Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Chicago Bears' started by BradMustersGhost, Oct 21, 2013.
Are you talking about McCown playing the Packers in 2011?
One good game does not a good QB make.
McCown hasn't changed. Our HC has changed. Our Offensive Line has changed. Our Receiver threats have changed.
McCown had a great game, and i thank him for that...seriously, he drove down the field to answer the Skins' TDs with his own...i don't care what anybody says, that was an AMAZING QB performance, and he should receive the credit for how he played. Loved watching it.
Still, i think his success is due more to the Bears' new QB-friendly system/coach and pieces than it is from McCown himself. Its a testament to Trestman's (Trestament?) coaching ability that he had our offense so well coached, that he could simply plug in his backup without missing a beat. Of course, just to throw this out there...maybe this is the type of coach/system/players that fit McCown like a glove and he ends up realizing his potential and playing lights out every week. Anything is possible, and he will have about 4 games or so to prove it.
In conclusion...McCown has shown me that this team under Emery and Trestman is very QB-friendly. Bad news for Jay, and good news for our prospects going forward, as we can possibly skip on Jay's 100M contract, and try and draft or sign another QB for cheaper. Or maybe Jay will take a pay cut. Or maybe this is the moment McCown becomes a true starter. Or maybe this is all an illusion, and i am still stuck in the preseason and dreaming this entire clusterfuck of a season. Who knows?
Just a knee jerk scenario which is hard to avoid, IMO.
Just like no one should base a resurgence of Cutler using a 125 rating game, no one should look at McCown's nice performance against a low grade Washington D as a lateral move. This process with the new system & Jay's growth in it was looked on as a season long review at the onset & personally I'll still wait on those results.
Of course, if someone comes up with a young stud to groom...
In an interview Trestman made after the Washington game, he said that the only attention he has paid to McCown was to run the scout team,so give some credit to the player too. Trestman did say he was very pleased with his performance, and I'd say it's vindication of our head coach that he knows what he wants in the QB position, and that he saw it in McCown. The guy learned the offense on his own like he was supposed to. Unlike Jason Campbell, who just sat on his ass and looked clueless in 2012.
I know and understand McCown's not a starter. If he has to play out the rest of the season because Cutler cannot, he's going to look bad. But what you expect from your backup QB is that he knows the offense, and can run the offense.
I'm getting the sense that quite a few posters are licking their chops for McCown's first bad game so they can have the conch and speak about how much of a fluke this Washington game was.
I totally agree. I figure the QB picture will be clearer at the end of the season. I don't think we should overpay Jay, and I don't think we will. I just want to see a viable QB in place before we cut ties completely with him. It's that old saying "a bird in the hand is better than two in the bush" ......I'm fine bringing in another guy to see if he can truly be solid for us. I wish we could have drafted a solid prospect this year, but we had too many other needs. McCown will be a serviceable backup until Jay returns, but I'm not confident he's the stud some here seem to think he is. He had 1 good game, which is great, even though we lost the game. The first time we see "Bad McCown" out there, these same people will be grabbing the pitch forks and screaming how he's a bum. Fans. Gotta love 'em. :D
McCown did look good there is no argue but the question remains if this was just a lucky shot or if he can keep his play up.
One good game doesn't mean jackshit, 2-3+ games is what matters.
In the next three games we have: Packers, Lions and Ravens and they sure as hell put more pressure on the QB than what Redskins did yesterday and that is what worries me. It's a good thing we run the WCO because it gives McCown and the team a better succes rate but I still want to see another good from McCown before I jump on the waggon.
Yup. Good yardage and percentage.... But 1 TD and 2 INTs speak volumes about why the Bears lost that game
Not at all. It is that no one had any faith McNown can get the job done.
If you think he is a capable QB for a team that wants to win.... More power (and room in that boat) to ya
I think he's a pretty good backup. No complaints in that regard from me. I just temper this with the fact he's not a long term solution at QB. I know you realize this, but some are almost giddy about him now.
You mean like how WNML came in here talking how great McCown was so he could say how right he was? Naaaah most are like that on this board.
I don't wish him any bad games, but history says he'll have a lot more bad ones then he'll have good ones. He's a career 50% comp % guy and that is only slighlty better then Tebow.
Now that he's 'the One', opposing DCs will just take away his few comfort zones & expose him for what he is...a back up. Nothing against him but the drop off should be & will prove to be just that.
You saw the drop off in yesterdays game, he's got a very limited arm, when he has to stretch the field he throws a duck.
Luckily in the WCO, you don't have to throw deep, unfortunately for a career 50% comp guy, you have to continue to be near 70%, yesterday he has a career day, to expect it week in week out w/teams planning for you is a completely different thing. They'll load in like they did Orton and crowd the box and beg him to throw deep.
He'd been on the team for three weeks. To me, that's a bit premature to judge a guy for his first start at an away game against Green Bay without Forte or any receivers. But, hey, you have stricter standards. So, if we start Jordan Palmer sometime this year, would you expect a win his first start?
That's a good point that many missed here. The 'Skins were prepared for Cutler, who is 180-degrees different from Josh McCown. There was ZERO game planning for McCown, so he benefited from this to some extent. We've all seen this in game situations where a starter goes down and the backup looks pretty good. In fact Caleb Hanie looked like a solid QB in the NFC Championship game when Jay went down to injury there. Many of us thought Caleb was going to be a solid QB after that performance (I confess that I thought this too). But he really wasn't a very good QB.
I do hope McCown continues to do well, but my gut feeling is that teams will quickly expose him. I know that sounds harsh, but that's my thought. But hey, I'm wrong about as much as I'm right on this board, so maybe he'll be a stud.
Pffft, I was totally right this preseason when I said he was a better option as the backup QB than the guy you were touting, Blanchard. I told you it was more important to have played in regular season games and have familiarity with the offense, and yesterday's game showed exactly that.
But I expectyou will be there in the front row to boo the guy and diminish anything he does for the Bears as this entire team comes off the rails.
Good god, McCown not going to light up the NFL as a stud.
You are probably right that he will be figured out. But what I expect from my backup QB is to know the offense and be able to run the offense. To give you a shot at winning a couple games before the starter comes back. That's what should be expected, and that's what he gave us in Washington.
I expect someone who plays the position to win. That is why they are on the team.
If you are willing to accept a loss due to "lack of team experience" have at it. McCown is a step about hot garbage. If he was not, he would not be sitting on his butt waiting for the Bears (the only team to call him) to give him a job.
I expect McCown, Palmer or anyone else who goes under center to be good enough to win the damn game. McCown has plenty of league experience. Being on the team three weeks does not change that.
I agree 100%. I'm not expecting him to play at the level of Jay (or any NFL starter) on a long-term basis. Most backups can't do that either. My expectations are pretty much as you describe.
I said in the offseason that he was a capable backup. I said he was better than the nobody UDFAs other posters seemed enamored with. He's a better option than Campbell was last year, and Campbell got 3.5 million bucks to not learn the system. He's better than Hanie was, because he managed to win a game in 2011 whereas we lost every game Hanie touched a football in.
At no time did I say he's starter material. He's a fine backup QB though.
And he contributed to a win against the Vikings the next week. But for you, picking a QB up off the street three weeks before and playing him should equal a win against a playoff caliber team in their stadium. That's a pretty unreasonable expectation.