Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 24 of 24
  1. #16
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    1,453
    Quote Originally Posted by Moriarty View Post
    "Retiring" without really retiring and keeping all the bonus money?

    Douchey.
    As I understand it, Orton reworked his deal on two occasions with the Cowboys to convert his salary into 'bonus' money to help with their cap situation. It would have been "douchey" of the team to then turn around and come after that money that should have already been Orton's.

    If the Cowboys had gone after that money, they'd trash their credibility with their players and no one would ever rework their contracts in the same way again.

    Go Bears!

    J
    Never bet on a Bears coaching decision.

  2. #17
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    5,275
    Also available:

    Me
    Sal's Grandma
    Joe Montana
    Bart Starr

    I dunno.... I liked Orton when he was here. But lets be honest.... Someone of Orton's caliber is going to be available mid season if we need them. Garrard, Grossman, Kolb, Quinn, Seneca Wallace.... are any of these guys significantly worse than Orton at this point in his career? Orton's last three seasons have had a combined ~192 passes for 2245 yards, 12 TD's, and 11 INT's. That isn't BAD, but it isn't truly amazing either.

    For reference, over the same 3 year stretch Grossman threw 265 passes for 3151 yards, 16 TD's, and 20 INT's while Kolb threw 255 passes for 3124 yards, 17 TD's, and 11 INT's.

    I dunno, if you think you have a guy with potential these days, the NFL standard practice seems to be to let "REAL" #2 Qb's sit on the market and put high potential guys on the roster. That gives the high potential guys time to develop and it leaves a pool of 2nd tier Qb's on the market for teams to pick through if they lose their starter.

    I don't know that any of the young guys on the roster scream high potential to me, but I can see the logic. We know Kyle Orton is never going to be a franchise Qb in the NFL. Do we KNOW that about Jordan Palmer? Its a long shot, but considering the value of uncovering a franchise Qb and the fact that a "long shot" is by definition better odds than a "no shot"... Don't you at least see? If someone snaps up Kyle Orton in the mean time and you are "stuck" with Grossman or Kolb, will you notice the difference?
    Tall, Dorky, and Ham-handed

  3. #18
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Valparaiso, Indiana, USA
    Posts
    15,743
    Quote Originally Posted by chewtoy View Post
    We know Kyle Orton is never going to be a franchise Qb in the NFL. Do we KNOW that about Jordan Palmer? Its a long shot, but considering the value of uncovering a franchise Qb and the fact that a "long shot" is by definition better odds than a "no shot"... Don't you at least see? If someone snaps up Kyle Orton in the mean time and you are "stuck" with Grossman or Kolb, will you notice the difference?
    If we don't sign a veteran QB, here's how it will play out if we need our backup to play... Suddenly and without warning most likely, Cutler goes down. At which point, Clausen or Palmer trots out and plays. Now maybe Trestman's magic wand will work and these guys will play adequately well. But there's absolutely no certainty of that based on their past performance. So if they go Caleb Hanie for a couple games, now we're picking up a veteran QB who has one week to prepare for an extremely important game. So yes, I think there will be a distinct difference between picking up a vet QB who has one week of practice with new teammates and one who has been there throughout TC to thoroughly know the offense and his new teammates.

    Another thing to consider is that if you're going to argue that Trestman's coaching and our skill players are going to help those young guys be more successful (a very fair point), then you also have to give the same credit to Kyle Orton as well. So he should perform BETTER than his career stats indicate.

    The situation could be different too. What if it's a playoff game and Cutler goes down in the first quarter? Then picking up the veteran isn't an option. So if your backup with upside falls flat in his first time on the field in years, the season's over.

    If you're the Jacksonville Jaguars, then hitch your wagon to young QBs with potential and hope one blossoms. But that's not us. We have a legit starting NFL QB who is going to be here for at least 3 more years. And we expect to be in the playoffs. That calls for more of a known quantity in a backup who isn't going to lose the game for you, even if he has no upside whatsoever.

