gbpfan1231 Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 Green Bay will fall off unless their run game gets a pulse. The Pack plays the Vikings then the Bears. When do you see this fall off coming? Definately not in the next two weeks!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Swerski Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 Pretend that I've never seen CHI play at all and explain to me what Orton clearly has that Grossman doesn't. Orton clearly has a weaker arm and less play-making ability. I agree with Pope that Orton was rushed big-time and put into a bad situation in '05. For all I know, he may have enough experience and knowledge of the system to be able to move the chains at this point. But I think it speaks volumes that they went out and got Griese last year and that Griese is still #2 on the depth chart right now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 Orton, career: 51.6 comp % 5.1 ypa 0.69 TD/INT ratio Grossman, career: 54.2 comp % 6.5 ypa 0.88 TD/INT ratio By comparisons of important QB numbers, Grossman is a better QB than Orton. Now, let's understand I'm not defending Grossman here. Grossman sucks big time. It's just that Orton sucks even worse. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 But I think it speaks volumes that they went out and got Griese last year and that Griese is still #2 on the depth chart right now. Agreed. But I think it speaks volumes towards the HC, not towards the QBs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingfish247 Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 Orton, career: 51.6 comp % 5.1 ypa 0.69 TD/INT ratio Grossman, career: 54.2 comp % 6.5 ypa 0.88 TD/INT ratio By comparisons of important QB numbers, Grossman is a better QB than Orton. Now, let's understand I'm not defending Grossman here. Grossman sucks big time. It's just that Orton sucks even worse. You just quoted career stats. You left out QB rating but it wouldn't matter because career stats, evidently, seem to mean nothing to the Bears' organization and probably some fans. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 You just quoted career stats. You left out QB rating but it wouldn't matter because career stats, evidently, seem to mean nothing to the Bears' organization and probably some fans. When I see the numbers I posted, I don't need to include QB rating to know that Grossman will be rated higher than Orton. Since you insist: Grossman, career rating: 69.3 Orton, career rating: 59.7 (PS - Griese, career QB rating: 84.5, career comp % 63.0%, career ypa 7.05, career TD/INT 1.30) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goopster24 Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 2 touchdowns in 32 offensive possessions. That's all one needs to know. A change must be made. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 By comparisons of important QB numbers, Grossman is a better QB than Orton. Very true, but his suck quotient may be more consistently bad. That way he is on a more level plane(no highs or drastic lows) so they may be better able to adjust and win more games. Orton's QB rating was about 50, but it was pretty consistent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mphtrilogy Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 griese is there best shot for salvaging this season. I thinkn he will get the nod, and a commitment from Lovie. Consequently, I will then pick him up and play him with confidence this week. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PantherDave Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 Quite simple really....your best RB hands down plays for the Jets, you have to choose from Grossman, Greise or Orton for the QB. The OT is so bad that they have become a liability to the DT...keeping them on the feild way to much, which leads to the strong possibility of injuries etc., and this is the NFL and only so many games can be won by ST. The schedule last year was a laugher and in doing so, made everyone think this team was better than it is actually. The Bears still have all their division games left, but it's stacked against them already with GB 3-0 and Det 2-1. These two teams will put points on the board, the question will be if the Bear OT can do the same-time will tell. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pope Flick Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 When I see the numbers I posted, I don't need to include QB rating to know that Grossman will be rated higher than Orton. Since you insist: Grossman, career rating: 69.3 Orton, career rating: 59.7 (PS - Griese, career QB rating: 84.5, career comp % 63.0%, career ypa 7.05, career TD/INT 1.30) I'm of the opinion that those numbers on paper do not take everything into account, given the scenario. Orton put up numbers that were less than Grossman to be sure, but they are not indicative of the situation both were given: Grossman was given just about every opportunity to put up better numbers, whereas Orton was thrown to the wolves. Griese's numbers are clearly better, but I worry about the "cancer factor" which I'm sure you're aware of, such as when he got drunk and slipped and fell into Nalen's fists, or some other lineman's. I haven't heard he's caused problems in ChiTown locker room just yet, but he wasnt run out of Denver and Tamp for no good reason. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingfish247 Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 When I see the numbers I posted, I don't need to include QB rating to know that Grossman will be rated higher than Orton. Since you insist: Grossman, career rating: 69.3 Orton, career rating: 59.7 (PS - Griese, career QB rating: 84.5, career comp % 63.0%, career ypa 7.05, career TD/INT 1.30) You don't have to for me. Herego any numbers demonstrating efficiency seem to mean nothing to the Bears organization and some fans. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pope Flick Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 (edited) Pretend that I've never seen CHI play at all and explain to me what Orton clearly has that Grossman doesn't. With the exception of his game against Cinci, he does not lose games in the manner that Grossman hands them away. The fact that Grossman has had 3 years to get ready, and Orton was given not even 3 weeks you can stop pretending. Edited September 25, 2007 by Pope Flick Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Swerski Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 The fact that Grossman has had 3 years to get ready, and Orton was given not even 3 weeks you can stop pretending. And the fact that Orton hasn't taken a snap with the first-string offense since January of 2006 suggests that he's probably still not ready. Unless the Bears have given up on the season and want to give Orton time to develop, I'd be pretty surprised to see him get the nod over Griese. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptainHook Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 The major difference that I see is that the Bears running game stinks. Bad. In years past, they won by running the football and playing good defense. Now that teams don't have to respect the run, Grossman has become even more exposed than in the past. And now the defense is badly banged up. Trading away Thomas Jones was a hugh, hugh, hugh, mistake. