PDA

View Full Version : Grossman done in Chicago...


Dr. Toro
02-04-2007, 10:22 PM
He's not the only reason the Bears lost, but they might win that game with Griese. Grossman alternates between being gunshy and taking undue risks, makes the offense ridiculously predictable, and just turns it over too much. He was probably worse against New Orleans, and I hope now we can put to bed the any QB can win a SB theory.

Not to pile on the kid, but he had no business playing in that game. The stats don't look that bad, but he seldom threatened and pretty much gave the game away in the fourth. He's really done up there... he's a million dollar arm and a wooden-nickel head in my opinion. He's got a club option for 2008, but 2007 will be his last. Just doesn't respond to adversity well and way too erratic.

CowboysTexansFan
02-04-2007, 10:23 PM
He's not the only reason the Bears lost, but they might win that game with Griese. Grossman alternates between being gunshy and taking undue risks, makes the offense ridiculously predictable, and just turns it over too much. He was probably worse against New Orleans, and I hope now we can put to bed the any QB can win a SB theory.

Not to pile on the kid, but he had no business playing in that game. The stats don't look that bad, but he seldom threatened and pretty much gave the game away in the fourth. He's really done up there... he's a million dollar arm and a wooden-nickel head in my opinion. He's got a club option for 2008, but 2007 will be his last. Just doesn't respond to adversity well and way too erratic.

Does he remind you of anyone else in the NFL? LOL...

TexansSeminole
02-04-2007, 10:23 PM
I doubt he will be starting next year.

Stros5Texans80
02-04-2007, 10:24 PM
I really think the game would be have more thrilling if the Saints had gone instead. From the beginning I knew Grossman wouldn't be able to help any. Only time in the game I liked the Bears being there was the opening kickoff. Devin Hester, you are an animal.

HoustonFrog
02-04-2007, 10:24 PM
He's not the only reason the Bears lost, but they might win that game with Griese. Grossman alternates between being gunshy and taking undue risks, makes the offense ridiculously predictable, and just turns it over too much. He was probably worse against New Orleans, and I hope now we can put to bed the any QB can win a SB theory.

Not to pile on the kid, but he had no business playing in that game. The stats don't look that bad, but he seldom threatened and pretty much gave the game away in the fourth. He's really done up there... he's a million dollar arm and a wooden-nickel head in my opinion. He's got a club option for 2008, but 2007 will be his last. Just doesn't respond to adversity well and way too erratic.

He fumbled snaps right into his hands and made throws while not being pressured that were just uncalled for. Sounds familiar to people around here.:) He lost it as much as anyone. The plays he made directly led to either scores or having his defense come back on the field after helping out the team. Look at it this way. Manning ont he Bears easily outduels the Colts. Manning on the Colts makes them better by a little bit. The Bears had talent, just not the triggerman.

DarkNinja
02-04-2007, 10:28 PM
Even though it rained cats and dogs.....He still played like David Carr. It was a good game.

Mr. B
02-04-2007, 10:32 PM
Totally agree wishing the Saints would have made it to the Superbowl. Sorry they lost but it just wasn't there day what with the weather and sloppy play.

Man what a party that would have been. Don't think the NFL would have ever seen anything like that.

As for Grossman being done. I don't know I think what happened was just trying to make to much happen in the second half and forcing.

Lots of the Blame could go on the couching. They really could have run the ball more instead.

B

Stros5Texans80
02-04-2007, 10:37 PM
Not having Benson also hurt them as they didn't have the 1-2 punch they had for the season.

El Amigo Invisible
02-04-2007, 10:38 PM
I thin David Carr would have been able to make some the throws that Rex could not.:stirpot:

Dr. Toro
02-04-2007, 10:40 PM
The Bears had talent, just not the triggerman.

Absolutely... it's a shame really, tough situation for that whole team and Rex. Lovie was in an impossible situation, but it was pretty clear after that Saints game that they didn't have a snowball's chance with Rex behind center. They were 7 point dogs despite outclassing IND in every phase and position on the field except for QB and WR.

His mechanics are awful (in a way that affects his throws), he seems to lack poise, is smaller than ideal, and makes some horrible decisions. He can throw a nice deep ball though.

gg no re
02-04-2007, 10:40 PM
Lots of the Blame could go on the couching. They really could have run the ball more instead.

BSurprisingly, that is what a lot of teams tried to do to the Colts this postseason.

Stros5Texans80
02-04-2007, 10:41 PM
I thin David Carr would have been able to make some the throws that Rex could not.:stirpot:

Let's not feed the flames. :secret:
Then again, this game could put them in the hunt for a new QB. :stirpot:

Dr. Toro
02-04-2007, 10:45 PM
Let's not feed the flames. :secret:
Then again, this game could put them in the hunt for a new QB. :stirpot:

They are in the hunt for a new QB... definitely. At this point, I think they'd want a cool veteran who can just manage ballgames... limited upside but little downside. Griese might be that guy... maybe Schaub's their man... definitely not Plummer.

TexanSam
02-04-2007, 10:45 PM
Maybe they'll make a trade for David Carr thinking he's the answer. Actually...I think Carr would have had a better game than Grossman did today. Grossman has a decent O-line.

HoustonFrog
02-04-2007, 10:50 PM
Absolutely... it's a shame really, tough situation for that whole team and Rex. Lovie was in an impossible situation, but it was pretty clear after that Saints game that they didn't have a snowball's chance with Rex behind center. They were 7 point dogs despite outclassing IND in every phase and position on the field except for QB and WR.

