The "official" answer is that he is a winner. That is a load of poo-poo. Bears are a conservative team- if they are winning, they don't want to change anything about their strategy, and that includes their QB.
The logical answer is that he is the best that they had, so they kinda had to support him. Supporting Griese would have undermined them in the long run, so they just let Rex keep playing.
The "true" answer, in my opinion, is just that they couldn't afford a better QB. Bears are a defensive team- always have been, always will be. In order to have a defensive powerhouse like the one theyve built up, they need to use their high draft picks on defenders. The defense eats up the $$$ - between Urlacher, Harris, Briggs, Brown, and the CB duo, it's a wonder that they aren't bankrupt. Nobody wants to be the first Chicago coach to say, "screw defense, I'm drafting a QB first round, and releasing a linebacker to pay for him." Chicago may just lynch that guy.
2007-02-04 16:49:19
·
answer #1
·
answered by Bobby S 4
·
2⤊
2⤋
You can say that Rex didn't have a part in taking the Bears to the Superbowl, but you would be wrong. You don't trade for a new QB when your last one took you to the Superbowl. Everyone makes him out to be the worst QB in the league.
2007-02-05 01:06:54
·
answer #2
·
answered by 7 Words You Can't Say On T.V 6
·
1⤊
1⤋
Okay... well, he sucks, I know. He pretty much ruined it for Da Bears, but, you gotta understand nothing was going for the Bears that game. People are gonna be on his back alot this offseason, but, maybe the Bears should give him one more chance. You never know... he can prove everyone wrong. If not, then they should trade him. He looked pretty pissed at the end of the game, and he said he would just practice and practice this offseason.
2007-02-08 21:06:49
·
answer #3
·
answered by lovinglife~ 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Here goes one for you, the Bears could have won if they had kept the Colts out of the end zone, and stopped them from getting within field goal range. Blame it all on Rex if you want, its not all his fault. He had two bad throws and lost a fumble, wow yeah he must suck. Get off the guys back, you think you could do better then go try out for the squad.
2007-02-05 00:58:27
·
answer #4
·
answered by Kenneth W 3
·
1⤊
1⤋
ha! i knew all along that rex gross sucked. at least kyle orton never single handedly cost the bears the game. i wasnt forgetting anything. i guaranteed my friend that rex was going to be accountable for at least 2 TO's i said he would throw an INT and fumble at least once. turns out i was right. rex sucks, i hope the bears get a new QB, well actually i dont cuz i hate the bears anyway.
2007-02-05 00:41:18
·
answer #5
·
answered by what? 7
·
2⤊
2⤋
Man, Grossman was the worst! The Bears really need to cut him! It was one of the worst Super Bowls I had seen in a while! Since, i was cheering for da Bears!
2007-02-05 01:24:38
·
answer #6
·
answered by american_living_in_japan 1
·
1⤊
2⤋
I agree that Rex is a crappy QB, but he is not the worst one out there as long as the Raiders still have Aaron Brooks.
2007-02-05 06:57:09
·
answer #7
·
answered by stan l 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
He made plays when he needed to make plays.
Yes he made several mistakes, but none the less he was the signal caller. He was the man who took each snap and they relied on him. Even though the defense was fantastic and special teams made the games differences, Grossman was still a factor in winning. Like they all say, don't fix what isn't broke. And the Bears were not broke.
2007-02-05 00:40:06
·
answer #8
·
answered by Tyler E 4
·
1⤊
3⤋
Rex just lost his job, today. I bet the bears are going to look to trade for a serviceable replacement like David Carr. Rex sunk his team today.
2007-02-05 01:02:57
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋
He is a young quarterback and the bears are hoping that over time he will mature and become a better player. While in the short term he is horrible, they are hoping long term that he becomes a better player.
2007-02-05 00:43:47
·
answer #10
·
answered by b598650 2
·
1⤊
1⤋