The Bears Suck

[Hawkfan]

I just searched this quote and didnt find anything linking to Dalai Lama. Strange

 

yeah when i tpyed it I thought it was stupid so i didn't want to claim the quote for my own

[Kyyle23]

yeah when i tpyed it I thought it was stupid so i didn't want to claim the quote for my own

 

LMAO, so you assigned the quote to the Dalai Lama?

[Steve9347]

And the Texans were great at home this year and they have the 3rd ranked offense. You act like since it was Houston all the players and fans should cry themselves to sleep every night until September 8, 2009.

Not in the least. I'm saying we had something to play for, and they did not.

[Hawkfan]

LMAO, so you assigned the quote to the Dalai Lama?

 

it was the first thing that came to mind. i watch caddyshack a lot.

[knightni]

yeah when i tpyed it I thought it was stupid so i didn't want to claim the quote for my own

Someone is "duck"ing the question.

[nitetrain8601]

Well, some people are still mad at the season, but truthfully the Bears overcame their terrible defensive coordinator, an average offensive coordinator, and their declining defensive players to a respectable 9-7 season. Could this team have done better? Yes. But look at the preseason predictions and Bears' fans themselves didn't predict this good of a season. You simply have to take that into account. Now once in awhile, you have a cinderella story, but fact is, the Bears didn't have the parts for a cinderella type season. They don't have the players or coordinators to take them places and overcome their deficiencies.

 

Lovie really isn't the problem. He showed more fire than the Bears last game if that counts for anything, especially when he tried to challenge the spot in the 4th quarter. Anyways, remember, Bill Cowhers hoo-rah wears out on players. Ask Pittsburgh fans and they wanted him out years before they won the SuperBowl and some still didn't care that he left right after the SuperBowl. That includes players as well.

 

The problem is, the Bears have two playmaking returners, a nice RB and nothing else on offense. Orton really is not the answer on offense. He simply stares down his receiver way too much, they don't have a #1 or #2 CB on that team, their best secondary player cannot get through a full season, their "franchise" player has fallen off, no one buys into their defensive coach, and their d-line looked like they've lost interest.

[JorgeFabregas]

The Colts game was a total fluke. Peyton Manning was clearly not ready to start the season. If we played them today we'd lose by at least 30. And I don't consider the Eagles a good team. Took two epic chokes by Dallas/Tampa for them to barely get in.

The Colts game was probaly a fluke, but I'm not sure why that shouldn't count as a win vs. a good team.

 

Were any of the losses flukey? Which games are we allowed to count?

[Jordan4life_2007]

The Colts game was probaly a fluke, but I'm not sure why that shouldn't count as a win vs. a good team.

 

Were any of the losses flukey? Which games are we allowed to count?

 

A win is a win. I just don't put as much stock in that particular win considering the circumstances at the time.

[WhiteSoxfan1986]

Don't hold your breath! I'm pretty certain the McCaskeys and Angelo have determined that the QB position just isn't very valuable. History certainly shows that to be the case...

 

Winning SuperBowl QB's:

 

1) Terry Bradshaw (4)

2) Joe Montana (4)

3) Troy Aikman (3)

4) Tom Brady (3)

5) Bart Starr (2)

6) Bob Griese (2)

7) Roger Staubach (2)

8) Jim Plunkett (2)

9) John Elway (2)

10) Joe Namath (1)

11) Len Dawson (1)

12) Johnny Unitas (1)

13) Ken Stabler (1)

14) Joe Theisman (1)

15) Jim McMahon (1)

16) Phil Simms (1)

17) Doug Williams (1)

18) Jeff Hostetler (1)

19) Mark Rypien (1)

20) Steve Young (1)

21) Brett Favre (1)

22) Kurt Warner (1)

23) Trent Dilfer (1)

24) Brad Johnson (1)

25) Ben Roethlisberger (1)

26) Peyton Manning (1)

27) Eli Manning (1)

 

Take away the flukey Johnsons and Dilfers on this list, and basically you need a franchise, if not hall of fame, caliber QB to win.

 

Terry Bradshaw wasn't very good

 

[Kyyle23]

Don't hold your breath! I'm pretty certain the McCaskeys and Angelo have determined that the QB position just isn't very valuable. History certainly shows that to be the case...

 

Winning SuperBowl QB's:

 

1) Terry Bradshaw (4)

2) Joe Montana (4)

3) Troy Aikman (3)

4) Tom Brady (3)

5) Bart Starr (2)

6) Bob Griese (2)

7) Roger Staubach (2)

8) Jim Plunkett (2)

9) John Elway (2)

10) Joe Namath (1)

11) Len Dawson (1)

12) Johnny Unitas (1)

13) Ken Stabler (1)

14) Joe Theisman (1)

15) Jim McMahon (1)

16) Phil Simms (1)

17) Doug Williams (1)

18) Jeff Hostetler (1)

19) Mark Rypien (1)

20) Steve Young (1)

21) Brett Favre (1)

22) Kurt Warner (1)

23) Trent Dilfer (1)

24) Brad Johnson (1)

25) Ben Roethlisberger (1)

26) Peyton Manning (1)

27) Eli Manning (1)

 

Take away the flukey Johnsons and Dilfers on this list, and basically you need a franchise, if not hall of fame, caliber QB to win.

 

I just want to know who the hall of fame/franchise QBs are on this list, because the back half is loaded with flukeys

 

Plus, isnt the definition of a fluke basically a 1 and done?

Edited December 30, 2008 by kyyle23

[Hatchetman]

Bradshaw's stats look bad by today's numbers, but they were good back in the day. For example 1977 he had seemingly a horrible passer rating of 71. But that was good for 7th best in the entire NFL.

