11/21/24
January 15, 2007
Who Showed Up? Was it Really Clutch Rex? Bears Move On.: Was this a gutsy performance by Rex Grossman?
Grossman had decent stats, and, as danjel points out, got an ugly win. The talking heads in the post-game, in particular Dan Marino, were very critical of his play. Marino pointed out numerous times that he felt Grossman repeatedly made poor decisions while in the pocket.
posted by FonGu at 07:56 AM on January 15, 2007
The thing is, who cares? I am, by no means, a Bears fan but com'on, does it really matter if they won by 30 or by 3? The point is, they won the game, which by the way was a great game. "The talking heads in the post-game, in particular Dan Marino, were very critical of his play. Marino pointed out numerous times that he felt Grossman repeatedly made poor decisions while in the pocket." I believe that ol' #13, Dan Marino was a great, great quarterback in his day but this is the same guy that never won a Superbowl. I'm sure that if he had a chance like Rex Grossman has in Chicago, he would be elated to "repeatedly (make) poor decisions while in the pocket" and win a playoff game.
posted by BornIcon at 08:47 AM on January 15, 2007
Good point born. While Marino may be right, on some level it does seem a bit disengenuous to criticize Grossman for his decision-making in a playoff game that he won.
posted by brainofdtrain at 08:49 AM on January 15, 2007
Don't get me wrong, I am not siding with Marino. When I coached, we would take any win. The "ugly" aspect was something you corrected in the next week's practice. I'm no fan of the Bears, but I'm happy to see Grossman get the win - particularly after the heat he took during the regular season.
posted by FonGu at 08:56 AM on January 15, 2007
I'm sure that if he had a chance like Rex Grossman has in Chicago, he would be elated to "repeatedly (make) poor decisions while in the pocket" and win a playoff game. He did have that chance. Dan Marino won eight playoff games (out of 18 played) and led his team to a Super Bowl.
posted by rcade at 09:07 AM on January 15, 2007
"He did have that chance. Dan Marino won eight playoff games (out of 18 played) and led his team to a Super Bowl" I know he did but has he ever won a Super Bowl? I don't remember the exact results of his Super Bowl stats but I'm sure Marino wouldn't of minded "winning ugly" in the Big Game, just once.
posted by BornIcon at 09:20 AM on January 15, 2007
Grossman didn't just win "the big game" -- he won a playoff game. Treating him like somebody who can pull rank on Marino makes Touchdown Jesus cry.
posted by rcade at 09:29 AM on January 15, 2007
Grossman didn't just win "the big game".... But I was talking about Dan Marino, not Grossman. I'm not comparing Grossman to Marino since I know how great of a quarterback Marino was for the Dolphins for his entire career. My point is that regardless of how Rex Grossman won his first playoff game, he still won. And for someone like Marino that has never won a Super Bowl, he should know how hard it is to win a playoff game let alone a Super Bowl. A win is a win and Grossman is as close as any of the four teams remaining to get that elusive Super Bowl ring. Even with winning ugly.
posted by BornIcon at 09:37 AM on January 15, 2007
I'm just surprised that the Bears were able to come back and when a game they trailed going into the fourth quarter. They had ample help from Seattle, however. My feeling on this current iteration of the Bears is that they are fine playing with a lead, but they would have trouble coming back from behind. As to Grossman, I think his game was pretty average. The couple of deep balls were obviously very nice and I think that opportunity will be there against the Saints as well, considering that Jeff Garcia did a pretty good job picking apart their secondary and had at least one very long touchdown pass (to Stallworth). My big issue with Grossman is that he doesn't take care of the ball very well, as was the case on the fumble, and that he tends to make bad decisions under pressure. Because of their inferior defense, the Saints blitz a lot, which means that the long pass on single coverage should be open but that Grossman will also have ample opportunity to make some boneheaded plays.
posted by holden at 09:54 AM on January 15, 2007
The dump offs aren't really Rex's fault, they're a part of the gameplan. Designed to get him completing passes and avoid some of his really boneheaded moves. Check out this for a good run down on what the Bears do with short passes to protect Grossman. What he can be blamed for is his inability to hit a wideopen fullback in the flat.
