DABEARSDABOMB Posted July 14, 2008 Report Share Posted July 14, 2008 The Tampa Tribune threw out the Bears as a team supposedly interested in Tampa Bay quarterback Chris Simms. This could be true, considering Jerry Angelo did like Simms in the past. But there's nothing coming from the Bears' side on this. We all know about the Bears' quarterback situation, with Rex Grossman and Kyle Orton battling at a position that has been unstable lately. The lefty Simms, if healthy, could put some heat on both players. But Simms hasn't played in a regular-season game since rupturing his spleen in September 2006. Since then, his relationship with Bucs head coach Jon Gruden has deteriorated, and Simms has asked out of town. Angelo, the former director of player personnel in Tampa, is not afraid to deal with the Bucs. The Bears traded veteran Brian Griese to Tampa Bay for a draft pick this off-season. They also traded with the Bucs during this year's draft to land safety Craig Steltz, a potential starter. I think this would be a very odd move, considering the Bears already have two unproven QB's on the roster battling things out and adding Simms would only make the process more difficult. This would mean you'd have 3 guys, all capable of being starters, all of whom have flashed some positive signs, battling for one job. Still, getting Simms gives you a guy who you could turn to if Orton/Rex don't go as planned and could potentially still be a guy that could be groomed as a starter and kept on when the Bears draft a QB next year (under the assumption that Rex/Kyle fail). If Rex/Kyle succeed, than oh well, Simms is a 3rd stringer this year and moves on to someplace else. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pixote Posted July 14, 2008 Report Share Posted July 14, 2008 I think this would be a very odd move, considering the Bears already have two unproven QB's on the roster battling things out and adding Simms would only make the process more difficult. This would mean you'd have 3 guys, all capable of being starters, all of whom have flashed some positive signs, battling for one job. Still, getting Simms gives you a guy who you could turn to if Orton/Rex don't go as planned and could potentially still be a guy that could be groomed as a starter and kept on when the Bears draft a QB next year (under the assumption that Rex/Kyle fail). If Rex/Kyle succeed, than oh well, Simms is a 3rd stringer this year and moves on to someplace else. I think he would be a cheap "safety net" as a number 3 QB. I personally thought he would be an excellent starter in the NFL and was developing fine until the injury. I am at a loss as to why Gruden seems to be so negative toward this guy. Although the two undrafted rookies might be ok future QBs, do we really want one of them to be our "emergency" option in case of injuries or failures of Rex or Kyle? A proven veteran would be reluctant to sign on cheap as a #3. I think Simms would. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BearSox Posted July 14, 2008 Report Share Posted July 14, 2008 I'd prefer Leftwich... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pixote Posted July 14, 2008 Report Share Posted July 14, 2008 I'd prefer Leftwich... I'd have no objections to Leftwich, if he would accept a #3, which he might since he is out of work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ostrogoth Posted July 14, 2008 Report Share Posted July 14, 2008 I'd have no objections to Leftwich, if he would accept a #3, which he might since he is out of work. I would have open competition, I don't believe Grossman has done anything special to deserve the starting job, I don't ever want Orton either, he will never be an effective passer, remember 2005. Grossman has the arm but not the instincts, can't hold onto the ball when pressure comes, Leftwich or Simms should be given a chance too, if we indeed make a move. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madlithuanian Posted July 14, 2008 Report Share Posted July 14, 2008 I'd tend to agree. It's not like Gruden (at least as a head coach) was developing talent in Oakland and TB...both his QB's were serious vets in Gannon and Johnson... I think he would be a cheap "safety net" as a number 3 QB. I personally thought he would be an excellent starter in the NFL and was developing fine until the injury. I am at a loss as to why Gruden seems to be so negative toward this guy. Although the two undrafted rookies might be ok future QBs, do we really want one of them to be our "emergency" option in case of injuries or failures of Rex or Kyle? A proven veteran would be reluctant to sign on cheap as a #3. I think Simms would. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChileBear Posted July 14, 2008 Report Share Posted July 14, 2008 I'd prefer Leftwich... I think Leftwich would be a much better option. I, personally, don't think that Simms brings anything that we need. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AZ54 Posted July 15, 2008 Report Share Posted July 15, 2008 I don't see much value in signing Simms unless we cut one of the UDFAs. I'm not saying they're worth keeping around since nobody has seen them do anything but there's not enough reps in practice for 5 QBs. I don't see how can run a QB competition between 3 guys. That would really limit the snaps with the first offense for each QB and really hinder development of whoever ends up starting. Simms or Leftwich would be at a huge disadvantage at this point so I can't see them seriously competing for the #1 job. I can see either being our #3. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mongo3451 Posted July 15, 2008 Report Share Posted July 15, 2008 No to Simms. I'm not interested in signing another QB, unless they can develop into a franchise QB. There are none out there at this point, so our UDFA's have a better shot at being what we are looking for. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boston Boxer Posted July 15, 2008 Report Share Posted July 15, 2008 Simms would step in as our #2 and eventually beat out Rex for the starter without a doubt. Our QB situation suck and we go through this every year...with each new year we seem to forget how bad our QBs are. I say yes to simms Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wesson44 Posted July 15, 2008 Report Share Posted July 15, 2008 I say maybe to Simms, no to Leftwich, maybe to Culpepper. Now my reasons are as follows. With Simms what do you get, a QB with a good arm, slow reads and a little mobility. With leftwich you get a slow QB, bad throwing mechanics(2 slow)not mobile. With Culpepper you get a former Pro Bowler, can be very mobile and has a good arm. Now the tree did all bomb on their last teams but given the teams they played for......who wouldn't at the time. So with our team being geared to running the ball and not pass happy they might have a chance to do something good for us. Culpepper is a better fit if you ask me. Now our UDRFA have to show something or they will be either cut or one sent to the practice squad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChileBear Posted July 15, 2008 Report Share Posted July 15, 2008 No to Simms. I'm not interested in signing another QB, unless they can develop into a franchise QB. There are none out there at this point, so our UDFA's have a better shot at being what we are looking for. Well put Mongo. Simms is not going to come in and offer anything that we don't already have, IMdO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NeoBear Posted July 15, 2008 Report Share Posted July 15, 2008 I would rather bring Phil Simms out of retirement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Connorbear Posted July 16, 2008 Report Share Posted July 16, 2008 Please no. I do not see him as an improvement to what we have on the roster. Peace Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pixote Posted July 16, 2008 Report Share Posted July 16, 2008 Please no. I do not see him as an improvement to what we have on the roster. Peace I do not think he would be a guaranteed improvement over Rex or Kyle, time would tell as he is very raw himself, but I do believe he would be a HUGE upgrade as our #3. I like the looks of the 2 undrafted QBs but do we want one of them starting if Rex and Kyle both go down? It can happen. It has before. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Da Bears 88 Posted July 16, 2008 Report Share Posted July 16, 2008 Simms has more talent than Orton. Acquire him and get rid of Orton. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreatScott82 Posted July 17, 2008 Report Share Posted July 17, 2008 Simms has more talent than Orton. Acquire him and get rid of Orton. There is no way you get rid of Orton. Yeah he may not have the arm that Grossman has, but IMO he is smarter and has proven he can win games by being smart. Why would you get rid of a guy like that, he's a solid #2 and would be the best #3 in football if he is put back there. He is 13-4 in regular season action BTW. Simms had an injury that nearly ended his life, i would much rather look at a guy like Leftwhich. That is of course if Favre isn't available Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madlithuanian Posted July 17, 2008 Report Share Posted July 17, 2008 I agree on Orton. There's too much we don't know yet...and his pocket presence and record are too good to chuck out the door without seeing more first. I personally see no harm in bringing Simms in. He could end up being a solid QB after his injury. If not, it's not a lot of loot spent hoping and praying. I'm really not up on Leftwich...for a cheap price, I see no harm as a 3rd. But overall, I'm just not thinking there's much upside. I just do not want to see Favre in a Bears uni...he needs to be the spokeman for Vicodin now that he's pining for work. There is no way you get rid of Orton. Yeah he may not have the arm