His mechanics are awful (in a way that affects his throws), he seems to lack poise, is smaller than ideal, and makes some horrible decisions. He can throw a nice deep ball though.

Well said. That is exactly what I was getting at. The Bears with another QB..just above average..have the advantage in most areas.

HoustonFrog
02-04-2007, 10:51 PM
Maybe they'll make a trade for David Carr thinking he's the answer. Actually...I think Carr would have had a better game than Grossman did today. Grossman has a decent O-line.

I'm not sure. Honestly, the plays being made were like watching a Texans film. Forcing throws while stepping up...floating ones to the outside and fumbling snaps.

Dr. Toro
02-04-2007, 10:54 PM
Surprisingly, that is what a lot of teams tried to do to the Colts this postseason.

Yeah... a bit foolish, Bob Sanders makes a world of difference, like having another MLB in running situations. Mathis, Freeney, and Sanders surrounded by average players makes for a pretty decent D if your O can control the clock.

Stros5Texans80
02-04-2007, 10:54 PM
Maybe they'll make a trade for David Carr thinking he's the answer. Actually...I think Carr would have had a better game than Grossman did today. Grossman has a decent O-line.

We can ONLY hope! :yes: :pigfly:

Mr teX
02-04-2007, 11:07 PM
Grossman did about what i expected for a guy who is just now is finally completing his 1st full season being healthy. He's also still young so.... You guys forget that pretty much all through the 1st half the bears led, but i told everyone i talked to about the game that if "bad" Rex showed up, that was at least a 10 pt. spot in favor of the colts.

I think that their defense which was among the tops in the league also let them down a bit IMO. Partly b/c of coaching (where's the blitzing?) Just sitting back & letting Manning dink all game long instead of forcing him to throw before he wanted to, was a big mistake by the coaching staff. More running could have helped them establish some type of ryhthm on offense & maybe could have kept Manning & co. off the field.


But all in hindsight.......

Dr. Toro
02-04-2007, 11:10 PM
Grossman did about what i expected for a guy who is just starting his first full season. You guys forget that pretty much all through the 1st half the bears led, but i told everyone i talked to about the game that if "bad" Rex showed up, that was at least a 10 pt. spot in favor of the colts.

I think that their defense which was among the tops in the league also let them down a bit IMO. Partly b/c of coaching (where's the blitzing?) Just sitting back & letting Manning dink all game long instead of forcing him to throw before he wanted to, was a big mistake by the coaching staff. More running could have helped them establish some type of ryhthm on offense & maybe could have kept Manning & co. off the field.


But all in hindsight.......

It's his 4th year in the league, he should have left some of those balls back in Gainesville as a freshman. "Bad Rex" is the Rex against good D's or in close games... 2 TDs and 12 INTs against Minn., Miami, and NE.

mexican_texan
02-04-2007, 11:15 PM
Grossman > Carr. We've seen that he can be successful, he's had some really good games and his team was always behind him.

HoustonFrog
02-04-2007, 11:17 PM
Grossman did about what i expected for a guy who is just now is finally completing his 1st full season being healthy. He's also still young so.... You guys forget that pretty much all through the 1st half the bears led, but i told everyone i talked to about the game that if "bad" Rex showed up, that was at least a 10 pt. spot in favor of the colts.

I think that their defense which was among the tops in the league also let them down a bit IMO. Partly b/c of coaching (where's the blitzing?) Just sitting back & letting Manning dink all game long instead of forcing him to throw before he wanted to, was a big mistake by the coaching staff. More running could have helped them establish some type of ryhthm on offense & maybe could have kept Manning & co. off the field.


But all in hindsight.......

I wouldn't call what Chicago's D did bad. They did let him dink but they also had take aways in critical situations and kept their offense within a TD by forcing FGs. What happened after these turnovers and kickoffs were usually turnovers by Rex or three and outs. I don't care what level you play on and how good you are, any D that is on the field that long is going to collapse after some time.

Rex made bad plays no matter his level. Two of those 2nd hald interceptions wrere just forced throws that would have bene picked even if they didn't float.

gtexan02
02-04-2007, 11:24 PM
the colts had the ball almost 30 minutes. crazy

Mr. B
02-04-2007, 11:25 PM
Jones did pretty decent and the bears just seemed to get away from it to fast.

Many teams tried and some were quite successful at it. They stuck with it and didn't bail so soon. They were in better hands with Jones than Grossman tonight.

B

Mr teX
02-04-2007, 11:26 PM
I wouldn't call what Chicago's D did bad. They did let him dink but they also had take aways in critical situations and kept their offense within a TD by forcing FGs. What happened after these turnovers and kickoffs were usually turnovers by Rex or three and outs. I don't care what level you play on and how good you are, any D that is on the field that long is going to collapse after some time.

Rex made bad plays no matter his level. Two of those 2nd hald interceptions wrere just forced throws that would have bene picked even if they didn't float.

Disagree with his 2nd pick, At least i don't think it was forced anyway. & i'm not saying what Chicago's D did was bad, I'm just saying that they didn't play as well as they can play. Yeah they forced turnovers but much of that was due to the conditions. I thought The corners played indy's WR's fairly well & when you've got the LB core & line that Chicago does I just thought that they could have done quite a bit more blitzing to maybe stop the redundant plays Indy was doing on them. You saw Urlacher getting frustrated with the coaching staff b/c they wouldn't adjust.

gg no re
02-04-2007, 11:28 PM
I just think that during this postseason, the presence of Bob Sanders was very huge for the Colts run defense.

For the most part though, even if the Bears stuck with Jones for the whole game, all teams need a reliable source of air power when neccessary, and Grossman just couldn't provide it.

