Matt Barkley

[richig07]

Richig07, I'm not attempting to be antagonistic here, but I hope you are watching Cousins tonight. Actually Barkley reminds me a lot of Cousins a year and a half ago... The conversation occurring here was almost the exact conversation that played out around D.C. about Cousins... It is why he still hasn't got a contract. He passes the eye test, but makes some bad mistakes, so they waited.... Now, it's gonna cost the Skins a ton.

Cousins is showing he isn't over the occasional gaffes as we speak, but... My point is more that maybe we.should commit to Barkley on a 2-3 year deal at about $8-10 million per year with maybe $15 million of it guaranteed rather than waiting for the price to get ridiculous. Thoughts?

I am a big Cousins fan, and he played essentially flawless football the month-plus prior to that game last night. So, I really can't condemn a guy for one bad game.

I would be on board with a 2-3 year deal for Barkley, but 10 mil per year? I highly doubt he gets that. He's still going to be relatively dirt cheap. IMO, he'll get high end backup QB type of money.

 

[richig07]

Barkley>>>Hoyer IMO. Hoyer couldn't score with the starters.


Unless Cousins completely shits the bed, Washington will sign him or tag him again. They've already stated as much. Granted, things can change, but it's not like they have another option lined up.


I know I sound like a broken record, but I fail to see a scenario that beats out Matt Barkley for the starting job next year. Cutler is gone. Hoyer is an aging backup. The list of FA QB's is shit, and even if we draft a QB high, Matt would have to completely shit the bed in camp and preseason, and the aforementioned Rookie would have to look like Tom freaking Brady, to warrant starting him over Barkley.

The kid has earned the job IMO, and the Bears would be retarded not to sign him. He'd come at a cheap-ass price and he can play. I would love to hear a better option, but I don't see it.

.

I think bringing back both Barkley and Hoyer is actually a good plan. Hoyer is not a great long-term option, but he is a tremendous one or two game spot starter. Could easily be the difference between 8-8 or 10-6.

 

[wood20ks]

Lotta rumors about Romo.



Ima be pissed if they bring him in. NO RETREADS.

 

[beardown07]

I would be on board with a 2-3 year deal for Barkley, but 10 mil per year? I highly doubt he gets that. He's still going to be relatively dirt cheap. IMO, he'll get high end backup QB type of money.

I think bringing back both Barkley and Hoyer is actually a good plan. Hoyer is not a great long-term option, but he is a tremendous one or two game spot starter. Could easily be the difference between 8-8 or 10-6.

I agree with both of these. The price is one reason I think Barkley is a no-brainer to sign. I also would take Hoyer again as a backup to Barkley.

Then draft a QB in the top half of the draft.


I wanna see more of Barkley. I think his stats would be out of sight without all the drops. He needs to eliminate the turnovers, but none of them have been Cutler-esque back-breakers. I thought the two INT's against Green Bay were pretty ugly, but in his defense, the first one should've been a defensive holding, and the second, it would've helped if Braverman even hinted at acting like he might be involved in the play. Dude never so much as even glanced back at his QB.

 

[richig07]

I agree with both of these. The price is one reason I think Barkley is a no-brainer to sign. I also would take Hoyer again as a backup to Barkley.

Then draft a QB in the top half of the draft.


I wanna see more of Barkley. I think his stats would be out of sight without all the drops. He needs to eliminate the turnovers, but none of them have been Cutler-esque back-breakers. I thought the two INT's against Green Bay were pretty ugly, but in his defense, the first one should've been a defensive holding, and the second, it would've helped if Braverman even hinted at acting like he might be involved in the play. Dude never so much as even glanced back at his QB.

Well, yeah, but those balls were air-mailed and into a sea of white jerseys. Holding or not... looking back or not... both were pretty shitty throws.

His stats would be 18-20 completions better, but I'm not sure how far that gets you. 75 QB rating to 80? Then some yardage and another TD on the Bellamy drop?

He looks very solid, and I like him. He's made a few mistakes, but he's only started four games. I would be quite happy about him as the QB next year.

 

[Payton]

I am a big Cousins fan, and he played essentially flawless football the month-plus prior to that game last night. So, I really can't condemn a guy for one bad game.

I would be on board with a 2-3 year deal for Barkley, but 10 mil per year? I highly doubt he gets that. He's still going to be relatively dirt cheap. IMO, he'll get high end backup QB type of money.

