DABEARSDABOMB Posted March 10, 2009 Report Share Posted March 10, 2009 The Bears do not have anything close to a proven NFL quarterback behind Kyle Orton, but in Jeff Garcia they could have one of the best backups in the NFL. Garcia is an experienced, productive veteran who still has good mobility at 39. Because there are some durability concerns with Garcia, he may not get many opportunities to compete for a starting job. He's a great insurance policy, however, and he would provide competition for Orton. Garcia's passer rating has been over 90 in each of the last three seasons, during which he has thrown 35 TD passes and just 12 interceptions. Bears general manager Jerry Angelo has left open the possibility of adding a veteran quarterback after the draft, but Garcia may be long gone by then. -- Chicago Sun-Times He wouldn't be a bad backup, but obviously if Orton doesn't pan out the Bears would still be in need for a QB. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted March 10, 2009 Report Share Posted March 10, 2009 [/i][/b]He wouldn't be a bad backup, but obviously if Orton doesn't pan out the Bears would still be in need for a QB. Hell, if Garcia comes to Chicago I could see how Orton would be the backup! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrunkBomber Posted March 10, 2009 Report Share Posted March 10, 2009 I really like Garcia and wouldnt mind the gamble but he is going to want to at least be able to compete for a starting job and he struggles when hes not in a WCO. I dont think he fits our system ery well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted March 10, 2009 Report Share Posted March 10, 2009 I really like Garcia and wouldnt mind the gamble but he is going to want to at least be able to compete for a starting job and he struggles when hes not in a WCO. I dont think he fits our system ery well. What System!?!?!? I don't care what anyone thinks about Garcia, that dude makes plays. If on the Bears' roster, he's probably already a better option than Orton. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrunkBomber Posted March 10, 2009 Report Share Posted March 10, 2009 What System!?!?!? I don't care what anyone thinks about Garcia, that dude makes plays. If on the Bears' roster, he's probably already a better option than Orton. WCO-San Francisco, Philly, Tampa Bay Non-WCO- Detroit, Cleveland That system Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrunkBomber Posted March 10, 2009 Report Share Posted March 10, 2009 I agree hes much better than Orton though. I think hes very good when in the right offense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted March 10, 2009 Report Share Posted March 10, 2009 WCO-San Francisco, Philly, Tampa Bay Non-WCO- Detroit, Cleveland That system That's not what I'm questioning. I'm questioning whether or not the Bears have a system. It's supposed to be similar to the west coast, but I think it's just because the OC sucks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrunkBomber Posted March 10, 2009 Report Share Posted March 10, 2009 I wish I knew what was going on in Ron Turners mind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DABEARSDABOMB Posted March 10, 2009 Author Report Share Posted March 10, 2009 Hell, if Garcia comes to Chicago I could see how Orton would be the backup! If the Bears brought in Garcia to start it would be a terrible terrible move. If you sign him, its to be a backup and insurance policy in case Orton gets hurt or turns into a downright disaster. Otherwise, if the Bears don't believe in Kyle, they should be doing what they can to ensure they can draft a QB that they think could be a franchise guy (ie, Sanchez and moving up to do so). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
'TD' Posted March 10, 2009 Report Share Posted March 10, 2009 I still think that if the Bears don't draft a QB, Grossman will be brought back. The market hasn't been there for him, and for the Bears at least he knows the "System". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BearSox Posted March 10, 2009 Report Share Posted March 10, 2009 Pass, it'd be a waste of money. Garcia can only play in the WCO, especially at this point in his career. I really wouldn't like him as a backup either. There'd be virtually no upside with a move like this. At least with someone like Leftwich there is some upside with signing him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akshaz Posted March 11, 2009 Report Share Posted March 11, 2009 At least with someone like Leftwich there is some upside with signing him. Just bring in somebody that can help us!! The way it looks, JA is content with Orton as the unquestioned starter. This infuriates me!! After the season, JA sounded like he was serious about improving the position. I guess he changed his mind after they had their meetings. Without a solid QB, we'll never be consistently good. We may have a good year or two. But, until we get this position settled, we'll be mired in mediocrity. It's frustrating that the team doesn't understand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BearSox Posted March 11, 2009 Report Share Posted March 11, 2009 Maybe we are planning on making a move for Sanchez in the draft? Hopefully not Freeman though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stinger226 Posted March 11, 2009 Report Share Posted March 11, 2009 Pass, it'd be a waste of money. Garcia can only play in the WCO, especially at this point in his career. I really wouldn't like him as a backup either. There'd be virtually no upside with a move like this. At least with someone like Leftwich there is some upside with signing him. We run the west coast offense. Short throws, throwing out of the backfield, TEs are in the game plan, and get off the bus running. He would be a seasoned QB for a short term. I think he would fit right in and not cost alot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
azbearsfan Posted March 11, 2009 Report Share Posted March 11, 2009 Nothing wrong with the offense if the line is set. Garcia would be just fine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrunkBomber Posted March 11, 2009 Report Share Posted March 11, 2009 We run the west coast offense. Short throws, throwing out of the backfield, TEs are in the game plan, and get off the bus running. He would be a seasoned QB for a short term. I think he would fit right in and not cost alot. We absolutely dont run the west coast offense. The only real similarity would be the mid range passes but the WCO is a pass first, short drop offense built around accurate QBs who are good at spreading the ball around. We run a run up the middle on first, throw an underthrown bomb to Hester hoping for a PI on second and a dump off pass on third and long thats behind the line of scrimmage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