Kaiser Toro
02-04-2007, 11:31 PM
the colts had the ball almost 30 minutes. crazy

Crazy is, as crazy does.

gg no re
02-04-2007, 11:34 PM
The Colts didn't have it for 30 minutes, that would've meant the Bears got some grinding done on offense.

They had it for 38 minutes.

mexican_texan
02-04-2007, 11:35 PM
The Bears' offense didn't appear to have a gameplan. Total disarray.

TwinSisters
02-04-2007, 11:38 PM
So does this mean that Trent Dilfer and Brad Johnson now move up in pole position?

Dr. Toro
02-04-2007, 11:44 PM
So does this mean that Trent Dilfer and Brad Johnson now move up in pole position?

Brad Johnson's one of the worst to ever win the game... but he had a 93 passer rating that season... he was ballin' that year.

Please_Evolve
02-05-2007, 12:42 PM
I just think that during this postseason, the presence of Bob Sanders was very huge for the Colts run defense.

For the most part though, even if the Bears stuck with Jones for the whole game, all teams need a reliable source of air power when neccessary, and Grossman just couldn't provide it.


Spot on. Exactly what i was thinking about Bob Sanders

Silver Oak
02-05-2007, 01:01 PM
So if two NFL teams use what some on this message board describe as being horrible qb's, does that not illustrate just how hard it is to find a quality NFL caliber qb?


To those who constantly call for Carr to be traded/let go/etc., be careful what you ask for as what we may get next may not be better, and could quite possibly be worse.

aj.
02-05-2007, 01:31 PM
To those who constantly call for Carr to be traded/let go/etc., be careful what you ask for as what we may get next may not be better, and could quite possibly be worse.

I was thinking about what could be worse and this is the only thing I could come up with.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v378/aj_texans/carrgross.jpg

kastofsna
02-05-2007, 01:56 PM
yeah, griese would've really lit it up. just think of all those great games he's had in his career that would make one think that.

Ole Miss Texan
02-05-2007, 01:57 PM
I was thinking about what could be worse and this is the only thing I could come up with.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v378/aj_texans/carrgross.jpg

haha thats pretty funny. put grossmans in a texans uni and that scares me more than anything.

bah007
02-05-2007, 02:11 PM
Did we really learn anything about Grossman and the Bears offense that we didn't already know?

I dont think so. I saw this one comin from a mile away.

The most pathetic thing was that the Bears started near midfield on almost every possession cuz the Colts were kicking short of Hester and they couldnt get any points.

Mr teX
02-05-2007, 02:55 PM
Coming from a Bears fan...

Grossman is ANYTHING but clutch. Lovie is "sticking with him" primarily to build his confidence. Knowing all the while that to bench him in the SB would have been disasterous for his confidence. I think that Grossman was less than 50% to blame for their loss last night. After all...Grossman IS who he has been ALL YEAR LONG...inconsistent!

The Bears D are the PRIMARY ONES that I blame for the loss last night. The games that Grossman has choked, the defense has been there to take up the slack. The defense played well against the Saints...but were "Big Play Dormant" for several weeks (4-5) before that. They were a product of a terribly weak schedule and providing big plays when needed in games that weren't against weak opponents. The coaches got SCARED last night when the Colts burned them with that long pass to Reggie Wayne early in the game. So instead, they decided to give one of the best QBs in the league, as many passes underneath that he wanted. And it cost them. They didn't have any swagger in their walk. They played with ABSOLUTELY NO AGGRESSION after the first quarter whatsoever. When it's raining like it was last night and Peyton Manning's uniform was as clean as it was until the FOURTH QUARTER...you're not gonna win games. The guy was NEVER on his back (w/the exception of the one sack) and was RARELY ever even hurried. I was terribly disappointed last night. My little boy (which is a HUGE Urlacher fan) was almost in tears in the 4th quarter.

The Bears (IMO) lost that game last night because the Defense weren't aggressive and the coaches were scared. Grossman didn't show me anything last night that he hadn't showed me a dozen times throughout the year.

It pains me to say it, but...
The best team won.






If that guy was on our message board i'd give him rep for that. It takes a special type of fan to admit that after losing the biggest football game in the city since 85'. It wasn't that the Defense played bad, they were in it just about all of the game, they just didn't play like themselves defensively. playing the umbrella defense like they did is so far from who they are....... i don't know what Lovie/Rivera were thinking.

thunderkyss
02-05-2007, 03:34 PM
I don't think Grossman is a great QB. But I don't think his time is over in Chicago.

He's played in 24 games...... he's only 26. He played like a QB in his second or third season. & technically, that's what he is.

He had some outstanding games against teams that were avg to poor, and he stunk it up against good teams....... that's kinda what young QBs do. In Peyton's 4th year he had 4 games with a QB rating of 60 or less(he had a passer rating of 35 in one game)...... & that's after starting for 4 years, where Grossman couldn't even practice for 4 years due to injuries.

The only difference, is that the rest of the Bears are ready to win SuperBowls, where Mannings teams haven't been until recently, so the poor play of RexGrossman is kinda magnified.

I say the Bears keep Rex.... & I bet the Bears are the favorites to win the NFC in 2007.

real
02-05-2007, 03:37 PM
I bet the Bears are the favorites to win the NFC in 2007.

I think I'm going to go with the Saints....

They're offense is going to be potent...And I think Sean Peyton does a good job on that defense this off-season...

Yankee_In_TX
02-05-2007, 03:46 PM
The most pathetic thing was that the Bears started near midfield on almost every possession cuz the Colts were kicking short of Hester and they couldnt get any points.