[lostfan]

^^There weren't as many rules to benefit offense back then, for example a DB could be a DB.

[Hawkfan]

I just want to know who the hall of fame/franchise QBs are on this list, because the back half is loaded with flukeys

 

Plus, isnt the definition of a fluke basically a 1 and done?

 

 

What are you trying to say? that ben reothlisberger, steve young, peyton manning, eli manning, mark rypien, jeff hostetler, and kurt warner are flukes?

[Kyyle23]

What are you trying to say? that ben reothlisberger, steve young, peyton manning, eli manning, mark rypien, jeff hostetler, and kurt warner are flukes?

 

Rypien, Hostetler and Roethlisberger dont belong in the same sentence as Peyton and Young, and Eli has had 1 and a half good years.

 

Im trying to figure out the definition of a fluke here

[Harry Chappas]

Rypien, Hostetler and Roethlisberger dont belong in the same sentence as Peyton and Young, and Eli has had 1 and a half good years.

 

Im trying to figure out the definition of a fluke here

 

I think the more impressive list is losing Super Bowl QB's Marino, Kelly, Unitas, Grossman etc.

[NorthSideSox72]

I think the more impressive list is losing Super Bowl QB's Marino, Kelly, Unitas, Grossman etc.

Which one of those is not like the others...

 

[Kyyle23]

Which one of those is not like the others...

 

LOL

 

At the same time, does anyone remember how bad Kerry Collins was when the Giants got their butts handed to them by the Ravens? Now people are calling a Titans-Giants Superbowl

[Jenksismyhero]

Rypien, Hostetler and Roethlisberger dont belong in the same sentence as Peyton and Young, and Eli has had 1 and a half good years.

 

Im trying to figure out the definition of a fluke here

 

 

I think Roeth at least has proven that he's not a one and done - he gets his team into the playoffs. But I guess if he tanks from here on out he would be considered a fluke (though he's still a franchise style QB). Rypien and Hostetler are definitely flukes.

 

I guess my point was that out of the 27 on that list, the overwhelming majority (19-20ish) are upper-echelon caliber QB's.

[Jordan4life_2007]

I think Roeth at least has proven that he's not a one and done - he gets his team into the playoffs. But I guess if he tanks from here on out he would be considered a fluke (though he's still a franchise style QB). Rypien and Hostetler are definitely flukes.

 

I guess my point was that out of the 27 on that list, the overwhelming majority (19-20ish) are upper-echelon caliber QB's.

 

Roethlisberger is terribly overrated (he's only had one pro-bowl caliber year). Might be one of the most overrated athletes in sports. The Steelers do what they do year-in-year-out on the strength of an overpowering/punishing defense and a stout running game.

[Hawkfan]

what are we talking about here? Flukey superbowl wins or whether or not someone was/is a quality quarterback? Because, for example, jeff hostetler probably had a flukey superbowl win after simms got injured, but he had to play behind simms for 5 years, and then eventually beat simms out of a job, so hostetler was definitely a quarterback who is much more of a franchise quarterback than orton or grossman are.

[Kyyle23]

what are we talking about here? Flukey superbowl wins or whether or not someone was/is a quality quarterback? Because, for example, jeff hostetler probably had a flukey superbowl win after simms got injured, but he had to play behind simms for 5 years, and then eventually beat simms out of a job, so hostetler was definitely a quarterback who is much more of a franchise quarterback than orton or grossman are.

 

Yeah, that reasoning makes no sense. Hostetler had a good few seasons then got paid to be mediocre in Oakland(and he didnt beat out Simms, Simms got injured, when Hostetler left for Oakland Simms reclaimed his job and went 11-5). There was nothing franchise quality about him, he was a decent quarterback, not one you build a franchise around.

[Hawkfan]

Yeah, that reasoning makes no sense. Hostetler had a good few seasons then got paid to be mediocre in Oakland(and he didnt beat out Simms, Simms got injured, when Hostetler left for Oakland Simms reclaimed his job and went 11-5). There was nothing franchise quality about him, he was a decent quarterback, not one you build a franchise around.

 

I think you are wrong in some areas of the story with hostetler and simms, but I don't think you need a spectacular quarterback to build a franchise around, just a decent and consistent one. I think mediocre can be described about grossman and orton, although orton looks like he could get better.

[Jenksismyhero]

I think you are wrong in some areas of the story with hostetler and simms, but I don't think you need a spectacular quarterback to build a franchise around, just a decent and consistent one. I think mediocre can be described about grossman and orton, although orton looks like he could get better.

 

Given the winning super bowl QB list, I absolutely disagree.

[Balta1701]

Given the winning super bowl QB list, I absolutely disagree.

If that's the case, then logically it follows that every year or two, you ought to spend your first round pick on a QB and try to land in the top 10, because that would therefore be the only realistic way of getting a super bowl championship.

[Jenksismyhero]

If that's the case, then logically it follows that every year or two, you ought to spend your first round pick on a QB and try to land in the top 10, because that would therefore be the only realistic way of getting a super bowl championship.

 

Why? You can groom a franchise QB more easily than drafting one and getting lucky. There are probably more franchise qb's that are later round picks than 1st round picks. The problem is teams like the Bears think that guys that suck (or are mediocre at best) for multiple seasons will somehow turn it around. Or, more accurately, they believe that putting a mediocre QB on the field with an expected good running game and defense is a recipe for success. I think history shows that your odds of success are pretty low using that formula (like 2 super bowl appearances in four decades). Who on the roster are they grooming for the future? They have no plan. For the 5th year in a row now we're hoping some mediocre QB can manage a game and allow the defense to win it for us. It's pathetic.