Image Image Image Image

Griese to replace Grossman at QB for Bears

Moderator: chitownsports4ever

batman_crip14
Junior
Posts: 272
And1: 0
Joined: Apr 27, 2007

 

Post#21 » by batman_crip14 » Wed Sep 26, 2007 5:56 am

this is probably the best thing for the chicago bears and rex grossman. we get a bandaid that will hopefully aid us with brian griese. this will help rex out a lot. i am a fan of rex, but man sometimes you can't let him be babied. i think we tried to make him get as much taste of the game possible. but he still needs to review his stuff. i would keep him because i think we finally have an offense that some what fits us because over the past years we had a lot of changes in the offense,playbook wise.

so having rex in the QB rotation aint bad, but i say its going to be awhile to gets himself together. he has been through a lot, 2 season ending injuries, takes us to the playoffs, we lose, come back following year hoping he doesnt get hurt and takes us to the SB with a roller coaster ride, now he is off the bad start. what really didnt help was having to wake up everyday knowing that the media was bashing on him, good or bad rex, he was always getting bashed on. i hope we keep him. he just needs to watch and learn now which is the best thing for him. any one kinda agree?
User avatar
Dr. Lechter
Senior
Posts: 622
And1: 0
Joined: May 03, 2007
Location: Trying to eat better

 

Post#22 » by Dr. Lechter » Wed Sep 26, 2007 6:14 am

dougthonus wrote:Is it odd that Bradley has fallen so quickly, or odd that we evaluated the #3 WR on his college team as a 2nd rounder in the draft.


Doug,

I did not know this. That's incredible! Great point! I've actually never heard anybody mention this and it really begs certain questions about how Angelo drafts offensive talent.

I am not gainsaying Angelo but there are times where you shake your head and Bradley is a great point for this. I just went along with the papers when everyone (reportedly) called Bradley a steal at the draft. I didn't know and just trusted the story.

There is also the Lovie issue though. . .Lovie doesn't make adjustments well at all. Could it be that Bradley doens't "fit" his idea of a player at that position and can't adjust to what he has? Just a question.
CBS7
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 26,112
And1: 3,447
Joined: Jan 21, 2005
Location: Dallas

 

Post#23 » by CBS7 » Wed Sep 26, 2007 10:43 am

I have always liked Bradley, I have no idea why he isn't playing as our #3 or at least #4 WR.

He looked good last year when he came back.
User avatar
dougthonus
Senior Mod - Bulls
Senior Mod - Bulls
Posts: 55,650
And1: 15,760
Joined: Dec 22, 2004
Contact:
 

 

Post#24 » by dougthonus » Wed Sep 26, 2007 1:21 pm

I am not gainsaying Angelo but there are times where you shake your head and Bradley is a great point for this. I just went along with the papers when everyone (reportedly) called Bradley a steal at the draft. I didn't know and just trusted the story.


I'm only going on memory here, but I remember his college receiving stats were not all that special (they were great for a 3rd WR though), I thought he was considered very raw. He played with Jason White who was an extraordinarily prolific passer (though he went undrafted).

Someone might be able to correct me if I'm wrong here, I mean it was 3 years ago, and my memory may be shaky on the subject. I wasn't a fan of the Bradley draft choice when we made it, but I thought "well at least we went offense for a change".
http://linktr.ee/bullsbeat - links to the bullsbeat podcast
@doug_thonus on twitter
BigUps
RealGM
Posts: 22,420
And1: 5,600
Joined: Dec 08, 2004
Location: Limits, like fears, are often just an illusion.
         

 

Post#25 » by BigUps » Wed Sep 26, 2007 2:05 pm

dougthonus wrote:I'm only going on memory here, but I remember his college receiving stats were not all that special (they were great for a 3rd WR though), I thought he was considered very raw. He played with Jason White who was an extraordinarily prolific passer (though he went undrafted).

Someone might be able to correct me if I'm wrong here, I mean it was 3 years ago, and my memory may be shaky on the subject. I wasn't a fan of the Bradley draft choice when we made it, but I thought "well at least we went offense for a change".


Doug this is how I remember it as well, however I also recall Bradley having another torn ACL in college that hampered his stats. I think it was also similar timing to his ACL injury in the NFL. It came right after he started showing signs of figuring it all out, much like with the Bears.