Should have taken a note from the Buckeyes, don't start the big game with a run-back, may end up being some of your only points! Bad karma, lol!

thunderkyss
02-05-2007, 03:50 PM
I think I'm going to go with the Saints....

They're offense is going to be potent...And I think Sean Peyton does a good job on that defense this off-season...

That is & has been the most volatile division in the NFL since it's inception. One year you're on top, the next year you're on the bottom, for no "real" reason.... Carolina was supposed to be in the SuperBowl this year, the Falcons were supposed to get back to the NFC Championship game Last year, the Tampa Bay Buccaneers was supposed to make another run the year before that....

The Saints won't make the play offs in '07, & their won't be a "real" reason for it...... nothing you can put your finger on, they just won't do very well.

Dr. Toro
02-05-2007, 04:02 PM
T-Kyss, my beef with Grossman is he does one thing well... throwing the deep ball. Everything else is subpar. Everything. Not accurate, not smart, not poised, not a playmaker with his feet, not clutch, uncomfortable throwing intermediate routes, undersized, and he certainly doesn't seem to have the confidence of his teammates. Maybe I'm being hard on him... but I'm talking about the way he looks on the field, not the box score or the final score. He just looks like another big arm.

shinerbock_girl
02-05-2007, 04:06 PM
I was disappointed with Grossman's performance...He really blew it...

thunderkyss
02-05-2007, 05:58 PM
T-Kyss, my beef with Grossman is he does one thing well... throwing the deep ball. Everything else is subpar. Everything. Not accurate, not smart, not poised, not a playmaker with his feet, not clutch, uncomfortable throwing intermediate routes, undersized, and he certainly doesn't seem to have the confidence of his teammates. Maybe I'm being hard on him... but I'm talking about the way he looks on the field, not the box score or the final score. He just looks like another big arm.

I personally don't care who Chicago's QB is...... the only relevance this discussion has with the Texans, is that a lot of folks believe that if we had a team like the Bears, then Carr could win a SuperBowl. My beef with that, is even on a team like the Bears, a loud portion of the fans don't want a guy like Grossman........ which I would believe would hold true for Carr.

Whether you think Carr is better than Grossman, or Grossman is better than Carr, you have to admit there are enough similarities to make the argument.

The biggest difference, IMHO, is that everything you mentioned wrong with Grossman are the things that a young QB is supposed to be working on....... except poise... I don't think he has a problem with poise, he didn't look fluttered to me...... he looked calm and in control.

A few bad throws.... Manning threw a few bad balls....

fumbled the snap.... maybe I just don't know.... but I wasn't aware that was a problem for him.

Grossman is young.. he's only played 24 games....... he's going to get better....


IMHO, I'd be surprised if the Bears panic, and try to find a QB for next season.

TwinSisters
02-05-2007, 08:29 PM
That is & has been the most volatile division in the NFL since it's inception. One year you're on top, the next year you're on the bottom, for no "real" reason.... Carolina was supposed to be in the SuperBowl this year, the Falcons were supposed to get back to the NFC Championship game Last year, the Tampa Bay Buccaneers was supposed to make another run the year before that....

The Saints won't make the play offs in '07, & their won't be a "real" reason for it...... nothing you can put your finger on, they just won't do very well.

Well if it is volatile, I mean really volatile... then the Saints should stay on top and win a Super Bowl, otherwise it is too steady, calm, and predictable.

Also Carr is better than Grossman. Carr is more like a Dilfer that fumbles and gets sacked instead of throwing INTs.

EDIT:

And I looked at all of the losing Super Bowl quarterbacks... Tony Eason and David Woodly both returned to their clubs the next year as the starter, so I wouldn't be surprised if Grossman does too.

Texasian
02-05-2007, 09:48 PM
Listening to Chicago sports radio stations WSCR 670 and WMVP 1000 today. The fans and media are obviously dissapointed with Turnoversaurus Rex. But like in Houston, he has apologists from the same groups as the above mentioned. So they will stick it out (Sounds familiar?). They did commit to him financially and they want him to be a 'bus driver' (Again, sounds familiar?). They say he is young (4 seasons with 24+ games exp.)and he will only get better (Dang, I swear this sounds freakin' familiar?!). Let them learn the hard way!

thunderkyss
02-05-2007, 10:09 PM
Listening to Chicago sports radio stations WSCR 670 and WMVP 1000 today. The fans and media are obviously dissapointed with Turnoversaurus Rex. But like in Houston, he has apologists from the same groups as the above mentioned. So they will stick it out (Sounds familiar?). They did commit to him financially and they want him to be a 'bus driver' (Again, sounds familiar?). They say he is young (4 seasons with 24+ games exp.)and he will only get better (Dang, I swear this sounds freakin' familiar?!). Let them learn the hard way!

The difference, our guy had 60 starts in 4 seasons... he's had his chance.

Like I said, Rex couldn't even practice but 2 weeks last season. Three weeks the year before that, and three weeks the year before that. It's not like he was Phillip Rivers taking some snaps in practice with the first team, like all backups do. or workout with the practice squad, and train with the QB coaches & team trainers.

at this time, in David's career..... this time, in Vince's career..... this time in Cutler's career..... 24 games.... it's like 8 games into his second season... it is too early to call him a bust, and drop him.

unless you are ready to be on the loosing end of a trade. or cut an MVP QB(Brees).

Texan_Aggie222
02-05-2007, 11:12 PM
You gotta give this kid a break. This was basically his rookie season because he has been hurt so much. I don't think he has even started 20 games in the NFL including this years playoffs. He is going to get better, he just needs to have time to develop and protect the football and he will be fine. Who else is out there? Jeff Garcia? Come on.............