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pope Flick Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 And the fact that Orton hasn't taken a snap with the first-string offense since January of 2006 suggests that he's probably still not ready. Unless the Bears have given up on the season and want to give Orton time to develop, I'd be pretty surprised to see him get the nod over Griese. That might be true, but at this point I don't know who -besides Grossman- has taken snaps with the first team besides him so the 'rust factor' you are alluding to may or may not be that much different from Griese to Orton. And Hook is right - there's no run game to respect and the passing game simply cannot compensate in the slightest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cory_n_az Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 Pains to say as a Bears fan, but I'd be surprised if this team finished .500. Statistically coming into the year, they surprisingly had one of the league's easiest schedule (rare given they're a defending Super Bowl rep). Sadly, Grossman isn't the only glowing problem on this team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 I'm of the opinion that those numbers on paper do not take everything into account, given the scenario. You & Lovie think just alike! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pope Flick Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 You & Lovie think just alike! Explain to me why context should be ignored and not look at numbers as if the spreadsheet tells all? 1000 days prep to become a full time starter, compared to 10 days. Results more or less the same. Do you understand the difference? It doesn't seem so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 (edited) Explain to me why context should be ignored and not look at numbers as if the spreadsheet tells all? 1000 days prep to become a full time starter, compared to 10 days. Results more or less the same. Do you understand the difference? It doesn't seem so. I understand the difference completely. So you are saying that CHI made Orton sit on the bench during all OTAs, all training camp, & all preseason, as well as during the regular season. I understand the difference completely. Grossman's numbers, as weak as they are, are far superior to Orton's. 10 pts in QB rating is a gigantic margin. To give you an idea of the difference in QB rating between Grossman & Orton, here's some perspective for you: The difference between Peyton Manning's career QB rating (94.6) and Trent Green's career QB rating (87.1) is less than 8 points. How's that for context? Edited September 25, 2007 by Bronco Billy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildcat2334 Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 Griese's numbers are clearly better, but I worry about the "cancer factor" which I'm sure you're aware of, such as when he got drunk and slipped and fell into Nalen's fists, or some other lineman's. I haven't heard he's caused problems in ChiTown locker room just yet, but he wasnt run out of Denver and Tamp for no good reason. this is ridiculous. You have zero info that he has caused problems, and you bring up Griese being a "cancer" bc of a prior incident in Denver. Wow, locker room brawls, getting drunk- gee whiz. QB's move on- happens all the time- Griese had a nice run, then has been a bit of a journeyman- he is still a MUCH better QB than Grossy, and if I was a diehard Bears fan, I would have been screaming for him LAST YEAR. From the looks of things- no on the team has any faith in Rex, or even likes the kid for that matter. He stands there on the sideline by himself- every analyst I have heard rips him to shreds yet Lovie still trots him out there- pretty unreal to me that a team with a D like Chicago has had the past 2-3 seasons gives themselves such little chance to win on the offensive side of the ball. Rex couldn't start for any other squad, cept for MInny maybe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Swerski Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 That might be true, but at this point I don't know who -besides Grossman- has taken snaps with the first team besides him so the 'rust factor' you are alluding to may or may not be that much different from Griese to Orton. I'm assuming that the top 2 QBs typically take snaps with the first-string offense and that the third-stringer (or a practice squad guy, if the team doesn't keep 3 QBs on its roster) runs practice with the backups. Of course, that could vary significantly from team to team and I really don't know what the Bears do. And Hook is right - there's no run game to respect and the passing game simply cannot compensate in the slightest. Agreed. The best they can hope for right now is putting in somebody else who (1) turns the ball over a lot less and (2) doesn't divide the locker room in the way that Rex has. It's imperative that the running games improves for that offense to be effective. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pope Flick Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 (edited) I understand the difference completely. So you are saying that CHI made Orton sit on the bench during all OTAs, all training camp, & all preseason, as well as during the regular season. I understand the difference completely. Grossman's numbers, as weak as they are, are far superior to Orton's. 10 pts in QB rating is a gigantic margin. Pretty much - they went through Chad Hutchinson and Jeff Blake in camp and the final preseason games that year before Orton became a starter. Explain to me why context should be ignored and not look at numbers as if the spreadsheet tells all? Didn't answer. Edited September 25, 2007 by Pope Flick Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 Unless the Bears have given up on the season and want to give Orton time to develop, I'd be pretty surprised to see him get the nod over Griese. I'd be astounded beyond comprehension if anyone thought of Orton as the Bears future #1 QB, time to develop or not, period. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rocknrobn26 Posted September 26, 2007 Author Share Posted September 26, 2007 (edited) I'd be astounded beyond comprehension if anyone thought of Orton as the Bears future #1 QB, time to develop or not, period. It was just a thought. Brain fart maybe. No! I had no scotch when I posted! But: Da Bears need a long term QB. Griese does not fit that bill. The "Overall D" and "O" line are getting old. Even with the patchwork they have been trying We lost/gave away our best RB Orton needs a test, or just get rid of him if he's that bad Grossman is NOT the answer Did I mention the injuries? This is a train wreck about to happen. I am willing to see drastic changes (YES ORTON), because if not an 8-8 season looks good right now, with nothing to look forward to. JMHO Disagree?? Comments..... Edited September 26, 2007 by rocknrobn26 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.