azbearsfan Posted March 11, 2009 Report Share Posted March 11, 2009 We absolutely dont run the west coast offense. The only real similarity would be the mid range passes but the WCO is a pass first, short drop offense built around accurate QBs who are good at spreading the ball around. We run a run up the middle on first, throw an underthrown bomb to Hester hoping for a PI on second and a dump off pass on third and long thats behind the line of scrimmage. I sort of disagree. "Get off the bus running" aside, I think Turner wants to pass to set up the run. I dont know if he is technically "west coast" because he likes to throw it deep, but he wants to pass. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrunkBomber Posted March 11, 2009 Report Share Posted March 11, 2009 I sort of disagree. "Get off the bus running" aside, I think Turner wants to pass to set up the run. I dont know if he is technically "west coast" because he likes to throw it deep, but he wants to pass. Either way, we are absolutely a run first team. We run mostly 5-7 step drops. We dont have a QB that can scan the field quickly and get rid of the ball fast and not make a lot of mistakes. We dont have WRs that are good at timing routes. A great example of a WCO offense was what Griese and Tampa did to us this year. The WCO basically replaces the running game with three step drop passes. If you just look at the teams that run WCO offenses its very obvious we dont. Philly, Tampa, Seattle... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
azbearsfan Posted March 11, 2009 Report Share Posted March 11, 2009 Either way, we are absolutely a run first team. We run mostly 5-7 step drops. We dont have a QB that can scan the field quickly and get rid of the ball fast and not make a lot of mistakes. We dont have WRs that are good at timing routes. A great example of a WCO offense was what Griese and Tampa did to us this year. The WCO basically replaces the running game with three step drop passes. If you just look at the teams that run WCO offenses its very obvious we dont. Philly, Tampa, Seattle... Again. I disagree. I dont think Turner is a run first guy. I know everyone clings to the "get off the bus running" quote, but he uses the pass to set up the run. We did plenty of throwing to the running back to replace some of the runs, so, again, we aren't a prototypical WCO, but I think Turner kind of runs his own brand of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mongo3451 Posted March 11, 2009 Report Share Posted March 11, 2009 Either way, we are absolutely a run first team. We run mostly 5-7 step drops. We dont have a QB that can scan the field quickly and get rid of the ball fast and not make a lot of mistakes. We dont have WRs that are good at timing routes. A great example of a WCO offense was what Griese and Tampa did to us this year. The WCO basically replaces the running game with three step drop passes. If you just look at the teams that run WCO offenses its very obvious we dont. Philly, Tampa, Seattle... We don't run 5-7 step drops. We overwhelmingly use 3 step drops. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stinger226 Posted March 11, 2009 Report Share Posted March 11, 2009 We don't run 5-7 step drops. We overwhelmingly use 3 step drops. We dont have the proper personal to run the true WCO but we use a form of it. Montana had Roger Craig who led had just as many yards receiving as he did rushing. The 3 step drop, short throws, throwing to the backs, TEs, its as close as you get. Alexander in Seatle during there hayday, had lots of receptions beside leading the league in rushing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfoligno Posted March 11, 2009 Report Share Posted March 11, 2009 While I don't want to argue whether or not our OC sucks, might another reason we don't have a system, or the system our OC wants to run, is because we don't have the players to run it? Just curious. Frankly, so many teams are said to run a "variation" of the WCO, I don't even know what the hell it is anymore. But isn't a key aspect of the system route running? Well, since our WRs (a) struggle to get quick sep off the LOS and than ( are not great route runners, I wonder if we have had the talent to run the system our OC wants. Is the TE a key element in the WCO? If so, what out 2 TE sets? To me, I think the problem in discussing what our system is, is that we may lack the talent to run the system we want. Do you think, if given the ideal choice, Turner would most prefer to run a 2 TE system, and yet w/ our personnel, does he have much of a choice? That's not what I'm questioning. I'm questioning whether or not the Bears have a system. It's supposed to be similar to the west coast, but I think it's just because the OC sucks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfoligno Posted March 11, 2009 Report Share Posted March 11, 2009 You beat me to it. Turner said, in a Q & A, that we had to run mostly 3 step drops due to our OL. He sounded like he would love to run more 5 and 7 step drops, but knew that would get Orton killed. We don't run 5-7 step drops. We overwhelmingly use 3 step drops. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfoligno Posted March 11, 2009 Report Share Posted March 11, 2009 Agreed, and that is what I said in another post. Frankly, I don't know what Turner would choose to run, but when you look at our personnel, our best set is likely a 2 TE formation as Olsen and Clark as better than most of our WRs, and absolutely better options than any of our WRs beyond Hester. I know longer really know what a WCO offense is, as so many teams run so many different "variations" of it, but (a) we lack WRs capable of solid route running, which I always thought was a key in the WCO and ( our best set w/ our current personnel is most likely a two TE set, which I do not think fits the traditional idea of WCO. We dont have the proper personal to run the true WCO but we use a form of it. Montana had Roger Craig who led had just as many yards receiving as he did rushing. The 3 step drop, short throws, throwing to the backs, TEs, its as close as you get. Alexander in Seatle during there hayday, had lots of receptions beside leading the league in rushing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
azbearsfan Posted March 11, 2009 Report Share Posted March 11, 2009 Agreed, and that is what I said in another post. Frankly, I don't know what Turner would choose to run, but when you look at our personnel, our best set is likely a 2 TE formation as Olsen and Clark as better than most of our WRs, and absolutely better options than any of our WRs beyond Hester. I know longer really know what a WCO offense is, as so many teams run so many different "variations" of it, but (a) we lack WRs capable of solid route running, which I always thought was a key in the WCO and ( our best set w/ our current personnel is most likely a two TE set, which I do not think fits the traditional idea of WCO. Didn't Turner also say in Q and A that he wanted to get a legit WR or something? That would add to the notion of not having the players. I think also if we could improve the line that he would feel better about making the offense more dynamic. 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.