Who should be our backup QB's next year?

**JustAnotherBearsFan99** · 12-23-2012, 01:29 PM

Originally Posted by Riczaj01

Blanchard UDFA
Lefevour 6th round
Nathan Endlerle 5th round
Trevor Vittatoe, UDFA
Haine 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

I agree there is a money aspect to this. If your backup QB's are going to fail, then why bother paying much for them. Even Cutler is struggling.

IMHO, the answer is to get the infrastructure in place for quarterbacks to have a chance to flourish (coaching & offense). Until we have that here in Chicago, we may as well have a beer vendor from the 400 level as our backup QB. He'll do as well as anyone we draft or acquire in FA.

**Riczaj01** · 12-23-2012, 03:17 PM

JABF, there is a huge cost difference. and that cost could goto other areas of need(Vet OL help/TE help/DB help). If you can get some of that sewed up the draft it also makes it harder for those around you to know what you plan on drafting, and it allows you to more easily start taking bpa in the draft.

**Henry Burris** · 12-23-2012, 04:55 PM

Well, so far, it looks like Dysert is predicted to be a first round pick, which obviously too high for us...
Derek Carr is staying in college
EJ Manuel's prolly gonna be there, and has good mobility for a big guy.

**Riczaj01** · 12-23-2012, 05:06 PM

I saw one kid that was expected in the late third...matt scott ot scott matthews??? out of one of the arizona colleges. I didn't mention him b/c I don't know college well and none of the sites i know about had any scouting on him other then he was a mid round option.

There was a Nasibb kid but he's rising fast(late 1st mid 2nd) which is still to high.

**Henry Burris** · 12-23-2012, 08:38 PM

It's Matt Scott. Dude is awesome as hell. Nvm EJ, we should get Matt Scott to be our next qb.

**weneedmorelinemen** · 12-23-2012, 10:38 PM

It is a waste of time for the Bears to draft rookie QBs without the proper developmental coaching in place to teach them how to play. I'm not talking o-line or player infrastructure on the team. I'm talking about the offensive coaching on this team. The only person that has walked through our door recently that I would consider qualified to teach a QB how to play was Mike Martz.

As a whole, a Lovie Smith coached team is a death sentence on the career of any long shot QB trying to make it in this league. Lovie can coach up and identify defensive players like Roach or Idonije. But it's my opinion that a rookie QB on this team, with our current coaching, has zero shot at being a capable starter because they just don't know offense enough to teach it.

We need to buy that experience and development from other teams in the form of veterans until the front office puts people (plural) on this team that know quarterback play and how to teach it in the current passing friendly NFL ruleset.

**Henry Burris** · 12-23-2012, 11:42 PM

I get what you're saying, but again, the point of this is to ask, what rookie/FA would instill confidence in us having backup qb spots. Other threads are for the importance of the other parts of the team. This, again, is more of a "what qb would you like?". I like Matt Scott and Chad Pennington.

**XaosGorilla** · 12-24-2012, 12:57 AM

If we are going to be serious about the backup QB position then maybe we should determine a skill set for said player and go from there.

This hypothetical person would need:
To be very mobile: The O-line can't protect very well.
To be difficult to tackle: see above.
To be physically tough/durable: see above.
To be mentally tough, or an eternal optimist: Between questionable talent, poor execution, and just plain bad coaching, this is a must.
To be good in garbage time, odds are there will be plenty of it.

Did I leave anything out?

**Riczaj01** · 12-24-2012, 01:06 AM

Originally Posted by weneedmorelinemen

It is a waste of time for the Bears to draft rookie QBs without the proper developmental coaching in place to teach them how to play. I'm not talking o-line or player infrastructure on the team. I'm talking about the offensive coaching on this team. The only person that has walked through our door recently that I would consider qualified to teach a QB how to play was Mike Martz.

As a whole, a Lovie Smith coached team is a death sentence on the career of any long shot QB trying to make it in this league. Lovie can coach up and identify defensive players like Roach or Idonije. But it's my opinion that a rookie QB on this team, with our current coaching, has zero shot at being a capable starter because they just don't know offense enough to teach it.

We need to buy that experience and development from other teams in the form of veterans until the front office puts people (plural) on this team that know quarterback play and how to teach it in the current passing friendly NFL ruleset.

Don't disagree w/this. If lovie and co' are here next year they should go vet b/c there is zero ability to develop someone. The costs of this on your cap are outrageous though for the limited player you get. The best guys out there are: Flacco(not leaving baltimore), Derrek Anderson, Rex Grossman, Jason Campbell, Moore, and Chase Daniels. These guys are brutally bad which is why they are looking for jobs. I don't want any of them on the Bears next year; if I had to go w/one it's probably Daniels, who's got to learn how to qb from Brees/Sean Payton.

**Henry Burris** · 12-24-2012, 02:09 AM

Originally Posted by XaosGorilla

If we are going to be serious about the backup QB position then maybe we should determine a skill set for said player and go from there.

This hypothetical person would need:
To be very mobile: The O-line can't protect very well.
To be difficult to tackle: see above.
To be physically tough/durable: see above.
To be mentally tough, or an eternal optimist: Between questionable talent, poor execution, and just plain bad coaching, this is a must.
To be good in garbage time, odds are there will be plenty of it.

Did I leave anything out?

Very good points. Anyone come to mind? Honestly, for me the best are reading the D and having a quick release, good accuracy. We don't need the bomb even half as much as we use it, just someone that could come in relief and get 4-6 yards here or there mixed in with a good ratio of runs. That would be ideal for a fa, because relying on such a skill set is only reliable with a qb who has seen a few things, and can trick the D. Despite what everyone says about all these "amazing" young QB's, outside of Luck, not many are playing with a full playbook and are only as good at passing because of their scrambling abilities, which again many have offenses tailored to them (Wilson and RG3 play a LOT of option ball, and Cam has to try again next year, while Dalton, Tannehill, Weems and that one guy are all decent players that are at the crossroads of being really good and just being serviceable). Therefore, with a vet, we should look to intelligence and accuracy, as tailoring an offense to a rook who can run the simple plays seems to be an easy way to do it, but doesn't guarantee much of anything based solely on their talent. So, we get the Chad Pennington type to keep the ball progressing and keep the defense honest by switching plays at the line, and whatnot, while get a Matt Scott, who has similar skills to Jay Cutler, but could have much of the (new) playbook pulled back to get him in the rhythm of the nfl, while keeping opposing D's confused with multiple rb sets and whatnot.

TL;DR It wouldn't matter who is the backup, Chad Pennington, or Matt Scott. Both are really fuggin awesome and with slight alterations one way or the other, could keep the game moving at least somewhat smoothly without Cutty.

Thread: Who should be our backup QB's next year?

LinkBack

Thread Tools

Posting Permissions