No playoff victories

Does this matter?

Oh, yeah, on Friday in the Tip Sheet column, it was noted that each of the wild-card games featured a quarterback with at least two playoff starts versus a quarterback who had none. Let the record show that the playoff-tested quarterbacks were 4-0 over the weekend. The eight starters for the division round have a combined 49 postseason starts. Only Rex Grossman of Chicago has no playoff starts. He and Seattle's Matt Hasselbeck are the only two without at least one playoff victory on their résumés. - Les P

I think Matt having played in one gives him an advantage but with Grossman "Manning" up this weekend?

 

Should be a help. I don't know if Grossman's relative lack of PT this year matters more for him getting in a rhythm or for us being able to scout/gameplan him. We blitzed Orton a lot and it didn't really help.

 

QBs making their first playoff appearances had a winning record prior to this weekend (I think they're now 1 game under .500), so no, I don't think it makes that big of a difference. Eli was pretty terrible down the stretch, so I don't think the playoff atmosphere was what screwed him, and then I don't think anyone knows how Grossman will react simply because he's played so few NFL games at any point in the season. Furthermore, Jake seemed to do just fine when he busted his playoff cherry two years ago.

 

Jake played his first playoff game v. quincy Carter I think. His first too. Jake's 2nd was v. Bulger, who was in his first.

 

I think Grossman is more likely to throw an interception and get us in good field position. if we score 14 points we have a great chance of winning.

 

Interesting article about Grossman from the Tribune
-----------------
Grossman just needs to be an Average Rex
BY RICK MORRISSEY
Chicago Tribune
CHICAGO - I can see you're nervous.

You saw what the Panthers did to the Giants in a 23-0 victory Sunday, and you're trying to come up with reasons the Bears' Rex Grossman is so much better than the New Yorker formerly known as an NFL quarterback, Eli Manning.

It can't be all those career starts (seven) Grossman has. It can't be experience, playoff or otherwise, because he doesn't have any.

It can't be because of Grossman's health history, what with his missing most of two seasons due to serious injuries. If you're honest, all you can come up with is that Grossman has a big lead in the freshness department. But we're talking about quarterbacks here, not lettuce.

Allow me to allay some of your fears. After much research into this season's NFC (Slogan: "Don't Tell Anybody, But We're Really, Really Average!"), I have come to the conclusion that as long as your quarterback isn't named Quasimodo or Quinn, you have a chance.

That's as good a reason as any why the Bears can beat Carolina in their playoff game Sunday at Soldier Field. They dominated the Panthers at home Nov. 20, as much as a 13-3 victory can be called dominating, and they did it with a nasty, angry defense.

For much of the season, I was convinced the Bears couldn't win in the playoffs without a quality quarterback. At some point - it very well could have been Kyle Orton's 136 passing yards against Carolina - I realized quarterbacks don't matter much in the NFC.

Look at the quarterbacks from the weekend's first-round NFC playoff games and, please, name me a great one. You can't, because there wasn't one. Manning threw three interceptions on three straight possessions in the third quarter Sunday.

People will be quick to say that, for once, Eli looked like his brother, the Colts' Peyton Manning, who historically has struggled in the playoffs. That's not fair to the much more talented Peyton. On Sunday, if somebody had said the two were distantly related, the reasonable response would have been, "You mean when single-celled organisms ruled Earth?"

Hmmmmm, great NFC quarterbacks. Carolina's Jake Delhomme? Do you remember what the Bears did to him in November? They sacked him eight times. When the game was over, he looked like a beached jellyfish.
Washington's Mark Brunell? Tampa Bay's Chris Simms? I don't think so.

For Grossman, the lesson from the weekend's playoff games was simple. Don't play like Simms and Manning, your fellow young and inexperienced quarterbacks. Mediocrity is underrated. An average game is enough. Whatever you do, don't make mistakes. They're killers.

