This article is not intended as a slam against the guy from USC (this one, not this one, this one, or this one, and certainly not this one). Instead, it’s intended as a reality check on the state of Bears quarterbacking. Matt Barkley is a pleasant surprise, but he’s also turning into another version of the Chicago urban legend—the backup quarterback who can ascend to the top and finally take the Bears into relevancy.
It is a narrative that has just enough truth behind it in the likes of Kurt Warner and Tom Brady to give it an authentic feel. Perhaps more importantly than authenticity is the thought that finding a backup quarterback who can get the job done without serious investment of draft capital is appealing for one reason above all others—it means that precious draft pick can be spent somewhere else. Maybe a lineman out of the SEC or a linebacker returner safety athletic marvel out of the Big Ten.
To be fair to Matt Barkley, he has played well under very adverse conditions. Not counting his horrible half-game against Green Bay (wherein he posted an 18.3 passer rating), he is looking at an 83 passer rating for the year. That is a dramatic improvement from where he was at prior to 2016, and on its own it says good things about his ability to move the football. It breaks down a little when one reads the fine print, though.
Take Barkley’s performances out of the equation, and the three teams #12 has gone up against have combined to allow a passer rating of 95.2. Barkley edged the competition against San Francisco (his 97.5 just barely outshines the 96.5 average allowed), but he turned in sub-par results against Tennessee (72.8 vs. 89) and Detroit (92.2 vs 100.7). In other words, Barkley is not performing to the same level as the average competition faced by those three teams.
Is some of this on his receivers and cobbled-together line? Absolutely. However, if history has taught Bears fans anything, it’s that other players on the offense are going to get injured next year, too.
One advantage that people point to with Barkley is that he has some experience to him, and that is valuable. Or rather, it is, but it’s not. First, the good. While he has only played in 8 games in the NFL, he has been on a roster for 2013, 2014, and 2016. He has attempted almost 170 NFL passes. That’s more than Johnny Manziel and Jared Goff and almost as many as Cody Kessler.
However, let’s put it another way. In his career, Matt Barkley has just more than half the passing attempts (at quarterback) as Terrelle Pryor with a worse touchdown percentage (2.4% to 2.9%), interception rate (4.7% to 3.9%), and career passer rating (64.2 vs. 69.3). Yes, the 2016 Bears are a bad team. However, the 2013 Raiders (4-12) were not world-beaters, either.
Can a team do worse than Matt Barkley? As a backup, absolutely, and the Bears have. Can a team do worse than Matt Barkley as a starter? Yes, but they shouldn’t. In overall “rate” statistics, Barkley is worse than the guy people want him to replace. Set aside his awkward start in Philadelphia—just in Chicago, Barkley’s touchdown percentage is lower and his interception rate is higher than Cutler’s. His passer rating is lower, he has fewer Adjusted Net Yards per Attempt, and fewer yards per game. In fact, the one category Barkley leads in is in “not being Jay Cutler,” which might be all some people care about.
This is not an indictment of Barkley. He has kept things interesting, and I will be hoping he plays lights out for the last three games of the year (one more than the others, honestly). However, “roll with Barkley” is not a viable strategy for a team that needs to rebuild. The future of the Bears at quarterback should be decided in late April, probably by the end of the second round, even if we’re all hoping that December proves me wrong.
To be clear, I do want Barkley to prove me wrong. I want him to post an above-average passer rating against the remaining opponents on Chicago’s schedule. I hope he finds an extra gear and elevates his game. If he plays so well that I find myself writing an apology column, I’ll be ecstatic. However, if Pace passes on trying to find a true franchise quarterback because Barkley seemed “good enough,” it could set the Bears back by another few years. “Good enough” isn’t.
Unless otherwise noted, all stats are drawn from Pro Football Reference.