Silver Oak
02-06-2007, 08:30 AM
But like in Houston, he has apologists from the same groups as the above mentioned.

I classify myself as a realist, not an apoligist.

I still assert it will be more difficult to find the great qb everyone wants (including me). Leave Carr alone, let him play out his contract, and lets build a team from the ground up.

thunderkyss
02-06-2007, 08:38 AM
I classify myself as a realist, not an apoligist.

I still assert it will be more difficult to find the great qb everyone wants (including me). Leave Carr alone, let him play out his contract, and lets build a team from the ground up.

Still..... we don't need a great QB. We need someone who will let our Wide receivers be Wide Receivers, and run more than go routes & Slants. Some one who'll stretch the field, and let our RBs get to the second level more than 5 yards beyond the LOS. We need a QB who can at least make it to his second read, before the dump off, so our tight-ends in the middle of the field would serve some kind of purpose.

Honoring Earl 34
02-06-2007, 08:48 AM
The difference is money . If your QB gets paid 2 million then you're probably not going to expect him to be a focal point of your offense .

QB75
02-06-2007, 08:55 AM
T-Kyss, my beef with Grossman is he does one thing well... throwing the deep ball. Everything else is subpar. Everything. Not accurate, not smart, not poised, not a playmaker with his feet, not clutch, uncomfortable throwing intermediate routes, undersized, and he certainly doesn't seem to have the confidence of his teammates. Maybe I'm being hard on him... but I'm talking about the way he looks on the field, not the box score or the final score. He just looks like another big arm.

Yeah, he also did a poor job of stopping the Colts final drive in which they ran the ball right down the throat of the Bears' defense. Might as well blame him for that too since the loss was apparently all his fault.:shades:

Mr teX
02-06-2007, 09:01 AM
Still..... we don't need a great QB. We need someone who will let our Wide receivers be Wide Receivers, and run more than go routes & Slants. Some one who'll stretch the field, and let our RBs get to the second level more than 5 yards beyond the LOS. We need a QB who can at least make it to his second read, before the dump off, so our tight-ends in the middle of the field would serve some kind of purpose.

Come on T-skyss, Is that all DC's fault? I'm not going to apologize for Dc's play, cause the overriding factor is that it has been 5 years & he's produced very little, but alot of that has to do with time allowed (created) in the pocket & talent, which we severely lack in all of the above.

To me they are basically the same guy at opposite ends of the spectrum as far as the talent they are surrounded by.

HoustonFrog
02-06-2007, 09:11 AM
Yeah, he also did a poor job of stopping the Colts final drive in which they ran the ball right down the throat of the Bears' defense. Might as well blame him for that too since the loss was apparently all his fault.:shades:

You mean a Defense that had been on the field all game. At one point the Colts had 3 times as many plays on offense. In 3 quarters the Bears offense had 3 turnovers, including 2 fumbled snaps and 8 3 and outs. So whose fault is that?Sorry but anyone who thinks the Bears D was the problem after looking at TOP and plays is dead wrong. Defenses can only be on the field for so long when you are playing an offense that runs a modified hurry up. When they stopped them to FGS and turnovers Rex gave it right back..sometimes on the next play.

thunderkyss
02-06-2007, 09:12 AM
Come on T-skyss, Is that all DC's fault? I'm not going to apologize for Dc's play, cause the overriding factor is that it has been 5 years & he's produced very little, but alot of that has to do with time allowed (created) in the pocket & talent, which we severely lack in all of the above.

To me they are basically the same guy at opposite ends of the spectrum as far as the talent they are surrounded by.

David has had more than 2.5 seconds to throw the ball on most occasions. For some reason on his 3 step drops(which is about 2 seconds), he comes off his back foot, sets to throw, then pulls the ball back down. More than half of his sacks this year has been similar..... he needs to throw the ball. When he sets up to throw, it is too late for him to look around for another option. If he's looking at whoever, and he usually is, all he has to decide is where he should put the ball, ahead, behind, inside, outside, in the stands. But I don't even trust him to make those decisions, because 1) he never throws it away from the pocket. & 2) when he does throw the ball, his placement have been off on most all of them(I think there have been half a dozen that were right).

Are you saying we are lacking talent at the WR, TE, & RB spot??

I don't buy that for one minute.

thunderkyss
02-06-2007, 09:17 AM
You mean a Defense that had been on the field all game. At one point the Colts had 3 times as many plays on offense. In 3 quarters the Bears offense had 3 turnovers, including 2 fumbled snaps and 8 3 and outs. So whose fault is that?Sorry but anyone who thinks the Bears D was the problem after looking at TOP and plays is dead wrong. Defenses can only be on the field for so long when you are playing an offense that runs a modified hurry up. When they stopped them to FGS and turnovers Rex gave it right back..sometimes on the next play.

If I could, I'd like to ask you to take this thinking back to our first three games.

pretty much the same scenario, but David's 4th Qtr stats makes it appear that our passing offense was carrying our team..... in fact, they hung our defense out to dry in the same situation you're describing here. Against Philly, our young D forced 3 & outs, punts, field goals, & even got an interception, But all anybody remembers, is that they couldn't get Philly off the field in the final 8 minutes of the game.

TwinSisters
02-06-2007, 09:24 AM
If I could, I'd like to ask you to take this thinking back to our first three games.

pretty much the same scenario, but David's 4th Qtr stats makes it appear that our passing offense was carrying our team..... in fact, they hung our defense out to dry in the same situation you're describing here. Against Philly, our young D forced 3 & outs, punts, field goals, & even got an interception, But all anybody remembers, is that they couldn't get Philly off the field in the final 8 minutes of the game.

eh.. your memory is faulty

http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/live/NFL_20060910_PHI@HOU

The Eagles were driving from the 2nd Quarter on. We had only two stops in the 1st Quarter... it was all Eagles after that... big plays surrendered.

