he had a couple of decent plays looking at the numbers. not being able to do much between the tackles hurts since it won’t be hard to figure out what he’s doing in the game, but maybe 5 years from now when our line is good….

but they also didn’t do anything to write home about (granted, first gamea action). maybe that is what was created with this QB competition. And the more I think about it the stupider this thing is. The coaching staff and every one of us knows exactly what each QB is going to bring to the table, so just decide which style we want to go with and give that guy all the reps because it’s obvious that with all of these new receivers and now linemen, they need as many reps as possible.

I really need to get back into the SCORE, was absolutely addicted to it last year. did they end up booting North off the morning show? because that was the only slot I absolutely refused to listen to…

so that information might, possibly (since its speculation), address the speed issue …

... but on the other hand, doesn’t that just further solidify the more critical argument / prevailing suspicion that Wolfe is too small to play at this level and won’t be able to take the hits consistently without being perenially injured? it was the same story last preseason, only worse, as he just plain sat out for several weeks, and we’ve seen his name on the injury list already a number of times this summer to a lesser extent.

unless the preseason practice schedule calls for RBs taking more of a beating than they do during the regular season, what reason do we have to think that he’ll be a dependable option around which we can design offensive packages or scripts? how will he ever be able to develop an ability to run between the tackles if practicing it involves him getting “banged up” to the point where it affects his speed? seems like a bit of a catch-22 to me, but that’s just my opinion.

... that I didn’t (fully) address in my comment. I think that I’m more and more of the opinion that we should go out and get Simms regardless of how Hanie pans out in the preseason, and here’s why…

all over the league this year, one of the major storylines has been about how so many teams are struggling with the distractions and inefficiencies resulting from QB battles / controversies. CHI, MIN, SF, ARI, KC, CLE, HOU, WAS, soon-to-be GB, and arguably TB. (also maybe BAL, ATL, and MIA, but they’re probably more about who just mans the wheel before / if not beginning with the rookies). Most of those controversies, with the exception of CLE and potentially WAS (two actual #1s?), are due to the fact that too many teams are trying to address the position by having two (or more, as was the case of the Bears last year) “potential” #1s. across the board, the strategy has proven to be either costly (financially) or a waste of valuable (offseason) training time, or both.

what I’m getting at is that I think we need to consider reverting back to the model of having a clearcut present-and-long-term starter, a clearcut insurance policy, and a clearcut (peripheral) QB of the future in development. (its very possible that Lovie recognized the need for such a structure before when he put on his longstanding “Rex is our quarterback” show, trying to assert a difference that, though (IMO) existed and was/is correctly recognized, was never realistically large enough to avoid the inevitable controversy.) it is widely thought / recognized that the QB position is the most important position on the football field, and if you can’t find a solid fixture for the position – one that both the organization and the fans/media will support through rough patches and/or injuries – you would naturally think it’d be pretty difficult to stay focused on improving all other facets of the team and/or its approach to the (offensive) game.

as I mentioned above, I have always had the feeling that Simms could be that type of a QB, and given the fact that he’s still just 28 years old, he could be that type of QB with some franchise for quite a few years to come.

I think a lot of people would agree that adding Simms and throwing Hanie to the practice squad (and, thus, potentially throwing him away since he could then be signed by any of the other ailing teams) would be risking, at least seemingly / initially, just muddling the picture even more by having three potential #1s, boosting your costs, and simultaneously losing a promising project / potential long-term solution. I think a lot of other people would agree that passing on Simms because you have a developmental project would put undue pressure on both the project and the organization to push forward and start prematurely when the two insurance policies (with a broken down line, no less) inevitably fail, at least in the eyes of public opinion. as for signing Simms and keeping all four on your roster, you’re obviously unnecessarily sacrificing much-needed depth at another position just to sustain your indecisiveness.

all that being said, I think that whichever QB loses the battle in Chicago should be traded as quickly as possible in favor of Simms, possibly even directly (plus a 7th rounder?) with TB if Gruden insists on having 7 QBs and is willing to accept that QB with open arms (which he probably will be, given his recent track record). as I clearly stated above, I think that that expendable QB should be, and will eventually prove to be, Orton and that Simms should be able to come in and sooner rather than later (and 1 and a half to 2 years sooner that Hanie…) prove he’s a solid #1/ franchise QB. right or wrong, that’s my gut feeling. should the project (Hanie) turn out to be everything you would have hoped he could be, you then either cut the insurance policy to further reduce costs and boost roster flexibility or you trade the promising product (again, Hanie) to another team that’s willing to pay a high price and is distant enough (meaning AFC) to not threaten you. I think the move to cut the “loser” should be made the second a “winner” is announced before the third preseason game, allowing Simms two weeks of camp to jump start his understanding of the offense and get an uber-basic package down in case we have an injury with the remaining “starter” either in preseason (in which case you let Hanie play out almost all of what’s left of the two games – no way that guy gets hurt with how jacked he is, and all parties would benefit in the long run from him being out there more) or within the first several games of the actual season.

other than injury, the only other remaining wildcard I can think of with the scenario would be the highly, highly unlikely chance that Rex comes full circle and proves to the coaches, fans, and himself that he’s a clearcut number one QB – not “highly unlikely” due to a lack of individual ability so much as the probability that his supporting cast won’t be able to properly support him before he’s given the hook. I like Rex – I think he’s more or less been wronged here in Chicago and hope he eventually excels in the league either here or anywhere after being fully developed, just as long as his success doesn’t happen here and coincide with the simultaneous resurrection of Simm’s career after he’s already sporting a Bears jersey. if that happens, we’re right back where we started, and I suddenly find myself being the jerk that’s selfishly rooting against Rex and hoping he’ll relapse so that the organization can move forward, something close to what some of the stupider super-cheeseheads up in Packer country are doing this very minute. in a similar scenario, if Rex proves to himself and to other organizations in the league that he’s a #1 QB and the Bears still promote Simms to the starter role in recognition of his higher trajectory, then Rex may very well ditch out come the end of the season and the expiration of his 1-year deal and we’ll be forced to find a replacement insurance policy. as far as I’m concerned though, cheap insurance policies are a dime a dozen in this league and finding a suitable / “serviceable” one should Rex depart shouldn’t be a serious problem or threat to the stability of the position.

I’m obviously not a GM that knows the ins and outs of executing such a plan, but to me, that’s what would make the most sense given the present opportunity with Simms, and if I had my way, that’s the direction I would go in with it. until its all been resolved, I suppose I’ll just have to settle for just crossing my fingers…