You can stay competitive year-in, year-out like that, but you’ll never be an elite team unless the team gets really lucky like they did in 2006.

"I've got a class (coming in) here, we've got a chance to do some things." --Tom Izzo on why he might not consider the Bulls coaching vacancy.

by tyger1147 on May 1, 2008 9:26 AM CDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

I think we really do draft well

Some teams hit in rounds 1-3. We hit well in rounds 3-7 and are spotty in rounds 1-2, but all-in-all I think we draft more quality players than most teams. Our line is old, but our defense (aside from Urlacher) is young. If we can be competetitive, one good draft next year and maybe a free agent signing and we can be elite. Our team has proved you can win without a QB. We did it when Orton was pathetic, we did it win Grossman was killing us, and last year our defense fell apart and we were still almost .500. We have to fix that defense and get a running game. Rex looked like a very good game manager in his second stint last year. He seemed to have chilled out and just took what was given to him. We know that Kyle can manage and he looked much better than two years ago. He may be even better yet. Don’t freak out yet. We took a risk by not drafting a future QB, but we had to risk somewhere and we know we can be elite without a top 15 QB if the rest of the team is doing there job.

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

by #23 on May 1, 2008 12:26 PM CDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

he also fumbled 5 times

and lost 3 of them in that renaissance.

by mike b on May 1, 2008 12:44 PM CDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

He also...

got sacked 10 times in those 3 games. Peyton Manning had 7 games with multiple sacks last year and he fumbled five times in those games. I also promise you that Rex got hit more times and harder than Peyton in all of those games with the exception of Colts vs. Chargers. All QB’s fumble when they are getting hit a lot. All of them do. Rex is just like every other QB in that category.

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

by #23 on May 1, 2008 1:01 PM CDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

2 of them

were fumbled snaps. noone was hitting him then.

by mike b on May 1, 2008 1:15 PM CDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

here's my point

people keep blaming rex’s problem on other people, the line, the receivers, everything else. and yeah, some of those cop outs are valid.

but a lot of quarteracks get pressured and don’t throw off their back foot, fumble easily or botch a snap. how long are some of you willing to stick with this guy? people act like no quarterback ever does well without an excellent run game, excellent receivers and an excellent defense. and that to evaluate one without all those pieces around him is unrealistic and has never been done.

in 06 he had good protection, good running game and a great defense, and he still made shit decisons and had poor mechanics. he won’t be in that good of a sitaution this year, so he better suddenly “get it” and learn to do more with less.

we were 1-2 during his return (in the games he played the whole game), and devin hester returned two touchdowns in the one victory.

by mike b on May 1, 2008 1:34 PM CDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

I don't remember a fumbled snap

in his second round of starts. It may of happened, but I remember no fumbled snaps. I do remember him running and dropping it as he was being chased. That was pretty stupid. I think that was the second stint. If you want to talk about fumbled snaps why don’t you look at the fact that all 3 QB’s last year fumbled snaps from Kruetz. Why is that? I know the guy has been good, but it does make me wonder how everyone has a problem with him. I hear Jim Miller on the radio talking about how he had some problems with the way Kruetz was snapping it when he was on the Bears. His rating in those two losses were 86.1 and 81.4. He was sacked 11 times in those two games and sacks count against your rating. How do other QB’s do when he gets sacked 5 and 6 times again. Get over 2006! it was his first year starting.

You are completely right about him throwing off his back foot. He still did that last year at the end of the year. I saw lots of QB’s doing this last year to my surprise. I guess Rex got me looking at other QB’s. He has to change that and maybe never will. He is slow, doesn’t elude the sack, rarely steps up into the pocket, and runs backward when in trouble. I know the guys has bad spots, I’m not a homer.

I would rather keep a guy with his upside and give him more experience. He has only played in 32 regular season games in 5 years. 24 have been in the last two seasons. He was on pace for 14 pics last year, down from 20 in 06. He improved by 6 even with a mammoth decline in the protection and running game. That is improvement. Peyton through 15 pics in his second year as starter. I know Peyton had Harrison to throw to as well.