Honoring Earl 34
02-06-2007, 09:29 AM
Yeah, he also did a poor job of stopping the Colts final drive in which they ran the ball right down the throat of the Bears' defense. Might as well blame him for that too since the loss was apparently all his fault.:shades:

If it was'nt for the Bears defense , Rex would have had to buy a ticket to the Super Bowl .

They would have been better off in the 3rd qtr . ... taking the ball and kneeling it while letting the play clock run down to 2 seconds before snapping it .... then punting it . Kinda like running against Cleveland and not passing .

HoustonFrog
02-06-2007, 09:37 AM
If I could, I'd like to ask you to take this thinking back to our first three games.

pretty much the same scenario, but David's 4th Qtr stats makes it appear that our passing offense was carrying our team..... in fact, they hung our defense out to dry in the same situation you're describing here. Against Philly, our young D forced 3 & outs, punts, field goals, & even got an interception, But all anybody remembers, is that they couldn't get Philly off the field in the final 8 minutes of the game.

Exactly TK. That was my point. People who just watch the games literally without looking at TOP, etc just don't get it. That is one of many reason that I think Carr is a hinderance. If they are trying to slowly dink and dunk down the field and can't get into a rhythm or make big plays then the defense just gets thrown back on the field. As much as people forget, the Cowboys D of the 90s was a bend but don't break kind of D and they would stop teams to FGs and get some turnovers, except they had an offense that could score and take time off the clock.

Mr teX
02-06-2007, 09:42 AM
David has had more than 2.5 seconds to throw the ball on most occasions. For some reason on his 3 step drops(which is about 2 seconds), he comes off his back foot, sets to throw, then pulls the ball back down. More than half of his sacks this year has been similar..... he needs to throw the ball. When he sets up to throw, it is too late for him to look around for another option. If he's looking at whoever, and he usually is, all he has to decide is where he should put the ball, ahead, behind, inside, outside, in the stands. But I don't even trust him to make those decisions, because 1) he never throws it away from the pocket. & 2) when he does throw the ball, his placement have been off on most all of them(I think there have been half a dozen that were right).

Are you saying we are lacking talent at the WR, TE, & RB spot??

I don't buy that for one minute.


first of all, on 3 step drops there usually isn't enough time for another read (3 steps, closeness to the line, etc) in fact, it's usually a 1 read play, that goes for almost every team. I don't understand, do you want him to force it even it's not there, cause you know he has done that on many occasions & usually the worst case scenario happens, the ball is popped in the air & INT. second, i don't know of any or i should say many QB's who get rid of the ball inside of 2.5 seconds regularly other than...you guessed it Brady & Manning, the 2 best qb's in the game today, but trust me they are the best for MANY more reasons than that. & yes we do lack talent at all those spots as well as pretty much every spot on our team, we have arguably 2-5 worthy starters on our entire team for christ sakes!


Add in the fact that the 3 step drop was basically our passing game for 4 years prior to Kubiak & teams basically go into games waiting on it. What was it K. Bullock of Tenn. said after 1 of our titans games this past year about DC & our passing game? I think it was something to the effect of knowing that he'll be able to pass on us but nothing that was "really going to hurt us." That says alot about DC as well as the talent on our team. Teams know we can't protect so it's just a matter of making us 1-dimensional.

I think that the biggest problem with DC is that he can't read defenses Fast enough to get the ball off close to your 2.5 secs.

HJam72
02-06-2007, 09:43 AM
I thin David Carr would have been able to make some the throws that Rex could not.:stirpot:

I agree. I'm not going to say that Carr is the answer here and all that, but I do think Grossman is worse--considerably worse. I've got nothing against him, but I've rarely seen even Carr be THAT bad. OK, a few times, but not usually THAT bad.

Now, if you blame Carr for like 80% of his own sacks, then MAYBE he's as bad as Grossman. Grossman did almost nothing until the 4th Qtr., and then I saw why--because he just can't. Carr does that too, but he doesn't miss his targets THAT badly in the 4th. I mean sometimes they can even catch them, if they're acrobatic about it.

HoustonFrog
02-06-2007, 09:50 AM
I agree. I'm not going to say that Carr is the answer here and all that, but I do think Grossman is worse--considerably worse. I've got nothing against him, but I've rarely seen even Carr be THAT bad. OK, a few times, but not usually THAT bad.

Now, if you blame Carr for like 80% of his own sacks, then MAYBE he's as bad as Grossman. Grossman did almost nothing until the 4th Qtr., and then I saw why--because he just can't. Carr does that too, but he doesn't miss his targets THAT badly in the 4th. I mean sometimes they can even catch them, if they're acrobatic about it.

Honestly, if that was a regular season Texans game, the battle cry would be .."Carr went 20-28 and once he got time(4th quarter) he made plays. The fumbled snaps were due to the weather and the passes were due to knowing his line never gives him time so he tried to go downfield..we always complain he never goes downfield. He had to try and make plays............."

All I'm doing is showing people what it is like to hear those things after seeing a bad QB perform. You can keep spinning it all day and that is what people do here for Carr.

HJam72
02-06-2007, 09:53 AM
Honestly, if that was a regular season Texans game, the battle cry would be .."Carr went 20-28 and once he got time(4th quarter) he made plays. The fumbled snaps were due to the weather and the passes were due to knowing his line never gives him time so he tried to go downfield..we always complain he never goes downfield. He had to try and make plays............."