All the better if he's cheaper. Was just imagining that Barkley's agent is going to pull the ole, "Well, if you are wanting him to be the starter for a couple of years to kick the tires, he should be paid 'starter money'...".

I mean heck, if we can sign him for $5-7 Million or less that'd be freaking awesome!

But yeah, wasn't ragging on Cousins for one bad game really, but just that he is not in the Brady/Rodgers/Brees class at this point... Seems the common comparison for what Cousins is around these parts is more of an Andy Dalton... And that works just fine as long as you have the other pieces in place...

 

[Payton]

I agree with both of these. The price is one reason I think Barkley is a no-brainer to sign. I also would take Hoyer again as a backup to Barkley.

Then draft a QB in the top half of the draft.


I wanna see more of Barkley. I think his stats would be out of sight without all the drops. He needs to eliminate the turnovers, but none of them have been Cutler-esque back-breakers. I thought the two INT's against Green Bay were pretty ugly, but in his defense, the first one should've been a defensive holding, and the second, it would've helped if Braverman even hinted at acting like he might be involved in the play. Dude never so much as even glanced back at his QB.

It all depends on who we are targeting to draft I guess... Nothing really excites me here. If Watson or Kizer drops into the 2nd or 3rd round? Sure why not! (Don't see that happening, just saying).

Guess we'll hear more about prospects in the coming months.

 

[beardown07]

It all depends on who we are targeting to draft I guess... Nothing really excites me here. If Watson or Kizer drops into the 2nd or 3rd round? Sure why not! (Don't see that happening, just saying).

Guess we'll hear more about prospects in the coming months.

That's one reason why I think Barkley is the likely starter.


There is jusy no one that stands out as a guaranteed stud coming out of college.

 

[anotheridiot]

Lets not forget the guy who had the most to offer was also in a QB logjam being Connor Shaw. Without that broken leg we pretty much all chose him over Hoyer.

 

[richig07]

It all depends on who we are targeting to draft I guess... Nothing really excites me here. If Watson or Kizer drops into the 2nd or 3rd round? Sure why not! (Don't see that happening, just saying).

Guess we'll hear more about prospects in the coming months.

I wouldn't touch either of those guys with a 10 foot pole. Tribusky is the only guy I would even remotely consider. Kaaya in the 2nd or 3rd if he falls, and we decide to take a flier. I'd be okay with that. Watson and Kizer will be downright busts as QB's in the NFL, IMO.

 

[richig07]

Lets not forget the guy who had the most to offer was also in a QB logjam being Connor Shaw. Without that broken leg we pretty much all chose him over Hoyer.

Yeah, I was most certainly in that camp. I was very intrigued by Shaw, and was on a plane for that 3rd pre-season game. When I heard Shaw got hurt, I was quite disappointed.

Barkley, Hoyer and Shaw coming back as our QB corp is fine with me. Or even Barkley, Shaw and a rookie. Save the few mil we'd spend on Hoyer, and go grab some more depth elsewhere.

 

[Payton]

I wouldn't touch either of those guys with a 10 foot pole. Tribusky is the only guy I would even remotely consider. Kaaya in the 2nd or 3rd if he falls, and we decide to take a flier. I'd be okay with that. Watson and Kizer will be downright busts as QB's in the NFL, IMO.

So will Kaaya. Watched enough of him to come away severely underwhelmed.

 

[beardown07]

Yeah, I was most certainly in that camp. I was very intrigued by Shaw, and was on a plane for that 3rd pre-season game. When I heard Shaw got hurt, I was quite disappointed.

Barkley, Hoyer and Shaw coming back as our QB corp is fine with me. Or even Barkley, Shaw and a rookie. Save the few mil we'd spend on Hoyer, and go grab some more depth elsewhere.

I have my doubts as to whether Shaw will be ready to go by week 1 of next year.



I have worries, that he might not ever play again. I know they do some miraculous shit with these kids these days, but that shit was BAD.

 

[richig07]

So will Kaaya. Watched enough of him to come away severely underwhelmed.

Yeah, that's fair enough. I've never been over impressed with him either. However, there's some scouts who seem to like him.

IMO, Trubisky is the only guy I think is worth a shot at in this class.

