Stauff Nation TB said 03/02, 11:25 PM
Pick the team that's had the worst position players throughout it's history (For example: The Chicago Bear's QB's)
I'll take the Chicago Bears QB's
This one could be challenging for people.
I don't want yall sayin I'm goin for an easy win either.
Cowboys-Celtics-Chisox said 03/02, 11:53 PM
Bears QB's? Have you not heard of Sid Luckman? Tough to pick a team and position that has an HOFer in it's past...
I'll go with the Lions at WR. For a team that has been around since 1929 to have SO MANY busts at the position continuing on to this day it seems almost fated that Detroit is where promising WR go to lose all hope and potential.
Considering a team carries far more WR's than QB's and the best of the best Detroit has to offer as a wide out in 79 years is Herman Moore, they are seriously doing something wrong.
Stauff Nation TB said 03/03, 12:18 AM
The Bears have one (Count em 1) HOF Quarterback in Sid Luckman. In their 86 years of existance, wow.
Here's the killer though. The Bear's have never reall had good quarterbacks, but since 1992, they've had an astounding 23 starting Quarterbacks. 23 in 15 seasons. In comparrison, the Green Bay Packers have had one. The only somewhat decent QB in that time was Jim Harbaugh.
I'll give that a second to sink in.
What's more is that since 1979 the Bears have made an amazing 49 QB changes. 49 changes in 28 seasons.
Wanna talk busts? Cade McNown, Craig Krenzel, Chris Chandler, Shane Matthews, Moses Moreno, Jonathan Quinn, Chad Hutchinson, Dave Krieg, Kordell Stewart (he was decent with the Steelers, but not with the Bears) and coming soon: Rex Grossman, Kyle Orton and Brian Griese.
And those are just some of the guys who have started since 1992.
And the QB's who could have been good (ie Eric Kramer and Jim McMahon) were hurt constantly.
Fun Facts (hooray)
In the Bears history, only two QB's have gone to the Pro Bowl
In 06 Rex Grossman became the 3rd Bear QB to start 16 games since 1981.
In short, these guys are the reason I cry myself to sleep at night.
Cowboys-Celtics-Chisox said 03/03, 12:36 AM
And the Lions have zero (count em 0) HOF WR's in their 79 years of existence. Considering teams typically carry at least twice as many WR as QB and multiple WR play, this is remarkable.
The Bears existence didn't begin in 1992. This TD is about the history of the franchise, not the last 16 years.
I can't list all of the lions busts at WR. We are only allowed 3600 characters per TD...
Jim McMahon led the '85 Bears, often considered the best team in history to a rout in the Super Bowl. But that was just because of their great Defense right? Wrong. They were only the #2 D in the NFL that year. They were the #1O.
Even Sexy Rexy took Da Bears to the Super Bowl little more than a year ago. Defense again, right? Wrong. #3 D, #2 O.
While these guys might not exactly be HOFers, they did lead their respectively high scoring offenses to the last Sunday of the season.
The Lions have tried every pass happy offense know to man over the years. From the WCO to the run and gun to the REALLY extreme Mike Martz pass first run never offense. STILL they can't come up with top notch WR's.
Draft WR with your high 1st round pick 3 consecutive years and you can't help but hit, right? Sadly, wrong.
Stauff Nation TB said 03/03, 12:53 AM
I used 1992 as a sense to compare the Bears number of QBs to other teams such as GB, who only had 1.
And doesn't part of the receiever's ability come from the QB? If you've got a bad QB on your team, your Wide Recievers won't do well either. Last three years the Lions have had Harrington and Kitna taking snaps for em. You're not gunna have very good recieving numbers if you only have an average QB in Kitna and a crappy one in Harrington.
McMahon was nothing special in 1985. He had a QB rating of 82.6. That's average. In 06 Rex Grossman's QB rating was 73.9. Obviously it wasn't just the QB who led the Offense that year. McMahon had Walter Payton in the backfield.
If you'd like me to list every quarterback the Bears ever had I would be happy to, but it would take me around 7000 characters. It's a very very long list.
The Bears have had one QB start for more than 5 years (Luckman) Other than that, no QB has ever played more than 5 seasons with the team.
Face it these QB's are horrible.
Chicago is known for their bad QB's and probably always will be. The Lions don't have a reputation for bad WRs like the Bears do for QBs.
I better not lose to you again. haha
Cowboys-Celtics-Chisox said 03/03, 02:45 AM
Stauff your problem is that you're a homer who is hung up on the Bears choice of QB's. That's understandable because they don't seem to be very good at it in recent years.