All I'm doing is showing people what it is like to hear those things after seeing a bad QB perform. You can keep spinning it all day and that is what people do here for Carr.

I'm not spinning for Carr, man. I'm saying that Grossman was horrible. I have to admit though that I've been up all night (tired) and I just remembered that it rained in the SB, lol. I'm sure that had a lot to do with it.

HoustonFrog
02-06-2007, 10:00 AM
I'm not spinning for Carr, man. I'm saying that Grossman was horrible. I have to admit though that I've been up all night (tired) and I just remembered that it rained in the SB, lol. I'm sure that had a lot to do with it.



Sorry, I wasn't gearing that towards you specifically. I know what you were saying. I just meant it in general since the talk has centered around comparing both guys ability to "suck"..lol.

Honoring Earl 34
02-06-2007, 10:01 AM
The only chance the Bears had was get a lead and run the ball . They got the lead but turned the ball over way to much .

The QB had a 2nd and one yard and fell down and lost eleven . On 3rd and twelve he fumbled the snap and killed the drive . This was at a critical part of the game where the Bears were losing by five .

Dr. Toro
02-06-2007, 11:31 AM
The topic is unavoidable, so here's my twenty cents. Carr is a much better player than Grossman is now, or will ever be. Carr would be a really nice fit for Chicago. He could execute well enough and make enough plays to win a lot of games for the Bears and probably win that game. I don't think it's really fair to compare the two. One guy is surrounded by top talent and looks like a joke half the time... one guy has average talent and line problems and struggles.

And I don't think citing Grossman's inexperience helps him at this point, he's injury prone and immature. Carr's a year older and has 50 more starts under his belt. We may not like how he's performed in those games, but at least he's been able to get out on the field.

With respect to their performance on the field, they're entireley different players with a few similar problems. Carr doesn't throw the ball downfield much or take chances anymore for whatever reason. Grossman only throws the ball short outside or deep down the middle and sidelines, and alternates between gunshy and foolishly aggressive. With his personnel and line though, there's no good reason Grossman should be comfortable making 1/3 of the throws he's expected to make. Carr's far more accurate and less aggressive/foolhardy. He doesn't have tons of glaring holes in his game like Rex, he's just pretty average.

They might seem like similar QBs, but you really gotta consider the context. Houston fans are disappointed with Carr because he can't "elevate the franchise", "put the team on his back", or "make those around him better". Don't confuse that with holding back an immensely talented and dominant team back like Grossman does. That ridiculous INT by Carr at TEN is a commonplace throw for Grossman. Carr's issues are mainly that he struggles with the pass rush and makes bad decisions when hurried. Grossman's issues are that he makes bad decisions by nature, with his jersey clean and the defense on its heels. If you surrounded Carr with Chicago type talent and kept his jersey clean all day, he'd do just fine.

Right now, that type of player doesn't seem to be enough in the eyes of Houston fans. That's a completely different issue than the one with Grossman in Chicago.

thunderkyss
02-06-2007, 11:33 AM
eh.. your memory is faulty

http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/live/NFL_20060910_PHI@HOU

The Eagles were driving from the 2nd Quarter on. We had only two stops in the 1st Quarter... it was all Eagles after that... big plays surrendered.


1st Qtr
Houston: TD
Eagles:Punt
Houston: Punt
Eagles: Int
Houston: punt
2nd Qtr
Eagles: TD
Houston: Punt
Eagles: Punt
Houston: FG
Eagles: TD
3rd Qtr
Eagles: TD
Houston: Punt
Eagles: Punt
Houston: Punt
4th Qtr
Eagles: FG
Houston: Turn over on Downs
Eagles: run out the clock


The Eagles had 9 possessions, and scored TDs on 3 of them. 1 FGs. We forced 3 punts, and 1 Int... Our Defense gave our offense the ball twice, when we had the lead, and we did nothing to extend it.

After the Eagles scored, we did nothing, our defense forced another punt, we then go up by three. They scored a TD to end the half, and again to start the third, & we're down by 11.

We get the ball, we punt...... our defense forces a stop, we get the ball still down by 11.... we punt.
We hold them to a field goal, we turn it over on downs. Then we couldn't get them off the field.

We had 2 opportunities to extend a lead, we didn't.
We had two opportunities to break the tie.... we went up by 3.

Down by 11 we had 2 opportunities to cut into the lead.... we didn't
with 9 minutes left to play in the game, we turn it over on downs....

We had eight possessions in that game, and walked away with 10 points. 8 possessions...... 27 minutes... avg's 3 minutes per possession. 4 possessions were for more than 4 minutes, The other four were 3 minutes & under. we scored on 2 of 8 possessions.

thunderkyss
02-06-2007, 11:45 AM
first of all, on 3 step drops there usually isn't enough time for another read (3 steps, closeness to the line, etc) in fact, it's usually a 1 read play, that goes for almost every team. I don't understand, do you want him to force it even it's not there, cause you know he has done that on many occasions & usually the worst case scenario happens, the ball is popped in the air & INT. second, i don't know of any or i should say many QB's who get rid of the ball inside of 2.5 seconds regularly other than...you guessed it Brady & Manning, the 2 best qb's in the game today, but trust me they are the best for MANY more reasons than that. & yes we do lack talent at all those spots as well as pretty much every spot on our team, we have arguably 2-5 worthy starters on our entire team for christ sakes!


