Brian Griese to start next week

[kevkev60614]

[ QUOTE ]
He'll probably be starting for the Bears again before week 8.

[/ QUOTE ]
I'd take this bet.

Here's my post from
Chicago Bears 2007 Official Thread.
[ QUOTE ]
Stat Griese Grossman
Completion percentage: 63.0% 54.2%
Yards/attempt: 7.0 6.5
TD/Int ratio: 104/80 28/32
QB rating: 84.5 69.3

Possible reasons why we shouldn't bench Grossman in favor of Griese and why they are insanely idiotic:[*]Point) Grossman's our qb of the future, Griese doesn't have one.[*]Counterpoint) Griese is only 32. At 32, an NFL qb could have several years left in the tank. Who here would rather have a terrible young qb than even a mediocre old one? The future doesn't matter anyway when our present defense and special teams (last night aside) are so good.
[*]Point) Those stats are crap because Griese had a better supporting cast on other teams.[*]Counterpoint) Receiverwise, who'd he have? Rod Smith in Denver? Chris Chambers in Miami? We still have several Pro Bowlers on offense. And even if it's true and Grossman has less support, does it make the difference in the stats above?
[*]Point) Obv Lovie sees both of them practice on a daily basis; he knows things we don't.[*]Counterpoint) Then what the hell's the point of posting on a forum anyway? Besides, it's what happens in a game that matters, not a practice. See the stats above.
[*]Point) Griese's numbers/Griese himself are too old. We'd need current numbers for a proper comparison.[*]Counterpoint) Well we don't have current numbers on Griese because he's not currently playing. Let's change that. If we go back to the past three seasons though, ('04-'06 23 games for Griese altogether,) he has a 67.0% completion percentage, 7.4 yards/attempt, and a 28/21 ratio. He's not as athletic as he was five years ago I'm sure, but then again he has five years more experience.
[*]Point) There's more to being a qb than putting up good numbers. Leadership, for instance.[*]Counterpoint) Yeah, Grossman's doing a super job leading the offense into the toilet. Mad props, yo.

Conclusion: Grossman clearly isn't the only problem on this team. But I'm getting really tired of people saying that Griese won't be any better.

[/ QUOTE ]
Anyone who's claiming that Grossman is a better option than Griese is wrong. Anyone claiming that Orton is a better option than Griese is... well I still think wrong but I can at least see the point. Grossman is currently the #2 qb, which means even if Griese is injured we won't get a chance to see whether Orton has improved over the past two years. I think that's a mistake.

[adios]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Your the Green Bay Packers...3-0 average D, Farve looks great, good WRs, dismal to below average o-line. no running game

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think he is a 2nd round pick better than their current RB.

[/ QUOTE ]

Turner doesn't have to be that good to make it worthwhile for the Packers. However, if memory serves, the Charges tendered Turner as an RFA for big enough money such that a team would have to give them a 1 and 3 if they signed him. No way the Charges take a 2 now for him after that.

[adios]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


Career QB rating of 84.5, 104-80 TD-to-INT ratio, 204.5 yards per game average, 63.0% completion percentage


What exactly is so bad about him?


Heres a few QBs simlilar to him for a comparison:

Drew Brees: 80.0 QB rating, 107-71 TD/INT, 223.6 yards per game.

Steve McNair: 83.2 QB rating, 173-116 TD/INT, 194.9 yards per game

Phil Simms: 78.5 QB rating, 199-157 TD/INT, 204.0 yards per game

Troy Aikman: 81.6 QB rating, 165-141 TD/INT, 199.6 yards per game

Matt Hasselbeck: 85.5 QB rating, 119-74 TD/INT, 156.7 yards per game(note: Matt's ypg is unfairly brought down due to a lot of spot duty though)

[/ QUOTE ]

I wrote this last year when everybody was calling for griese over grossman.