But come on.
An 82.6QBR in 1985 was actually very good. Consider that Terry Bradshaw had a career passer rating under 80 and he gets mentioned as an all time great.
For a team to never have a QB start for more than 5 years is less unusual than you might think. Not too many journeyman QBs last 5 years with the same organization and there are several teams that have never had an HOFer at the position. The Bears aren't one of them as they HAVE had an HOFer even if it was several decades ago. They've also had several "good enough" guys under center and have been able to be very competitive during long stretches in their history with just such players at the position.
Their situation is nothing like the Lions situation with WRs. For a three year stretch, Herman Moore was a top receiver in the NFL. 1 receiver, for 3 years, in the 79 year history of the franchise.
I'm convinced if Jerry Rice himself had been a Lion he'd have gotten hurt or otherwise not been near as great as he was in San Fran.
Det=WR Hell.
Comments (26)
The wide receiver corps the bears have had over the years haven't been too spectacular either; at qb they had Sid Luckman, hall of famer, and two solid ones in Eric Kramer and Jim McMahon. The bears wr with most yards, johnny morris, is not even in the hall of fame.
asamberg | 03/02/08, 11:38 PM
Report Offensive CommentYa they've had 1 HOF QB in their history. (Remember, the Bears are tied for the oldest team in the NFL. They began in 1921)
Stauff Nation TB | 03/02/08, 11:40 PM
Report Offensive CommentGood Luck, Stauff. Sorry it took so long, as soon as I saw this the words Sid Luckman appeared in big neon letters...but then I had to go find another player and position without resorting to recent expansion franchises ;-)
Cowboys-Celtics-Chisox | 03/02/08, 11:56 PM
Report Offensive Commentfine with me. no big deal
Stauff Nation TB | 03/02/08, 11:59 PM
Report Offensive CommentCleveland corner backs
Browns_Fan | 03/02/08, 11:59 PM
Report Offensive CommentAnd you picked my Lions!! Normally I'd be upset but I can't think of a good reason to be on this one haha
Your Leader....WOW | 03/03/08, 12:00 AM
Report Offensive CommentMIami Dolphins WR's... good in the system, but I can't rhyme off a list of greats
TorFan | 03/03/08, 01:17 AM
Report Offensive CommentThe Cardinals and you can pick the position.
buckybadger | 03/03/08, 02:02 AM
Report Offensive CommentMisc comment to find later.
LoveItHateIt | 03/03/08, 02:03 AM
Report Offensive Comment"In short, these guys are the reason I cry myself to sleep at night."
Truly great.
I'll vote later.
thehemogoblin needs a Wii | 03/03/08, 02:17 AM
Report Offensive CommentGood Job, Stauff.
Cowboys-Celtics-Chisox | 03/03/08, 02:46 AM
Report Offensive CommentIt's so sad - I used to collect Herman Moore cards
Kobe is Beef | 03/03/08, 05:06 AM
Report Offensive CommentBengals Punter
NCshvDavid running down fools | 03/03/08, 05:51 AM
Report Offensive CommentVote to CCC-> Good arguments
JetsSuck | 03/03/08, 06:40 AM
Report Offensive CommentVote to CCC good arguments. I agree with him too. The Bears had some good QB's, but the Lions have had busts.
dyhard: be back Sunday | 03/03/08, 07:16 AM
Report Offensive CommentIm going to lose again
Stauff Nation TB | 03/03/08, 08:58 AM
Report Offensive Commentstauff you got my vote
the lions have to hof recievers on their team right now
pwronk01 | 03/03/08, 09:37 AM
Report Offensive CommentYou'd think that the Bears would win it right off, but the arguments convinced me otherwise. Vote -->
noydbyj | 03/03/08, 09:44 AM
Report Offensive Commenti'd say 80 %qb rating was very good in the 70's and should have been higher in the 80's...seeing thee are qb's getting consistently in the 90's and 100's now a days.
it hard not to vote for the bears...just becasue i would like to argue with some off CCC arguments but there are flaws in both so based on arguments...---->
Steveo16220 says:30 days left | 03/03/08, 12:44 PM
Report Offensive CommentIm a fellow Bears fan who also cries, at more than just the qbs! But based on arguments I have to go >
Z_Aug:Bow to your Sensei | 03/03/08, 02:46 PM
Report Offensive CommentAdd a comment
Remember to keep it clean. Bad words will get filtered, and offensive comments will be removed. More Guidelines