What would I do? Hire the best vet backup I could find just like we did this year. Campbell wasn't a bad hire Tice was a poor coach who never had him prepared to come into any game in relief or to start. In defense of Cambell I'd just say that Cutler is struggling mightily to run that offense well himself and failing so what do you guys expect from his backup.
The Bears offense is like a rusted out '63 Chevy running on 6 out of 8 cylinders and a busted tranny. Does it make any difference whether Tony Stewart is driving it or I'm driving it? It's not gonna win any races. So putting down Campbell or Emery for signing him is pretty foolish. Campbell was more than capable of doing the job if he'd been properly prepared and if the job itself was doable but it wasn't. Peyton Manning could not have come in off the bench and done better so let's not knock Campbell.
In all likelihood Campbell will be looking for a starters role somewhere but if not he may be worth keeping just not for $3.5 mil. I'm gonna cut Emery a little slack on this one. After last year he may have overreacted a bit in what he spent but the pickings were slim and with no developmental type on the team worth a damn he had little choice.
If we could protect Cutler then McCown would be sufficient and less costly but we don't protect him so the need for a better than average #2 is still there. I don't know who to get because I don't even know who's gonna be available but it can't be a rookie at #2. However, we do need a guy in development if Blanchard was not or is not gonna be that guy.
vet backups around the league disagree w/your theory Soul, henne did nothing, Leftwhich did nothing, campbell did nothing. vet backsups are the most expensive myth in the game. they bring nothing but their own failure and short comings to the team and cost more.
and yes it can be a rookie, yates, cousins, both mid round backups did just fine, russell wilson mid round guy doing just fine.
I will agree though, that w/the current crop of coaches in this staff the chances of any development happening are moot. But why bring in a guy and pay him 2-3 mil if he's going to do you just as good as a rookie that costs a several hundred K? Both are going to lose more then they win, so why pay more for the same product?
I suggest Chad Pennington if he is doing a comeback.. ;)
I don't know what we should do at this time. We have so many positions that we need to draft that I am not sure if we should use a pick for a QB but yet in the past smart drafters e.g. Ron Wolf with the Packers would use a late round pick on a QB and hope they panned out.
This is a tough call to say the least.
We've brought in a lot of young QB's in recent years. Then we let them go. Not counting older veterans we've brought in, we've drafted or signed 7 young QB's over the past 3 seasons alone. Neither the veterans or young QB's we bring in amount to much. Of course, even Jay Cutler, struggles here now.
So, if we spend more draft picks or bring in more young promising FA's, will it be different? Not with all of our many problems on offense & with coaches who can't coach.
2012 Matt Blanchard
2011 Nathan Enderle
2011 Trevor Vittatoe
2011 Caleb Hanie
2010 Dan LeFevour
2010 Matt Gutierrez
2010 Mike Teel
Funny again, the last oc to get us in the top 15 was the last one to develop a rookie, as well...
Edit: our current qb coach did a good job w cutler, maybe with a correctly run wc, we could bring in a young guy like dysert, and a Pennington, or as similar as possible (quick reader, good shorter accuracy, dgaf about 90 yd bombs) and i think we could be okay.
What I don't understand, is why don't we have a young QB on our practice squad anymore? If we're not going to develop a young guy (not even try) then why draft them? Why sign them as FA's? We get 'em and cut 'em.
We have 3 veterans now: Cutler, Campbell & McCown.
Why get more young QB's when we don't even TRY to do anything with 'em other than cut them? Makes no sense to me. It's madness.
Would we be better off to have committed to our draft picks/FS guys - either Enderly, LeFevour or Blanchard, rather than to go out and get more young people?
Lefevour 6th round
Nathan Endlerle 5th round
Trevor Vittatoe, UDFA
Matt Gutierrez(not a young guy, was picked up in UDFA by the Pats in 2007)
Mike Teel(was drafted in the 6th round by the Seahawks in 2009, again not a rookie we drafted.
So what you are saying(and I agree) late round/udfa qb's aren't any good. Glad we are on the same page.
Lets look at the teams that win SB's over the last 10 years
2002 NE: won a sb w/their backup qb(Brady 6th round pick, sat on the bench for 2 years won a sb), was not an experienced vet
2003 TB: backup was drafted by them in the 2nd round in 1999 not an expereinced vet.
2004 NE: backup was Davey Rohan, not a vet
2005 NE: Matt Caassle, not a vet
2006 Pitt: Batch, vet
2007 Ind: Jim Sorgi 6th round draft pick by Indy 3 years earlier
2008 NYG: David Carr vet
2009 Pitt: Batch, vet
2010 NO's Chase Daniels UDFA 09 from Skins cut him, signed by the NO in 09 made the active roster
2011 GB: Graham Harrell: UDFA from 09, GB signed him on 2010
2012 NYG: David Carr vet.
now do the math, how many of these teams are signing expensive vet backups? How many are signing cheap young qb's or drafting them and keeping them around? If you want to see a SB/multiple sb's it's in your best interest to draft a young qb or sign one that doesn't hurt your cap