In any case, injuries aside, Angelo reached for Bradley and has a history of reaching for mediocre talent. We dealt a first round pick for Daniel Manning and then took Garret Wolfe earlier than needed to go along with Bradley. Angelo seems to become obssesed with a player and out of fear of losing him he takes them early. This would be fine if they panned out, but so far they haven't.
User avatar
dougthonus
Senior Mod - Bulls
Senior Mod - Bulls
Posts: 55,650
And1: 15,760
Joined: Dec 22, 2004
Contact:
 

 

Post#26 » by dougthonus » Wed Sep 26, 2007 2:43 pm

I actually think Angelo has done a solid job in the draft outside of the 1st round. If you look at what most teams are getting out of the draft, I don't think the Bears are below average. However, all of his solid picks have been defensive players.
http://linktr.ee/bullsbeat - links to the bullsbeat podcast
@doug_thonus on twitter
Howling Mad
General Manager
Posts: 8,992
And1: 582
Joined: Jun 28, 2006

 

Post#27 » by Howling Mad » Wed Sep 26, 2007 4:25 pm

I actually think Angelo has done a solid job in the draft outside of the 1st round. If you look at what most teams are getting out of the draft, I don't think the Bears are below average. However, all of his solid picks have been defensive players.


I couldn't agree more.

Angelo has been superb at picking up talent. Yes, mostly defensive but he has hit some grand slams with his defensive picks.

The first round in the draft is also loaded with busts. There seems to be more busts in the first round than there are "diamonds in the rough" in other rounds. Angelo seems to love the 3-5 round draft picks, and rightfully so, 'cause thats where hes found a lot of his star players.
User avatar
Clint Eastwood
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,893
And1: 1,081
Joined: Aug 13, 2004
Location: Taking my talents to South Beach (twice a day at times)

 

Post#28 » by Clint Eastwood » Wed Sep 26, 2007 5:11 pm

im with Joe Jackson. i think everyone here underestimates griese and it is because of the national media that doesnt see him as a long term solution. he is at the age 31 or 32 that often finds QBs becoming great when they were largely unnoticed before.

i used to watch griese with denver, and he is a very good qb. has an average arm, but accurate. he will make a play when it breaks down, which grossman never could do. he will hit a man open deep which grossman could never do.

griese will be our qb for the next 5 years, and he will be top half in the league in QB rating. mark it down, you heard it here.

now only if the offensive line can give him a little time to throw...
We have Martell Webster. He's called Kyle Korver here, and we shall love him and squeeze him and call him Ashton. -BrooklynBulls
batman_crip14
Junior
Posts: 272
And1: 0
Joined: Apr 27, 2007

 

Post#29 » by batman_crip14 » Thu Sep 27, 2007 5:46 am

grossman had one of the prettiest deep balls in the business last year. oline is not doing what they are suppose. i dont want to see griese do bad, but he will do as much as rex did because of the 2 seconds the oline give. have any of you guys seen the PATS oline? my god its sick to watch brady relax in the pocket, its not even funny. grossman would be a probowl QB if he was on the pats. they give brady toooooooo much time, anyone agree?
CBS7
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 26,112
And1: 3,447
Joined: Jan 21, 2005
Location: Dallas

 

Post#30 » by CBS7 » Thu Sep 27, 2007 10:39 am

He'd be significantly better but I don't think he'd be a probowler.
User avatar
dougthonus
Senior Mod - Bulls
Senior Mod - Bulls
Posts: 55,650
And1: 15,760
Joined: Dec 22, 2004
Contact:
 

 

Post#31 » by dougthonus » Thu Sep 27, 2007 1:01 pm

grossman had one of the prettiest deep balls in the business last year.


I disagree. He underthrew most of his deep passes. He hit Berrian with a lot of deep balls that if they were on target would have been TDs, but Berrian had to slow up to gather them. A ton of his interceptions were on deep throws that were off target. The Bears made a lot of big plays, because, especially early, teams were keying on the run, and we were getting 1 on 1 down the field or broken plays with wide open WRs on deep passes.
http://linktr.ee/bullsbeat - links to the bullsbeat podcast
@doug_thonus on twitter
User avatar
dougthonus
Senior Mod - Bulls
Senior Mod - Bulls
Posts: 55,650
And1: 15,760
Joined: Dec 22, 2004
Contact:
 

 

Post#32 » by dougthonus » Thu Sep 27, 2007 1:02 pm

As a side note, last game, the offensive line game Rex a crapload of time for the the first 3/4ths of the game or so last week. The offensive line was really bad the first 2 weeks, but was pretty solid week 3. Of course, Rex made a lot of solid throws that were dropped in the first half as well.
http://linktr.ee/bullsbeat - links to the bullsbeat podcast
@doug_thonus on twitter
CBS7
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 26,112
And1: 3,447
Joined: Jan 21, 2005
Location: Dallas

 

Post#33 » by CBS7 » Thu Sep 27, 2007 5:04 pm

Granville Colter wrote:im with Joe Jackson. i think everyone here underestimates griese and it is because of the national media that doesnt see him as a long term solution. he is at the age 31 or 32 that often finds QBs becoming great when they were largely unnoticed before.

i used to watch griese with denver, and he is a very good qb. has an average arm, but accurate. he will make a play when it breaks down, which grossman never could do. he will hit a man open deep which grossman could never do.

griese will be our qb for the next 5 years, and he will be top half in the league in QB rating. mark it down, you heard it here.

now only if the offensive line can give him a little time to throw...