that Grossman has, but IMO he is smarter and has proven he can win games by being smart. Why would you get rid of a guy like that, he's a solid #2 and would be the best #3 in football if he is put back there. He is 13-4 in regular season action BTW. Simms had an injury that nearly ended his life, i would much rather look at a guy like Leftwhich. That is of course if Favre isn't available Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrackerDog Posted July 17, 2008 Report Share Posted July 17, 2008 I say maybe to Simms, no to Leftwich, maybe to Culpepper. Now my reasons are as follows. With Simms what do you get, a QB with a good arm, slow reads and a little mobility. With leftwich you get a slow QB, bad throwing mechanics(2 slow)not mobile. With Culpepper you get a former Pro Bowler, can be very mobile and has a good arm. Now the tree did all bomb on their last teams but given the teams they played for......who wouldn't at the time. So with our team being geared to running the ball and not pass happy they might have a chance to do something good for us. Culpepper is a better fit if you ask me. Now our UDRFA have to show something or they will be either cut or one sent to the practice squad. Culpepper isn't mobile anymore. Still, he is interesting. I didn't watch any of his play last season so I'm not sure what he has left in him. Three teams have had him and none are knocking on his door. That should tell us something. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bradjock Posted July 18, 2008 Report Share Posted July 18, 2008 I think this would be a very odd move, considering the Bears already have two unproven QB's on the roster battling things out and adding Simms would only make the process more difficult. This would mean you'd have 3 guys, all capable of being starters, all of whom have flashed some positive signs, battling for one job. Still, getting Simms gives you a guy who you could turn to if Orton/Rex don't go as planned and could potentially still be a guy that could be groomed as a starter and kept on when the Bears draft a QB next year (under the assumption that Rex/Kyle fail). If Rex/Kyle succeed, than oh well, Simms is a 3rd stringer this year and moves on to someplace else. When we were interested in getting Bruce Gradowski, the story was that he would be the clear #3. That tells me he wouldn't be brought into compete, but he'd be around for a year to learn the system, get back into football since he's been out so long, and be brought along slowly. In other words, we'd be signing him more for 2009 then for 2008. If/when Rex flops and is gone, in 2009 Simms would compete with Orton. (My guess is at this point we'd draft another QB fairly high and give him a "red-shirt" type season holding the clip-board) Either way, he'd be an upgrade as a #3 QB. If he comes cheap, like with signing Kevin Jones, why not bring him in? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxFan1 Posted July 18, 2008 Report Share Posted July 18, 2008 Why not bring in Simms and Leftwich on incentive laden contracts and let the 4 of them go at it in an open competition? Grossman vs Orton vs Leftwich vs Simms. Whats the worst that could happen? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
balta1701-A Posted July 18, 2008 Report Share Posted July 18, 2008 Why not bring in Simms and Leftwich on incentive laden contracts and let the 4 of them go at it in an open competition? Grossman vs Orton vs Leftwich vs Simms. Whats the worst that could happen? The worst that can happen is overkill...none of them get enough reps/snaps to actually develop any sort of a feel with the players here and therefore none of them develop and you essentially guarantee a QB disaster next year. There are only enough practice snaps to go around. If you think Leftwich or Simms will be significantly better than what you already have, ok bring them in and give them a tryout. But if you think they're roughly at the same level as your 2 guys now and you're just hoping something sticks...then just stick with the guys you have. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bradjock Posted July 19, 2008 Report Share Posted July 19, 2008 The worst that can happen is overkill...none of them get enough reps/snaps to actually develop any sort of a feel with the players here and therefore none of them develop and you essentially guarantee a QB disaster next year. There are only enough practice snaps to go around. If you think Leftwich or Simms will be significantly better than what you already have, ok bring them in and give them a tryout. But if you think they're roughly at the same level as your 2 guys now and you're just hoping something sticks...then just stick with the guys you have. Agreed. I said this already, but IMO any veteran QB we bring in we'll likely sign for at least two years, and they'll be groomed as an eventual replacement for Rex or Kyle. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.