He may not work out, but the guy has only started for two years and the second season no one could have looked good. No one! Eli is a legend now and his stats similar to Grossman’s. Eli has started 3 years.

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

by #23 on May 1, 2008 2:14 PM CDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

although
He was on pace for 14 pics last year, down from 20 in 06

and he was on pace for 8 touchdowns then.

every qb has had problems with kreutz, but its undeniable that rex has had more.

Get over 2006! it was his first year starting.

these are the excuses i am talking about, how many years starting then before you want to make an actual eval on the guy? give him three like it used to be? but make sure he has a team around him otherwise “no qb could succeed?”

eli is a legend the way trent dilfer is a legend

by mike b on May 1, 2008 2:42 PM CDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

Moreover

regardless of performance can Rex get through a season healthy. Something he has yet to do.

Being Who You Thought We Were Since 2005!

by WCG on May 2, 2008 3:14 PM CDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

Should Be Retitled

“Jerry Angelo talks about lack of QB”

Because he didn’t really explain anything other than “I don’t want to make a big mistake and get fired for it.”

He’s lucky John Paxson is around for me to take my anger out on instead.

Insert clever and witty remark slash pun here!

by ES46NE10 on Apr 30, 2008 4:02 PM CDT reply reply   0 recs

did you REALLY like a QB in this draft?

we weren’t getting ryan. brohm wasn’t bad, but do you really think he’s going to be a top QB? same with henne, booty, etc. this was a terrible QB class. why would you pick the best pieces of a slop of crap unless they were really something? brohm in the 3rd round, sure. flacco in the 2nd, maybe. if this was a better QB class, yes, we should have taken one. but i have a hard time saying any QB left on the board during any of our picks (at least in rounds 1-5) was better than the player we got.

by guy incognito on Apr 30, 2008 6:59 PM CDT reply reply   0 recs

KEVIN O'CONNELL FTW

I am like your Dan Aykroyd and biglow would be Jane, the ignorant slut. -Chad

by thecoolest on Apr 30, 2008 7:23 PM CDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

I don't NEED a top QB.

I just want one that’s merely adequate. One that’s a Top-15 QB. I can’t see any way that Brohm isn’t at least that. Sure they might not hit a homerun, but is that really necessary? How about a double instead? They didn’t even take the bat off the shoulder.

"I've got a class (coming in) here, we've got a chance to do some things." --Tom Izzo on why he might not consider the Bulls coaching vacancy.

by tyger1147 on Apr 30, 2008 11:33 PM CDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

you guys are kickin' a dead horse

to truly get a good evaluation of a qb or a rb for that matter, you must first fix the ol. without a solid ol you will not get the most of the skilled positions. rex might be good behind a good line, maybe not. then you got orton(who really surprized me at how strong his arm was late last year) maybe he will work. defense wins championships and it all starts up front in the trenches.

just think of how the qb stats would look without all the dropped balls

by coolgjc on Apr 30, 2008 11:52 PM CDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

Just think how good they'd look if the QB's were any good.

The line is in rebuilding mode. Maybe they’ll re-sign Rex for another year to get a better evaluation.

"I've got a class (coming in) here, we've got a chance to do some things." --Tom Izzo on why he might not consider the Bulls coaching vacancy.

by tyger1147 on May 1, 2008 9:28 AM CDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

can't evaluate them

when they’re eratic, can’t be done. or something.

by mike b on May 1, 2008 9:34 AM CDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

nope

not when they don’t have enough time to let a play develop. anyone would be erratic in those conditions.

by coolgjc on May 1, 2008 5:28 PM CDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

when

‘05? if so,then you also had a decent running game that helped. and what was the ‘05 season? oh ya his 1st full one. look i’m not sayin’ Rex is the greatest thing since sliced bread but come on…you can’t name one qb that would be calm, cool and collective back there.

by coolgjc on May 1, 2008 10:08 PM CDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

btw

i’m all for finding a better qb but who??? Orton wasn’t spectacular and Greise just sux. so who??? the bears will never have a top qb. won’t happen.

by coolgjc on May 1, 2008 10:10 PM CDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

never?

i doubt that.

by mike b on May 1, 2008 10:17 PM CDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

06 maybe?

he was hurt most of 05.

i’m wondering where the excuses end, 3 full seasons with an excellent team around him?

by mike b on May 1, 2008 10:17 PM CDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

you did

“3 full seasons with and excellent team” if you were being sarcastic i guess I didnt get it.