Play like Brunell and Delhomme - decent quarterbacks, not great quarterbacks. A team can last in these playoffs by being a little better than good. Being the best team in the NFC is like being the best-looking Marx brother.

When Grossman lines up under center against Carolina, it will be his first live snap in three weeks. He sat out the season finale at Minnesota as a precaution against injury, and the team had a bye in the first round of the playoffs.

The Bears say they're not worried about a rusty Rex. They say Grossman will get all the work he needs in practice, but it's worth noting the Bears worked out only twice last week.

I can see you're still nervous.

You thought home-field advantage in a cold-weather city would be worth something, and then you saw the warm-weather Panthers go into Giants Stadium and all but express disappointment that hypothermia wasn't an issue.
You saw New York running back Tiki Barber, he of the 1,860 regular-season rushing yards, walk away with 41. And you couldn't help but wonder how the Bears' Thomas Jones would fare in a playoff game against these same Panthers.

Sunday at Soldier Field should be different. The Giants' defense is not the Bears' defense. Lovie Smith, in that drawl of his, needs to tell Grossman that all he needs to be is good enough.

If the Bears lose, it will be a major disappointment - not because of how far they've come or because of their poor playoff record of late. It will be a major disappointment because the NFC was there for the taking.
All they need is a mistake-free quarterback. It's not asking the world, is it?

 

Well, first of all, I keep hearing everybody say that chic 'thoroughly dominated the Panthers', etc. Now, I watched the game carefully. And yes, we abandoned the run and went pass whacky. We turned the ball over twice before the sacks began, and before we really tried to run. Smitty turned the ball over in a stoopid way.

But, they got 10 out of their 13 points on gift interceptions deep in their own territory. If I'm not mistaken, the other 3 came off smitty's fumble (a muff I believe) in their territory. Their Offense did less than we did, albeit mistake free to a point.

3 sacks came back to back near the end of the game when, with little time left, we went pass whacky in an obvious way.

We ran no screens OR draws to speak of, against a D that overpersues.

Sure, I guess they 'dominated us' by making us make mistakes, if that is the case, but offensively and defensively - take away the 2 ints and the muff, and I think it was not too far from even.

I'm not being a homer here, but if they think they are gonna 'dominate' us like they so called 'dominated' us last time, they are playing right into the hype they are being piled on. Without the absolute dumb two ints right off the bat, the whole games a different story- not that we'd have won necessarily, but certainly not this overall 'domination' I've been hearing and reading about by the media, et al.

We looked dumb in that game. We looked ill prepared. we looked like we took them lightly, with very little gameplanning. We didn't look like we have in the ps games since 2003.

But the bottom line, is if Jake doesn't throw gifts in this game, Grossman/Orton will have to play a bit better than 'average', cause we actually have a defense too.

There will be no domination Sunday. We may lose, but if we do it's because of dumb mistakes.

And also, what the fuk were they thinking leaving Grossman on the bench against the vikings? Was possible injury as much of a concern as a relatively inexperienced player getting almost no reps this year sitting the bench instead of getting some PT the last game before a PO game?

I'm not real sure if all that was a smart move. He didn't play against our D last time, and he dang sure hasn't played against a good D like ours this year (especially the D we have taken to the ps). Plus the jitters of the PO, I just don't see how he's gonna play mistake free if he needs to make more than very conservative plays or has to make any long drives under pressure Sunday.

 

I like your comments. When playing aganst strong Ds it is very important not to make stupid mistakes. That's the key. Don't get behind.

As far as inexperienced QBs go, What makes them skakey IMO is their tendancy to hold the ball too long when trying to catch up. This alows sacks which in turn makes them jumpy in the pocket leading to INTs. Orton was very cool in the pocket, not making this kinda mistake. I don't know about Grossman. He certainly is not going to sit in the pocket and produce more yardage than Orton with our rush D.

I hope jake is much more patient this time around. Until we gain field position we can't have him being the gunslinger.