posted by Bulgaroktonos at 11:27 AM on January 15, 2007
im not sure if it was just me seeing this, but it seemed like there was only one down (third) that grossman actually took the time to look at the entire field. he was consistantly, on passing downs, only watching one reciever and waiting for him to get open. its as if he knows who is getting the ball before the play starts, whether that person is open or not. i saw it on several occasions. im not sure if it is because he is afraid to look over the whole field, for fear of losing track of where the pass rush is or what, but it became painfully obvious to me that he is sticking to the primary reciever far too often.
posted by 15yroldkid at 12:41 PM on January 15, 2007
Let's put it this way: I AM a Bears fan and am scared to death about facing the Saints and that offense. Rex has not had back to back good games all year and Lovie had best keep Brian Griese ready to step in.
posted by wdminott at 02:10 PM on January 15, 2007
Rex Grossman is lucky to be on a team with a dominating defense. Lovie Smith said it best a few weeks ago, "We are 10-3 with Rex as our Quarterback." He doesn't have gaudy statistics to speak of, but the team wins. Is Grossman the primary reason for the W's? Hell No! The Bears defense is scary and they have a good running game. Hopefully Rex won't be the reason that the Bears lose the championship. He should just enjoy the ride like Rothlisburger did last year.
posted by yay-yo at 03:11 PM on January 15, 2007
"We are 10-3 with Rex as our Quarterback. The Bears were never 10-3. Rex did exactly what the Bears needed him to do. They know his weaknesses: locking in on one receiver, throwing off his back foot, running backwards when the pressure is on, fumbling, and throwing the ball into coverage to avoid a hit instead of throwing it away. They know his strengths: good arm, nice touch on the deep ball (when he steps into it) short memory, supreme confdence. Rex showed both his strengths and his weaknesses yesterday, luckily for the Bears, this week, the strengths outweighed the weaknesses. Two more games like that and the Bears have a shot.
posted by Tokens0605 at 08:02 PM on January 15, 2007
The Bears who were they thought we were if you want to crown them then crown their ass anyhow Rex is technically a rookie and will always make mistakes like ALL quarterbacks do he is maturing and I thought he played a good game yesterday the interception was not his fault but the fumble was as far as his play this year it's been up and down at the best and Chicago's fans are in an uproar about this but I have just one thing to say about this If the Bears would've lost yesterday it would not have been sexy rexy's fault it woul've been the defense's fault go figure
posted by luther70 at 08:30 PM on January 15, 2007
Luther, what did you just post? It is completely incomprehensible.
posted by hawkguy at 08:54 PM on January 15, 2007
The defense has been slipping ever since Mike Brown and Tommie Harris went down. Not to mention the other guys who went down for a game here and there (Vasher and Tillman). they don't seem to have the swagger they had earlier in the season. The offensive line has to do a better job of containing the blitz. Seems to me the opposing defense gets thru way too easy when they blitz. Any reason why the Bears don't put Rex in the shotgun, especially in a blitzing situation? I understand that Olin Kreutz doesn't like the shotgun snap. But he's not the coach. Who's running the team? I think it would be beneficial to give Grossman that extra 1/2 second to analyze what's happening.
posted by t money at 08:59 PM on January 15, 2007
By the way, did you ever notice that you very rarely see a Bears' Wide-receiver wide open??
posted by t money at 09:03 PM on January 15, 2007
Luther, maybe a comma here, a period there, and not hitting the sauce so hard before you post! I'm sure that was a really great one, if we could just figure it out!
posted by Buckfever14 at 10:58 PM on January 15, 2007
You know what, I really liked Dan Marino when he played. He was a great QB, but Rex's play aside, he won. It may of been ugly, but he did not make any mistakes that cost his team in an irreparable way, so I'm sure they'll take it. Yes, Grossman has been up and down this year, but as stated earlier in the thread, he is kind of like a rookie in the aspect that this is his first full year as a starter. I mean go look at Peyton's first year in the league, 26 tds vs. 28 ints (Rex had 23 tds to 20 ints). Not exactly a stellar start to his career, but it has definitely improved. So, Bears fans and Marino, GET OFF GROSSMAN'S BACK! He will be fine, I think, because there were just too many flashes of brilliance to discount. BTW, in 1988 Marino had 28 tds and 23 ints and in 1989 he had 24 tds and 22 ints. Not exactly stellar as far as stats go and these were his 6th and 7th seasons.