"snuffalufagus fucks my shit up"

by leopoldjones on May 2, 2008 2:04 AM CDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

where does the word offense appear

the TEAM was a hypothetical team since we won’t have an excellent team for years.

by mike b on May 2, 2008 9:06 AM CDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

no excuses bud

you will never see a top qb in chicago. your beatin a dead horse. take what you get at qb. its the same ol’ thing every few weeks on here groosman sux, grossman is erratic, etc….you insert any and i repeat any qb back there and you’ll be sayin’ he sux too. you want orton? if they start him full time he will be the same. bring someone else in and you get (yep you guessed it )the same results. its a run team and they will focus their attention there. always have and always will.

by coolgjc on May 1, 2008 10:45 PM CDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

i guess you're talking to me?

if you’re that positive they’ll never have a good qb I’m not sure why you’re watching, I guess for that once ina generation team that wins it all in spite of it?

glad you’re ok with it though.

by mike b on May 1, 2008 10:58 PM CDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

yep

i’m not ok with it but history repeats itself. you can wish in one hand and shit in the other and see which one fills up first.

the bears will be a better team that can compete by focusing attention to other positions. grossman is not the straw that broke this camel’s back. he is just merely the cherry on top. no need to piss and moan about one guy over and over.

why i watch isn’t the topic. the topic is qb.

by coolgjc on May 1, 2008 11:43 PM CDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

unless

that guy lost you the superbowl. in that case he is the straw.

either way, i have seen the other parts of the team perform consistently, not gorssman.

if we’re busting out sayings :

if you order apple pie and get a pile of shit you can either shut up and eat the shit or get your apple pie. i’ll piss and moan, you enjoy your pile of shit.

by mike b on May 2, 2008 9:09 AM CDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

rex grossman did not lose us the superbowl,

if you think that you are dumber than I thought you were, the superbowl was lost long before he threw his picks, our defense could not stop manning, rivera was too afraid of him and what he could do, that game was lost before we took the field. Granted Grossman had a bad game but he did not lose it for us.

"snuffalufagus fucks my shit up"

by leopoldjones on May 2, 2008 11:00 AM CDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

right

fumbles and interceptions don’t ever lose games.

go back to the tinkertoys.

by mike b on May 2, 2008 11:56 AM CDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

3 turnovers

one of which was a pick 6. and a complete inability to do anything with the offense.

by mike b on May 2, 2008 12:11 PM CDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

and

please to not get the opinion that anything you say has any value to me whatsoever, whether it be a football opiion or one of your lame insults.

i am operating under the opinion that you are in fact a child or operating with dimished brain capacity; there is no other reason for some of the things you say.

in fact, i decided that i would be ignoring your “contributions” unless they were directly involved with something of mine, other than that it’s really not worth the time or the read.

by mike b on May 2, 2008 12:00 PM CDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

ya that guy

lost us the superbowl from the sidelines right? correct me if i’m wrong but didn’t the offense spend a consecutive 56 minutes on the sidelines. the defense couldn’t get off the field. but that will happen when your safties are 20 yards deep the hole game. your right atleast they were consistently bad the whole game. enjoy your shitty apple pie.

by coolgjc on May 2, 2008 8:04 PM CDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

3 and out

maybe if he didn’t have his head up his ass the entire offensive game the defense wouldn’t have been out there so much either.

remeber the part where the defensive game plan made him fumble snaps, miss receivers and throw pick six's?

oh yeah, right.

by mike b on May 3, 2008 1:13 PM CDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

What game were you watching?

Are you claiming the defense did well? Are you claiming that Benson didn’t fumble in a critical moment? Are you claiming that everyone on the team played well except for Grossman? I only remember two players playing well the whole game: Briggs and Jones.