    If you want to have a QB with potential on the team, fine. That's what the 3rd QB is for. And if Orton comes in and the high ceiling guy beats him out, that's great. But to just dismiss the idea of bringing in a quality NFL backup is utterly silly, IMO.
    Wouldn't it be great if we booted the 200 lawyers from the House and Senate and replaced them with economists? That way, we'd stop harming our economy with laws that would apply to the politicians, too.

  4. #19
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Bloomington, IN
    Posts
    1,615
    Seems to be a moot point as all signs are pointing to Orton wishing to retire.

  5. #20
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    862
    Quote Originally Posted by Mikefive View Post
    Here are your Chicago Bears backup QBs:

    1. A 2nd round draft pick who started immediately - and the team was so good under his leadership that the team ended up with the #1 pick, which it used to take another QB. And he never played another down since.
    The receivers Clausen will be playing with in Chicago is probably the most talent he has been surrounded by since his time at ND with Floyd, Tate and Rudolph.

    I'm willing to bet he could be successful here.

  6. #21
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Tempe, AZ
    Posts
    6,343
    Quote Originally Posted by Wounded Bear View Post
    I'll take my chances with Clausen or Palmer any day of the week over Orton (aka, Shane Matthews, aka, Steve Stenstrom), who never had much of an upside and now is in the decline of his career.

    In other words, I willing to bet that Clausen's potential is much higher than Kyle Orton's at this point in both of their careers.

    The great thing about Orton being in Dallas is that he is in Dallas.
    I think Orton has checked out. While I like him better than Clausen (but that's just hate of all things South Bend), at this point he's similar to the Garrards and company of the world. All guys we could sign in the season and we already have 2 of those types already.

    But the reason I quoted this post was holy hyperbole, Orton equal to Matthews and Stenstrom?!?!
    Basic, yes, but it was something we rarely saw under former Bears coordinator Ron Turner. Turner's idea of in-game adjustments involved his boxer shorts. -Rick Morrissey.

  7. #22
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    "Cornfields and Crick-ets forever"
    Posts
    11,569
    Quote Originally Posted by BearsFanInMN View Post
    But the reason I quoted this post was holy hyperbole, Orton equal to Matthews and Stenstrom?!?!
    Stenstrom, no
    Matthews, absolutely

    Matthews had a 75 career rating, Orton an 80.
    But rule changes have notably inflated QB ratings over time, so that's a deadlock.

    Orton had somewhat better arm strength (as did pretty much every mediocre or better QB, ever), but it wasn't all that great.
    Both were more your "game manager" type QBs.
    The word "hero" is frequently abused badly. This is a real hero.

  8. #23
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Undisclosed Location
    Posts
    8,637
    Quote Originally Posted by BearsFanInMN View Post
    But the reason I quoted this post was holy hyperbole, Orton equal to Matthews and Stenstrom?!?!
    Yeah, the reason why I throw Orton, Matthews, and Stenstrom together (I admit, Stenstrom is a reach) is because their passing games were more of the horizontal type rather than vertical. That, of course, could be blamed on the offensive coordinators, however, I don't think many offensive coordinators have much choice with QB's of their arm strength.
    "Jesus is ideal and wonderful, but you Christians -- you are not like him."

    -Gandhi

  9. #24
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Tempe, AZ
    Posts
    6,343
    I think Orton was a bit underrated as I thought he did well with the heaping pile of dung that was the offense for us.

    I guess maybe it was closer to Matthews than I thought as I didn't know he played 14 seasons. I'd have thought half that long at best. But I had no doubt Matthews was a noodle arm and I guess I never really viewed Orton that way.
    Basic, yes, but it was something we rarely saw under former Bears coordinator Ron Turner. Turner's idea of in-game adjustments involved his boxer shorts. -Rick Morrissey.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  






Part of USA TODAY Sports Digital Properties.