 

[beardown07]

I'm telling ya, they have been "meaningless games",(tell that to the opposition), but Barkley has played with as much poise and calm as I've seen in some time in a Bears Jersey. His pocket presence, and quite frankly, his guts to stay alive and not "sack it in", has been impressive. He's made mistakes, but his moxie in battling back from said mistakes and wherewithal to "get over em'" has been great.

The Bears are a team whose season has been over, far before Barkley was even a thought in people's mind, and he has managed to generate the most excitement all season, and has people taking notice. There is a lot to be excited about, with the Bears going forward. Howard is a bonafide stud, at 21. The D has a great foundation. The o-line is becoming legit. Whitehair is a perennial probowler that warranted consideration this year.


I am stoked about Pace. I think he's getting shit done. I am on record as saying this last offseason is the best that the Bears have had in a long time.

 

[Payton]

Yeah, that's fair enough. I've never been over impressed with him either. However, there's some scouts who seem to like him.

IMO, Trubisky is the only guy I think is worth a shot at in this class.

I honestly don't know enough about him, even though I'm an ACC fan...

Oh well, it just seems like that type of QB class where you don't want to be that team that reaches for a QB because the odds are pretty good that it will be a wasted pick... If we get a guy mid to late round, that's cool... Just don't want to jump because the "experts" think a particular guy is the top QB "in this class"... I think we can agree that doesn't mean a whole bunch this year...

 

[richig07]

All the better if he's cheaper. Was just imagining that Barkley's agent is going to pull the ole, "Well, if you are wanting him to be the starter for a couple of years to kick the tires, he should be paid 'starter money'...".

I mean heck, if we can sign him for $5-7 Million or less that'd be freaking awesome!

Well, whatever price Barkley was 24 hours ago, that stock definitely took a hit following today's performance.

 

[anotheridiot]

Do they just play Fales in the third quarter next game?

 

[JoeyTourettes]

The past 2 weeks should have ended the Matt Barkley love affair in Chicago. For WEEKS and weeks the major scouts have said to not get too excited about Barkley. Chicago didn't listen, for ONE big reason: he was NOT Jay Cutler. ALL the reasons (excuses) I have given Jay over the years have been spouted about Barkley in the past month- Drops, bad routes, bad play calling, "look who his receivers are!!", "He's got a bad OLINE!!"

There is one semi-valid reason that the Barkley hopeful have always come back to... "He's only started 4-5 games!" While I understand that if Jay had this same stat line over the past 2 weeks- they would be justified in saying that he shouldn't be doing that in year 10. That's true. I can't imagine what would have happened to Jay if he had the same stat line- 8 TD's 16 interceptions. Death threats for sure.... but for some reason Barkley is STILL being linked as a potential starter? Whaaaaat? The hypocriticalness of Bears fans is crazy.

Just so I'm Clear:
Conner Shaw, Brian Hoyer, Matt Barkley. ARE NOT THE ANSWER.

Conner Shaw is TERRIBLE. In his one NFL start he had 50% comp. 1 INT and a lost fumble. NOT The answer. DO NOT want him, and you shouldn't either. But he looked decent in a smattering of PRE-SEASON attempts?? WHAAAT? (oh yeah he's NOT Cutler)

Brian Hoyer: has played for 5 teams....in 8 years... That should be enough to tell you he's not good enough. And NO I don't want him either.

Matt Barkley: The above should be enough to sway you away from him, but of course (he's NOT Jay) He's been on 3 rosters in 3 years. And WAS on the street earlier this year. He's had a few bright spots, but No...just NO.

I'm NOT advocating for Jay Cutler anymore. If he's not back next year I get it, and at this point I'm ready for the change too... I'm just shining a light on the insanity of Bears fans. PLEASE see the light- DON'T settle for mediocre QB play just because it's NOT Cutler.

 

[beardown07]

DON'T settle for mediocre QB play just because it's NOT Cutler.

Don't tell me what to do. lulz Fuck Jay. I'm done with him and his personal black cloud. Kid is cursed.


Ftr, Cutler has had so many 4 INT games, you could choke on em'. The most noticeable difference between Jay and EVERYONE else, is that no matter how shitty the OTHER guy is, their respective teammates play harder for them. The team almost always seems to play better football, when Jay is not behind Center. It may not be as exhilarating, but is it BETTER, as a whole.


I say sign Matt and Hoyer, and get their fucking shit together in the Draft, and find that young stud.

It's either that, or bring back Jay, or some re-tread like Romo, and I personally would like to see the first-mentioned option.