Add in the fact that the 3 step drop was basically our passing game for 4 years prior to Kubiak & teams basically go into games waiting on it. What was it K. Bullock of Tenn. said after 1 of our titans games this past year about DC & our passing game? I think it was something to the effect of knowing that he'll be able to pass on us but nothing that was "really going to hurt us." That says alot about DC as well as the talent on our team. Teams know we can't protect so it's just a matter of making us 1-dimensional.

I think that the biggest problem with DC is that he can't read defenses Fast enough to get the ball off close to your 2.5 secs.

2.5 is avg around the league. 3 is really good, and anything close to 4(or more) is considered all day. The clock in a QBs head is to get rid of the ball in 2.5 seconds....... that's a 5 step drop, and for people who can run a 40 yard dash in under 5 seconds, that's 15 yards.

I've got the Tennessee games taped, in one of those games, you can clearly see Vince taking a three step drop. Step one, he's looking to his left, step three, he's looking straight ahead, and step three, he's looking to the right. He steps up in the direction he wants to throw the ball, and that's that.

& no, I don't want David to force the ball, I want him to throw it away. If you haven't noticed, if David is sacked, we won't throw the ball, regardless of down & distance on the next play.... so we don't just lose that play, we often lose the next one as well, running a draw on 3rd & 17....

Mr teX
02-06-2007, 01:13 PM
2.5 is avg around the league. 3 is really good, and anything close to 4(or more) is considered all day. The clock in a QBs head is to get rid of the ball in 2.5 seconds....... that's a 5 step drop, and for people who can run a 40 yard dash in under 5 seconds, that's 15 yards.

I've got the Tennessee games taped, in one of those games, you can clearly see Vince taking a three step drop. Step one, he's looking to his left, step three, he's looking straight ahead, and step three, he's looking to the right. He steps up in the direction he wants to throw the ball, and that's that.

& no, I don't want David to force the ball, I want him to throw it away. If you haven't noticed, if David is sacked, we won't throw the ball, regardless of down & distance on the next play.... so we don't just lose that play, we often lose the next one as well, running a draw on 3rd & 17....


& for every one of those you can find I can find a Qb who upon snap, looks right over at his primary reciever & throws the ball, no look off what-so-ever (Manning to Harrison anyone?). The truth of the matter is on a 3 step drop it really doesn't matter much if you look off or not, other facets of the offensive game plan open that up (the ability to throw it intermediate, deep), but when you're doing that every single pass play (like we pretty much have to), cornerbacks start to anticipate it & jump the route to where it is either picked or nearly picked.

Again teams already know this about us if they have a functional scouting department so they just tell the corners to sit on the quick slant because they know we aren't going to go much deeper than that. not taking away from your 2.5 sec. thing, i think it's valid, but there are other things that influence why DC is stinking it up in the passing department, it's not just that he won't throw it.

real
02-06-2007, 01:18 PM
Our O-line wasn't that bad....

OzzO
02-06-2007, 01:36 PM
& for every one of those you can find I can find a Qb who upon snap, looks right over at his primary reciever & throws the ball, no look off what-so-ever (Manning to Harrison anyone?)....

You know, I noticed that about Manning too some time ago (maybe last year) but thinking about it, it's quite possible he can lock on his weapon of choice because he can read the defense (better) and can find the weakness while he's at the line changing a call (within 3 choices from what I've heard) to something that plays to the defense's weakness for that plan, mismatch or such.

Mr teX
02-06-2007, 01:43 PM
Our O-line wasn't that bad....
Apparently grossman's wasn't either since they were good enough to get to the Superbowl.
i
But don't get me wrong, it's not all on our O-line either, it's the collection of them, our talent level, DC stinking it up & our Dom Capers "try to stay in it & win at the last minute" reputation.

QB75
02-06-2007, 01:53 PM
You mean a Defense that had been on the field all game. At one point the Colts had 3 times as many plays on offense. In 3 quarters the Bears offense had 3 turnovers, including 2 fumbled snaps and 8 3 and outs. So whose fault is that?Sorry but anyone who thinks the Bears D was the problem after looking at TOP and plays is dead wrong. Defenses can only be on the field for so long when you are playing an offense that runs a modified hurry up. When they stopped them to FGS and turnovers Rex gave it right back..sometimes on the next play.

Yes. That's the defense I mean. They didn't step to the challenge.

Texasian
02-06-2007, 02:21 PM
I classify myself as a realist, not an apoligist.

I still assert it will be more difficult to find the great qb everyone wants (including me). Leave Carr alone, let him play out his contract, and lets build a team from the ground up.


Can't we do that NOW!;) Realisticly, he stinks (for the most part, not all)! We don't need a great QB, just someone better!

HomeBred_Texan
02-06-2007, 05:09 PM
Was reading about Train Rex on Fox sports and found some talk interesting. Of course, there is NO trade talk going on at this moment and the suggestion of giving a 1st through 5th rounder for Carr is an ignorant statement.

It also mentions Jake the Snake Plummer...

http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/6446740?MSNHPHMA

Another source of quarterbacking talent is the draft, which could yield someone with enough moxie to lead the Bears to glory. However, the developmental timeline would be an issue for a team already prepared to make the next step.

The next region of upgrade exploration is the trade market. According to league insiders, David Carr who was the draft's first overall pick after he finished playing for Fresno State will be available. Unfortunately, Carr was selected by the pass-block-deficient Houston Texans and has spent more time on his back than Dracula. Nobody truly knows if Carr should play or be parked.

Denver must be eager to get rid of Jake Plummer, a talented-but-shaky veteran who at least understands what it's like to be despised in a football-mad city. Don't look for him (or anyone else) to land in Chicago, either.