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

by #23 on May 3, 2008 1:41 PM CDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

easy way

to answer that is to see if i actually said that. would have saved you a post.

by mike b on May 3, 2008 1:51 PM CDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

Ok,

then tell me. Did Grossman play bad or did everyone play bad besides Jones and Briggs? I include the coaching staffs poor decisions like defensive game planning and Turner going away from the run.

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

by #23 on May 3, 2008 3:42 PM CDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

everybody sucked

but the defense allowed 22 points, not an insurmountable number. the ofense scord 10 and gave up 7.

by mike b on May 3, 2008 4:41 PM CDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

56 minutes

with no opportunity to pull said head out of said ass. time of posession doesn’t mean anything? come on. the defense would not have been out there so much if they could have produced 3 and outs! did they even have one in that game?

you might have wanted grossman to pull a Montana or Elway in that game but he’s not that guy.

lack of adjusting by the coaching staff and the fact that the defense played so poorly, are the reasons we lost that game. you have no football sense what-so -ever if you truely put all the blame on grossman.

by coolgjc on May 3, 2008 4:21 PM CDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

i don't think all, but most

you know what else helps an offense get rhythm? holding on to the ball.

if you would have told me before the sb that the defense would only allow 22 points against one of if not the best qb in the game i would have bet the house.

the offense scored 10 points. 10. and they gave up 7.

by mike b on May 3, 2008 4:41 PM CDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

time of possesion

Possession Colts: 38:04 Bears: 21:56

the great thing about football is that the ball gets kicked away when a team scores. so taking away reid’s one fumble, the offense had five attempts at least to do something, and were unable to do much of anything.

the offense sucked, rex was the leader of the offense, and he had another tunover party, they didn’t have a lot of time, but they didn’t do shit with the time they had.

anybody want to bet on whether or not he drops the first snap opening night?

by mike b on May 3, 2008 4:54 PM CDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

21minutes and 56 seconds.

your right, we had the stupid turnovers. two of which were out of despiration towards the end of the game. i’m not saying the kid didn’t make mistakes, but the proof is in the pudding. when you control the clock for 38 minutes its an almost certain win. that just proves right there the defense couldn’t get off the field.

yep rex was the leader….or in your case the fall guy. most intelligent people can put the blame where it belongs. spread out to the guys that know themselves they are to blame. not just one guy but 11 at once. its a team sport dude.

i’ve been a part of football since i was able to walk,and i learned along time ago that there is no i or me in team. you win as a team and lose as a team. not one sole individual is responsible for either.

the kid doesn’t deserve all the shit you and the majority give him. nor will Orton if he’s the guy(and yes you’ll have the same attitude with the next guy)

as i’ve stated before, strong running game and a great defense is all chicago is about . so when injuries plague the team and the running game isn’t what it should be for various reasons, its not the qb fault.
the qb position will never be stellar. at best slightly above average. which when combined with the aboved mentioned, will be a championship caliber team.

i think you just got a hard-on for grossman.

by coolgjc on May 3, 2008 7:19 PM CDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

you

want me to highlight where isaid ti wasnt all his fault or can you find that on your own?

(and yes you’ll have the same attitude with the next guy)

you don’t really know what the hell your talking about there chief.

not sure if your new here or not, but no one is impressed with the “i’ve been a part of football since i was able to walk,” since most of us here have that on the resume already.

i guess its really easy to find excuses for the guy. jut hope genius’ like you aren’t waiting for that perfect team to come along so we can “finally evaluate him.”

by mike b on May 4, 2008 12:36 AM CDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

goddamn your an asshole

"snuffalufagus fucks my shit up"

by leopoldjones on May 4, 2008 1:49 PM CDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

oh they were out of desperation?

well then nevermind, obvioulsy that makes a difference. I won’t bother discussing it any further then.

by mike b on May 4, 2008 12:43 AM CDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

i think 3 different qb’s fumbled the snap last year….

by coolgjc on May 3, 2008 7:20 PM CDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs