This whole Orton vs. Grossman debate has gotten out of hand. The world of sports journalism insists upon becoming more and more about sound bites and controversy and less and less about thoughtful arguements, logical reasoning, and good reporting, BUT I always feel that the media is a reflection of the people it is playing to. We sports fans have become lazy.
If you really believe that the Bears would be better off with Rex at QB than with Kyle Orton, then fine. Everyone is entitled to their opinion. But the number of fans who are talking about this so called "QB controversy" is amazing. Why do we so willingly buy into the Sports Controversy of the Month?
Take a second to review the facts here. Grossman's college numbers are slightly better than Orton's (see below), but that can be attributed to the Florida offense. I guess you could say that Rex's pro numbers are better than Orton's, but Orton is 9-4 in 12 starts with no injuries, while Rex is 3-3 in 6 starts with three injuries. I like Rex Grossman. I think that he has a future in the NFL. I think that he has a future with the Bears...
...but this isn't McMahon vs. McNown here. How can we say with such certainty that Grossman is the better NFL quarterback? Are we basing it on his playoff victories? (0) His 300-yard passing performances? (0) His career winning percentage? (.500)
Let's keep things in perspective. While the Bears have succeeded by treating Orton like a professional starting quarterback rather than a rookie quarterback, he is still a rook. He has played 13 games. He isn't exactly a seasoned veteran yet. If you're giving up on Orton 13 games into his career, then I suppose that you'd have given up on these losers as well:
Johnny Unitas, rookie in 1956: 110/198 for 1498 yards, 9TD/10INT, 55.6%, 74.0 RAT
Joe Namath, 1965: 164/340 for 2220 yards, 18/15, 48.2%, 68.6
Bob Griese, 1967: 166/331 for 2005 yards, 15/18, 50.2%, 61.6
Roger Staubach, 1969/1970: 67/129 for 963 yards, 3/10, 51.9%, 51.9
Terry Bradshaw, 1970: 203/373 for 2259 yards, 13/22, 54.4%, 59.7
Phil Simms, 1979: 134/265 for 1743 yards, 13/14, 50.6%, 66.0
John Elway, 1983: 123/259 for 1663 yards, 7/14, 47.5%, 54.9
Steve Young, 1985/1986: 267/501 for 3217 yards, 11/21, 53.3%, 63.1
Troy Aikman, 1989: 155/293 for 1749 yards, 9/18, 52.9%, 55.7
Donovan McNabb, 1999: 106/216 for 948 yards, 8/7, 49.1%, 60.1
Everytime I hear some yahoo talking about the negative effects of television and video games, everytime we are referred to as the "A.D.D. Generation," I want to slap them around with my remote control. And then Orton/Grossman debates rage on after one bad game in a win (vs. Green Bay) and one medium game in a loss (vs. Pittsburgh), and I start to think they're right.
THIS IS THE NFL, PEOPLE! Quarterback is the toughest position in the league, and arguably the toughest in sports. Are we really going to sit here and say that Kyle Orton's career as a starter is finished because he is not going to the Pro Bowl in his ROOKIE SEASON? Are we really that shortsighted/impatient/dumb?
The Bears will go into camp next season with Orton and Grossman fighting for the starting QB position. Lovie will say what he always says: "Every player has to earn their spot." "Every job is up for competition." "We play whoever is best." Grossman may very well beat Orton out in camp, and if that happens, then great. But how can you say that Kyle Orton should lose his job to a guy who is less proven than he is because Orton is not a top flight QB as a rookie? To me, it doesn't make sense. It smacks of lazy analysis and knee-jerk conviction.
ORTON VS. GROSSMAN, TALE OF THE TAPE
COLLEGE CAREERS
Grossman, three years at Florida: 677-1110, 9164 yards, 77 TD, 36 INT, 61.0%, 96.9 RAT
Orton, four years at Purdue: 748-1262, 8918 yards, 60 TD, 24 INT, 59.3%, 88.8 RAT
edge: Grossman
PRO CAREERS
Grossman, three years with the Bears: 6 games, 3-3 record, 85-156, 1044 yards, 6.69 ypa, 3 TD, 4 INT, 54.5%, 71.1 RAT
Orton, one year with the Bears: 13 games, 9-4 record, 182-344, 1798 yards, 5.23 ypa, 9 TD, 13 INT, 52.9%, 60.9 RAT
edge: EVEN (Grossman's numbers are a tad better, but Orton has been healthy and has the wins)
COLLEGE QB HISTORIES
Big time Florida QBs: Shane Matthews, Danny Wuerffel, Doug Johnson
Big time Purdue QBs: Len Dawson, Bob Griese, Jim Everett, Drew Brees
Booj makes some really good points. I think the main reason that bear fans want to see a change is because Grossman's career has been long anticipated in Chicago. Right now he is the great white hope. For two seasons we've been wating for Grossman to come in and take our offense to the next level. Unfortunately it has been delayed twice by injuries. All last season, I heard several people talking excitedly about Grossman's return. When he got injured, I think a lot of people felt cheated. Now that he's healthy again, they want to see him play. I realize he may not be the answer but many have put their faith in the idea of him being the answer for so long. It's hard to give up that. I think Orton still deserves the job, but i wouldn't complain seeing Rex get a shot.
Couldn't have said it better myself. I am baffled that this is even a topic of conversation at all. If the situation was reversed and Orton was the one hurt and Grossman led them to a 9-4 record, would there still be this controversy?
The bottom line is winning games. Regardless of who the Bears put behind center, his job is to play well enough not to lose the game. If the Bears fall behind 14-0, what makes people think Grossman is any more capable of bringing them back than Orton? I could understand if it were, say, a Daunte Culpepper or somebody that's actually played more than a quarter of a season.
The Panthers offense hasn't been doing much lately. Let's bench Delhomme and bring in Chris Weinke!
Incorrect comments from dilusional fans, Grossman is a better skilled QB, period. He has been in the league longer and has learned two offenses. He also can make plays with his arm, and will not have a 5 int game or a 60 yd passing day. With all that said, Orton has the confidence of his teamates and that is more important than stats. My solution stay with Orton the rest of the year and open up the QB competition.
To reverse the situation, as you say Matt914, isn't even a conceivable idea. Let's just change Grossman's legal name and to Orton and Orton's to Grossman. There: the situation is reversed.
Silly, right? If the situation were flipped, Orton's rookie season wouldn't have taken off to begin with, and Grossman would be undebatably the starter because absolutely no one wants to see Jeff Blake start for the Bears.
In any situation, on any team, you will have the latest controversies. Should Philip Rivers stay in San Diego and start, or should the Chargers stick with Drew Brees and try to get value for Rivers in a trade? Will Daunte Culpepper be the same next year, or will Brad Johnson take the helm again? Will Gus Frerotte start for the Dolphins or someone else? Will Marc Bulger start for the Rams, or will Fitzpatrick emerge in the next few games to take the job away? How many quaterback debates go on in a season? Too many.
Orton, while you can rest yourself on the fact that this is his rookie season, has not improved. From game one to game twelve, it was the same mistakes week after week. Even yesterday when he passed for 207 yards, he only completed just under 50% of his throws, tossing many overthrows on key third downs. Sounds like business as usual.
Yes, yesterday was his best game, minus the lack of touchdowns. In week five or six, you expect to see many mistakes. By week thirteen, there should be some improvement. So far, that improvement has been minimal. The Bears cannot continue to lean on the crutch that the defense has become.
Last edited by DaBears2485 on December 12th at 5:44 PM.
Orton has shown little improvement through 13 games. Give Grossman, the supposed better player, the chance to try to revive a weak offensive season.
Oh, and there's no guarantee that Grossman won't throw a 5 INT game or 60 yard passing day. I'm sure Brett Favre never thought he'd throw 5 picks, but the Bengals had something different to say about that.
After reading some comments from Muhammad, I doubt Orton has the entire team's confidence. Grossman was the man before Orton was drafted. After such stagnation on offense, I bet you they're ready for the change, just for the mere hope that it'll create the spark that they need.
Last edited by DaBears2485 on December 12th at 5:47 PM.
To say that Orton is anywhere near the level that Grossman is at right now is simply ludicrous. Were you not watching the Atlanta game when Grossman completed the 19 yard sideline out pattern to Gage? Orton couldn't make that pass in his dreams. Grossman is a pedigreed passer who can think on the fly and adjust if the play breaks down, he can also read the field quicker than Orton. I'm not saying Orton may not be a solid starter some day, but Grossman simply has a quicker release, better mechanics, is infinitely more accurate, and can move in the pocket. BooJ34, you should be ashamed of yourself for calling yourself a sportswriter and not being able to see the difference with your eyes. Grossman keeps drives alive, Orton is lucky to HAVE a drive.
smcgov-I should be ashamed of myself? I think that's a bit much. I agree with you that Rex looked good against Atlanta, but I wrote this piece a week before that game. My feeling at the time--and I think if you take another look at this story, you'll see this--was that there was no way to be sure that Grossman was a better pro QB than Orton based solely on what they each had accomplished at that time. When Lovie made the switch in the Atlanta game, it felt right. But I was not ready to see Orton get yanked after the first Green Bay game or the Pittsburgh game simply because he had not played well.
One of the biggest differences between this 11-5 season and last year's 5-11 season was Kyle Orton. When Rex went down last year, Quinn came in because Terry Shea had assured everyone that Quinn was a solid QB. Obviously, he was not. Then they brought Krenzel in, and he was able to ride the Bears' D and make enough plays to win three in a row. Then they pulled him (I'm not sure why) in favor of Hutchinson, who looked great in his debut against the Vikes and then bombed. This season, rather than those three guys, it was Orton, and I won't believe anyone for a moment who thinks that Orton's work on this team was incidental. He was not just "along for the ride."
So, yes, I agree with you that Rex looks like the better NFL QB...now...but that on December 12th there was no way to be sure of that, and certainly no way concrete enough to justify pulling a quarterback who won eight straight games.