posted by hellamarine at 11:26 PM on January 15, 2007
Wdminott, I am a Bear fan too and Rex gives me ulcers out there. But unless Rex is tanking beyond belief (possible) I don't think putting Griese in will make a difference. He hasn't had the reps this season to come into a huge game like this and bail them out of a jam. When he has played his numbers have been subpar. Like everyone else who is prescribing the solution to Rex's woes, here is my prescription: 1. Be aware of pressure and take a sack if necessary. Too many times Rex doesn't see defenders bearing down on him and when he does, he doesn't tuck the ball into his body and take a 5 or 10 yard loss to avoid fumbling or throwing a pick. 2. Hit receivers in stride. Did you notice how many balls he threw to a receiver's rear shoulder? 80% of the time, guys had to reach back to make catches. Muhammed coughed up that one ball for an INT but Rex's ball placement did not help. 3. Lean into passes and throw off front foot.. The throwing off his back foot drives me nuts. It automatically puts more loft on the ball and makes it easier for DBs to pick it off. 4. Learn from mistakes. You have to take risks in a game but you can't afford to gamble with field position or turnovers.
posted by bluesdog at 01:35 AM on January 16, 2007
Wow never hear so much complaining about a Bear's team that is 14-2. Were any of you guys around in the the 70's. I am just so happy to see you guy's complain about a winning Bear's team. When haven't the Bears won ugly? Just ask Bobby Douglas, Dick Butkus, or Big Mike. If it wasn't for ugly than it wouldn't be Da Bears.
posted by Waynek591 at 07:20 AM on January 16, 2007
Wow never hear so much complaining about a Bear's team that is 14-2. The Bears finished the season 13-3, but your point re winning ugly has some merit. The problem is that winning ugly hasn't been enough to get the Bears past the first round of the playoffs in recent years. We'll see if it's enough to get them through to the Super Bowl (and potentially win it) this year.
posted by holden at 08:02 AM on January 16, 2007
Were any of you guys around in the the 70's. It sure was painful to watch Bob Avellini, Mike Phipps and Vince Evans. I would take Rex over any of them to lead the Bears. I think the underlying issue here for Bears fans is that Rex' inconsistency really scares the crap out of us. It has been a long time since the Bears have won a playoff game. It has been a long time since the 1985 Bears spoiled us with dominating play. They won with ease. For me, watching Rex play is surely exciting but also extemely nerve racking. Rex just does not give you that fuzzy feeling that he can save the day at the end of a close game. But, I am happy to have the opportunity to watch Rex again, win or lose, than to have the Bear's season over for the year. I think Rex has the potential to be another Brett Favre in the making; only the opposing defenses do not fear him yet.
posted by danjel at 10:23 AM on January 16, 2007
Maybe it's from too many years of watching Favre, but I see Rex out there and I see a scared kid terrified of the blitz and getting sacked. He gets way too nervous and skittish in the pocket, and ends up throwing it where he shouldn't all too often; I just wouldn't have a whole helluva lot of confidence in him as my QB if I were a Bears fan (a sentiment I see echoed herein quite a bit from Bears fans too). Of course, the Packers were interested in him once too, so I don't doubt that he'll amount to something great down the line, but right now I see inexperience plaguing his play more often than not. That was one exciting game, though sloppy as hell. Give the kid a couple more years and he'll settle down and hit his stride.
posted by evixir at 12:59 PM on January 17, 2007
Seattle was playing on borrowed time. They should have been beaten by a chip shot last week. Couldn't do it twice in a row. Babineaux said "We had this game". But they were given last weeks game. Karma baby. With both philly and seattle losing it was a good weekend for me. If Rex can get by new orleans, I'll be impressed.
posted by justgary at 01:33 AM on January 19, 2007
The article states that Rex' performance was one of the gutsiest in Bears playoff history. I can't say I totally agree. Rex faced a repetetive heavy pass rush throughout the game. To me, he was married to the pocket and didn't do much to get himself outside the pocket when warranted. He fell in love with dumping out passes to the back; some of those should have been thrown away instead of taking a loss on the play. Winning ugly!