5 years is a lot, but I'd be fine with that because it means he's doing something right and would give us time to get and develop a new starting QB for the long term future.

I'd say 2, 3 years tops if he isn't crap.
richard
Banned User
Posts: 1,649
And1: 0
Joined: Jun 20, 2007

 

Post#34 » by richard » Thu Sep 27, 2007 6:08 pm

Chicago Tribune - Despite being the second-lowest-rated starting quarterback in the NFL, Rex Grossman didn't expect to be demoted to backup quarterback by coach Lovie Smith.

"I was surprised but [felt] frustration," Grossman said after his first day of practice as the No. 2 quarterback. "You have to move on and realize at any point you could be back out there. If that's the case, I'll play my best and get a rhythm going."

Grossman assured Brian Griese "there were no hard feelings," and Griese empathized with the Grossman and shared a story about the time he was replaced in Denver


lol.
batman_crip14
Junior
Posts: 272
And1: 0
Joined: Apr 27, 2007

 

Post#35 » by batman_crip14 » Fri Sep 28, 2007 5:45 am

i wanna see how fast the media and fans go from loving griese to hating the **** out of him. chicago is such a harsh town ahah
User avatar
Dr. Lechter
Senior
Posts: 622
And1: 0
Joined: May 03, 2007
Location: Trying to eat better

 

Post#36 » by Dr. Lechter » Fri Sep 28, 2007 6:32 am

batman_crip14 wrote:grossman had one of the prettiest deep balls in the business last year. oline is not doing what they are suppose. i dont want to see griese do bad, but he will do as much as rex did because of the 2 seconds the oline give. have any of you guys seen the PATS oline? my god its sick to watch brady relax in the pocket, its not even funny. grossman would be a probowl QB if he was on the pats. they give brady toooooooo much time, anyone agree?


I completely agree with Doug on this quote. However, I woudl add that Rex had more protection last year than this year. Last year, Rex had unbelievably bad games.

I believe our O-line is not very good this year, but this might just be a synergy of Running Back and Quarterback recognition of a blitz. If neither of them see it in the backfield, bad bad things will happen.

Griese scored 39 on the Wonderlic (Sp?). I'm hoping that's enough to see a blitz.
batman_crip14
Junior
Posts: 272
And1: 0
Joined: Apr 27, 2007

 

Post#37 » by batman_crip14 » Fri Sep 28, 2007 5:31 pm

whats wonderlic? last year rex had more good games than he did bad. but for some reason, we always drag the bad than we do the good. rex is one example of that, but it happens in our normal everyday lives. rex did more than a lot of people think, and dont really appreciate that
User avatar
dougthonus
Senior Mod - Bulls
Senior Mod - Bulls
Posts: 55,650
And1: 15,760
Joined: Dec 22, 2004
Contact:
 

 

Post#38 » by dougthonus » Fri Sep 28, 2007 6:27 pm

Wonderlic is basically an IQ test. A 39 is a very high score.
http://linktr.ee/bullsbeat - links to the bullsbeat podcast
@doug_thonus on twitter
mps
Senior
Posts: 528
And1: 0
Joined: Feb 26, 2002

 

Post#39 » by mps » Fri Sep 28, 2007 8:57 pm

dougthonus wrote:Wonderlic is basically an IQ test. A 39 is a very high score.

Just to elaborate, a 39 corresponds to an IQ of 138. Here's how different groups score on average, courtesy of the Wikipedia entry (Note that these are only averages, YMMV):
  • Chemist - 31
  • Programmer - 29
  • Offensive Tackle - 26
  • Newswriter - 26
  • Center - 25
  • Quarterback - 24
  • Salesperson - 24
  • Guard - 23
  • Tight End - 22
  • Bank teller- 22
  • Clerical worker- 21
  • Safety - 19
  • Linebacker - 19
  • Cornerback - 18
  • Wide Receiver - 17
  • Fullback - 17
  • Security Guard - 17
  • Halfback - 16
  • Warehouse worker - 15
mps
Senior
Posts: 528
And1: 0
Joined: Feb 26, 2002

 

Post#40 » by mps » Fri Sep 28, 2007 9:08 pm

batman_crip14 wrote:whats wonderlic? last year rex had more good games than he did bad. but for some reason, we always drag the bad than we do the good. rex is one example of that, but it happens in our normal everyday lives. rex did more than a lot of people think, and dont really appreciate that

Rex has certainly had some great games and all QBs are up and down, but there still is a minimum level of consistency needed and having 3 games last year with a QB rating of under 11 (including a zero), just isn't a starting QB. To top it off, this year he's had 3 straight bad games to go with no good ones.

I'd also add that the fact that he was shocked by the demotion shows that he really hasn't come to terms with what's required for starting NFL QB. There's not any other way to make that clear.

Return to Chicago Bears