I was always interested in how poorly-staffed the Chicago Bears have been at QB over the last couple of decades. Lovie Smith suffered primarily from poor QB play that could not provide enough support for a very good defense to win a title. Getting a legitimate QB in the NFL is an inexact science, so nothing seemed all that out of sorts... Until now!
Lovie Smith has brought in Josh McCown in TB, anointed him the starter, and hitched his wagon to a 34-35 year old journeyman. Sound familiar? After throwing a whole bunch of money at free agents on the defensive side of the ball, Lovie Smith is banking on McCown recreating is 2013 magic in TB. This is not really a knock on Josh McCown, and as a Packers fan I can't help but love the guy because of what he did to the Vikings in 2003, but he is what he is: a mediocre QB who is not going to make defenses gameplan against him. This is also not a suggestion that Mike Glennon is any better, but isn't hoping that McCown can lead your team to a Super Bowl just plain unrealistic?
Now that I've jumped squarely on the Lovie Smith is a horrible offensive personnel guy, they will promptly win the Super Bowl, McCown will throw 40 TDs with only 5 INTs, and I will be eating large chunks of crow until Jason decides to let it go (which will be never).
Hypothetically speaking, I'd never let it go--however, in this case I'll have to because I'll be right on board with you. I cannot fathom how this was a smart move.
ReplyDeleteGlennon had a 59.4% completion percentage as a rookie. McCown's career completion percentage? Yeah you betcha: 59.4%. McCown's TD: INT is 50:45, Glennon's 19:9. Y/A? McCown is at 6.6 for his career, rookie-year-Glennon at 6.3. QB ratings (as admittedly imperfect as they are): McCown 77.5, rookie-year-Glennon 83.9. McCown does have one season with a higher ESPN-pretend-stat QBR than the rook, too, last year when he marked down an 85.09 (up against Glennons 45.59). In McCown's only real extended chance at starting, his age-25 season (Glennon was 24 last year), he put up a 6-7 season, 57.1% completion percentage for 2511 yards, 11TD/10INT and 6.2 Y/A, and took 31 sacks. Glennon went 4-9, 59.4% for 2608, 19TD/9INT and 6.3 Y/A, and took 40 sacks.
So Lovie signs and promotes a guy he didn't start for two full seasons in Chicago to unseat a guy with basically the same/better career rate numbers and comparable full-season records, only 10 years younger and half the price. Why wouldn't you keep the cheaper guy with some possible upside, build your line and receiver corp, see if he improves once you toss him to your new OC who built his reputation on QB development (though with an iffy NFL resume), and move on in two years if you need to instead of signing a 34-year old guy who, presumably, is what he is? Because Josh!
ive never really understood why a lot of qbs stay in the league or why the nfl continues to sign them. i feel like the qb position is just swamped with mediocrity and so a qb like colt mccoy, david carr, brady quinn, etc etc continue to be signed by teams baffles me. why pay a dude who has no right to be in the nfl, nothing to bring to your team sitting there taking up a roster spot. Ok ok i get it, you want a 3rd or even in some cases a back up qb who at least has some nfl experience. but really you can't find ANYONE? where are the jeff garcias out there? kurt warner, steve youngs?! we have to continue to watch as quinn throws 10 ints in 4 games with 2 tds and goes 0-4 as some assholes back up every year
ReplyDeleteI think it's more hubris than anything else. Lots of coaches and GMS and scouts liked Quinn, Carr, and McCoy when they came out, and I suspect it's fairly easy to see them struggle elsewhere and imagine it's just because of the teammates, the organization, or especially the coaching. For a Jim Harbaugh, who liked Blaine Gabbert a few years ago, it's probably pretty easy to think you can fix the dude and develop the potential you saw earlier (or imagined you saw). So they don't just see these guys as retreads, but as salvage operations--still with value and upside (although in lots of cases the upside we're talking about here seems to be basic competence in the event your starter gets hurt).
ReplyDelete