[ QUOTE ]
Brian Griese is terrible. Being a Dolphins fan, he ruined their 2003 season by himself. Fiedler got hurt and Griese started against a bad SD team and lit them up 20-29, 192 yards, 3 td. Wow this guy is good. Next game against Indy, takes 5 sacks, loses 2 fumbles but still passes effectively 18-29, 231 yards, 1 td, 0 int. Next game against Tennessee, takes 4 sacks, loses 2 fumbles, throws 3 int, 0td and is 15-27 for 131 yards. Next game against Baltimore, goes 13-32 for 126 yards and the Dolphins win 9-6. Next game against Washington, throws 2 int by half and gets replaced by Jay Fiedler.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

Griese's inconsistent and maybe was on the sauce (I think he had a DUI in Denver). Something to consider IMO though is that however you rate a QB it's partly dependent on who that QB has around him. I think the Bears actually have talent at the skill positions (even Benson but getting rid of Jones was a bad move IMO) so Griese should have some weapons to go to. What I saw of Rex was that he wasn't getting the ball to his receivers on out patterns that well as I saw him throw short to Muhammed a few times in the Cowboys game. Rex has problems dealing with a pass rush and doesn't move that well in the pocket IMO. Defenses seem to be able to confuse Rex easily too. FWIW I think the Bears will respond positively to this change and I'm not a Bears fan either.

[EvanJC]

no.

[DrewDevil]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
John Elway kinda sucked for most of his career, though.

[/ QUOTE ]

He was only the winningest QB in history until this year, often carrying teams on his back that would've gone 4-12 without him. Yep, he sucked.

[/ QUOTE ]

The Elway myth has grown over the years. JOA's view is a lot closer to the truth than you are giving it credit for.

From 88-92 he had 73tds and 80 INTs. The idea that he always carried bad teams on his back until TD got there is fairly dubious.

[/ QUOTE ]

Let me just say on the Elway hijack: I watched most of Elway's career and I did not like the Broncos at all.

He was incredibly awesome and to say he "kinda sucked" before Davis got there is one of the dumbest things I've ever read.

[Jack of Arcades]

Elway obviously improved after the 1992 season.

[suzzer99]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
John Elway kinda sucked for most of his career, though.

[/ QUOTE ]

He was only the winningest QB in history until this year, often carrying teams on his back that would've gone 4-12 without him. Yep, he sucked.

[/ QUOTE ]

The Elway myth has grown over the years. JOA's view is a lot closer to the truth than you are giving it credit for.

From 88-92 he had 73tds and 80 INTs. The idea that he always carried bad teams on his back until TD got there is fairly dubious.

[/ QUOTE ]

Let me just say on the Elway hijack: I watched most of Elway's career and I did not like the Broncos at all.

He was incredibly awesome and to say he "kinda sucked" before Davis got there is one of the dumbest things I've ever read.

[/ QUOTE ]

He certainly never sucked against the Chiefs. More like fisted. With no lube.

[Leaky Eye]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Your the Green Bay Packers...3-0 average D, Farve looks great, good WRs, dismal to below average o-line. no running game

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think he is a 2nd round pick better than their current RB.

[/ QUOTE ]

Turner doesn't have to be that good to make it worthwhile for the Packers. However, if memory serves, the Charges tendered Turner as an RFA for big enough money such that a team would have to give them a 1 and 3 if they signed him. No way the Charges take a 2 now for him after that.

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe I am overestimating the #2 pick. In my opinion the NFL runs on young legs more than any other sport. You need some key players that you can keep together for a while, and you fill the rest of the team year after year with young legs (hoping you get a key player every now and then out of the group). Botching or surrendering 1-4 picks can destroy you.

I think Turner is a very solid back, but I think he is not good enough to be hard to find a replacement. Maybe a 2 is a good price. I think its slightly too much but wtf do I know. I sure wouldn't give a 1 and a 3 though!

[West]

[ QUOTE ]
The nicest part about "numbers can't tell you the whole story" is that you are then allowed to make up whatever you want and no one can possibly argue with you.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, I think you are probably going to have trouble finding people who are old enough to remember watching Elway's whole career and think he's overrated. I'm sure you're not suggesting that numbers DO tell the whole story. Football isn't baseball.

In '93 and '94, with Reeves gone and before Mike Shanahan and Terrell Davis got there, Elway threw for 41 TDs with 20 picks.

I'm a Broncos fan so I'm biased of course, but I grew up during the Elway era and watched it all.

[suzzer99]

Even when Elway didn't always play the best, there was no better QB to have needing a game-winning drive late.

He could be having a horrible game. But get down to 3 minutes left, down by 6 - and it was like he would just wake up out of a fog and start flinging the ball all over the field with laser accuracy. You could see him perk up in his body language. Some QBs get scared in those spots, Elway got jacked-up. It almost seemed like he needed to create a challenge for himself. Like just playing against an NFL defense wasn't stimulating his juices enough. [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]