In Gus I Trust

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

So why have teams in need of a starter not made any plays for him? First he went to NY where their QB situation was shaky but has now solidified, and now he moves on to Denver where he's very unlikely to see any time unless it's due to injury.

Because nobody in football knows anything about anything. Nobody wants to disrupt the cohesion and chemistry (and the subsequent losing) that their a bad QB brings.

And of course, if they did decide it was time for an upgrade, they'd probably shoot higher than Patrick Ramsey. Thus, a bunch of horrible QBs go in the first round, and bad teams stay bad.

Patrick Ramsey is worth about one more win over the course of an entire 16 game season than, say, Rex Grossman for example. But if you are the Bears, does it really make a lot of sense to cut Grossman and bring in Ramsey when you could have drafted a QB instead? It makes you look indecisive as a franchise and it seems that football execs would MUCH rather be seen as wrong than as indecisive.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Because nobody in football knows anything about anything. Nobody wants to disrupt the cohesion and chemistry (and the subsequent losing) that their a bad QB brings.

And of course, if they did decide it was time for an upgrade, they'd probably shoot higher than Patrick Ramsey. Thus, a bunch of horrible QBs go in the first round, and bad teams stay bad.

Patrick Ramsey is worth about one more win over the course of an entire 16 game season than, say, Rex Grossman for example. But if you are the Bears, does it really make a lot of sense to cut Grossman and bring in Ramsey when you could have drafted a QB instead? It makes you look indecisive as a franchise and it seems that football execs would MUCH rather be seen as wrong than as indecisive.

I'm really lost as to what you're trying to say here but I'll respond anyway.

Teams should make moves to improve their team. If you have a starting caliber QB sitting on a bench somewhere, why would you not want to bring him in, especially a younger guy like Ramsey who already has some starting experience??

Hell, Matt Schaub is a lot less proven than Ramsey at the NFL level and he's been handed a starting gig and the Texans went and cut Carr to clear the position for him. Does that make them indecisive because they decided that Carr wasn't cutting it and they would rather take their chances on Schaub?

If I were the Bears and I decided Grossman wasn't the answer, I sure as hell would try to make a move rather than worrying about how that move would be perceived.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

I'm really lost as to what you're trying to say here but I'll respond anyway.

Teams should make moves to improve their team. If you have a starting caliber QB sitting on a bench somewhere, why would you not want to bring him in, especially a younger guy like Ramsey who already has some starting experience??

Hell, Matt Schaub is a lot less proven than Ramsey at the NFL level and he's been handed a starting gig and the Texans went and cut Carr to clear the position for him. Does that make them indecisive because they decided that Carr wasn't cutting it and they would rather take their chances on Schaub?

If I were the Bears and I decided Grossman wasn't the answer, I sure as hell would try to make a move rather than worrying about how that move would be perceived.

My post wasn't very clear, but I think you got my drift.

The Texans could have upgraded their QB situation by signing Ramsey for a lot less money and without all those picks. But they would never have done that, and this actually is a good example of the point I was trying to make.

Ramsey would have been an upgrade over Carr, but in an effort to not seem indecisive, the Texans chose to pour a ton of money and picks into Schaub, emphatically making their decision.

Now, Schaub is a much better QB than Ramsey, and will prove so this year. But was he 8 million dollars a year and 2 second rounders better? That's tough to say.

If the Bears decided that Grossman wasn't the answer, I'm guessing they probably wouldn't be all like "we had 11 wins with Rex, but we could get this great value guy (Ramsey), and win 12 games!". They'd probably swing a blockbuster deal for an overvalued QB thats better, and would cost way more in both money and picks.

Thats why Ramsey has no starting job.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

If I were the Bears and I decided Grossman wasn't the answer, I sure as hell would try to make a move rather than worrying about how that move would be perceived.

I would too for sure, but I'm guessing once you were in the business, you'd realize just how much of a minority you were.

GMs and coaches will talk all night and day about how "winning is everything", but if one move is going to be received kindly to your peers, and the other is going to for all intents and purposes, slap them accross the face, the exec that does too much of the latter is going to find himself out of a job.

No matter how good he is at his job.

In the NFL, earning the respect of your peers is far more important than creating a winner. Granted, you can earn respect BY creating a winner, but you are going to stay around much longer being a well-respected loser, than a guy who has a bad rep around the league.