Should Chicago stick with Chase Daniel if he plays well enough?

[PapaShogun 2,911]

10 hours ago, Jakuvious said:

I think the difficulty is, this is really more a question about their plans for Trubisky than anything Daniel does. Because I do think Daniel is likely to play better than Trubisky has thus far, even if only because it's kind of hard not to. And I think he gives them a better shot to win this year. But I don't think you can make that move without it effectively being a give up on Trubisky. I can't remember a time a young, highly drafted QB, was benched for a journeyman vet, and was later given the starting job back and went on to be a good QB for the team that drafted him. I guess the Bucs are basically a year removed from that situation with Winston, but I doubt he goes on to succeed. So I think if you make that choice, you're basically saying you've given up on Trubisky. Which might not be the wrong move, but I doubt Chicago is ready and willing to do that. Teams are so slow to move on from QBs they invested heavily in.

So I guess, I think it would be the smart move, but I'm not sure they're able to do it.

Troy Aikman got hurt after the Cowboys started 7-5 in 1991. He was playing ehhh? Steve Beuerlein replaced him, and the Cowboys went 5-0, and won a playoff game. Troy could have returned when healthy, but coach Jimmy Johnson stuck with Steve. Troy obviously got healthy, amd went on to have a HOF career.

Drew Brees was benched his third year for long time journeyman Doug Flutie. Brees turned his career around the very next season, but the Chargers drafted Rivers, Brees hurt his elbow in week 17 of the 2005 season, and well yeah off to The Big Easy.

Edited October 6 by PapaShogun

[ronjon1990 381]

They should trade for someone before the deadline. 

[LeotheLion 361]

11 hours ago, JustAnotherFan said:

If he plays like he did against the Vikings then the Bears are in trouble.

I really wish people would actually watch the games instead of box score scouting.

And I like Daniel because of Mizzou but he has such a defined ceiling at QB that imo would prevent the Bears from winning the Super Bowl. The Bears have the defense that they need to pick whoever gives them the best shot at winning it all and that has to be Trubisky. You just hope he gets better throughout the year and is playing his best football in January. 

[fortdetroit 57]

8 minutes ago, LeotheLion said:

And I like Daniel because of Mizzou but he has such a defined ceiling at QB that imo would prevent the Bears from winning the Super Bowl. The Bears have the defense that they need to pick whoever gives them the best shot at winning it all and that has to be Trubisky. You just hope he gets better throughout the year and is playing his best football in January. 

With the defense they have, the Bears just need someone to play it safe, go through his progressions, and avoid completing missing the wide open receivers. They don’t need a playmaking QB with that defense.

[LeotheLion 361]

4 minutes ago, fortdetroit said:

With the defense they have, the Bears just need someone to play it safe, go through his progressions, and avoid completing missing the wide open receivers. They don’t need a playmaking QB with that defense.

I find it almost impossible that Daniel can win 3 or 4 playoff games even with that defense. I also don't think Trubisky can right now either but he can still get better. Daniel at this point is who he is going to be. 

[fortdetroit 57]

3 minutes ago, LeotheLion said:

I find it almost impossible that Daniel can win 3 or 4 playoff games even with that defense. I also don't think Trubisky can right now either but he can still get better. Daniel at this point is who he is going to be. 

Well I don’t think either of them is realistically good enough to do that. I just think Daniel gives them a better chance.

[mattyice0401 31]

11 hours ago, JustAnotherFan said:

If he plays like he did against the Vikings then the Bears are in trouble.

I really wish people would actually watch the games instead of box score scouting.

Sorry mate I dont have TV, Gotta make do with what I got and go off with what I read.

[JustAnotherFan 2,093]

28 minutes ago, fortdetroit said:

With the defense they have, the Bears just need someone to play it safe, go through his progressions, and avoid completing missing the wide open receivers. They don’t need a playmaking QB with that defense.

None of this describes Daniel though.....

[JustAnotherFan 2,093]

1 hour ago, ronjon1990 said:

They should trade for someone before the deadline. 

Trading for players mid-season cost more than they are in the off-season and there is no viable option on the market who is worth trading for.

If Mitch doesn't work out then the season is lost anyhow. No reason to take unnecessary risks. 

[JustAnotherFan 2,093]

So....are we done talking about this now?

[RaidersAreOne 3,652]

1 minute ago, JustAnotherFan said:

So....are we done talking about this now?

He had a very bad game. 2 picks, could/should have been 3. Took some bad sacks. Threw some absolute ducks and the WR's made incredible catches. 

[showtime 2,282]

51 minutes ago, RaidersAreOne said:

He had a very bad game. 2 picks, could/should have been 3. Took some bad sacks. Threw some absolute ducks and the WR's made incredible catches. 

Even with all of that, they still could have won the game.  The Bears defense is supposed to be this highly touted unit, yet they got chewed up on the ground.  Both of Daniel's interceptions were really bad, but they looked like poor communication.  His last one, it looked like he was throwing to a spot and his receiver wasn't anywhere near there.  It was a horrible throw/decision, but he had to make a play since they were losing.... you know, since their defense got drove on and gave up another rushing TD just prior to that possession.

[JustAnotherFan 2,093]

27 minutes ago, showtime said:

Even with all of that, they still could have won the game.  The Bears defense is supposed to be this highly touted unit, yet they got chewed up on the ground.  Both of Daniel's interceptions were really bad, but they looked like poor communication.  His last one, it looked like he was throwing to a spot and his receiver wasn't anywhere near there.  It was a horrible throw/decision, but he had to make a play since they were losing.... you know, since their defense got drove on and gave up another rushing TD just prior to that possession.

Chase is that you? You were garbage again today. Please retire.

[showtime 2,282]

2 minutes ago, JustAnotherFan said:

Chase is that you? You were garbage again today. Please retire.

I'm just saying.  They put up 21 points.  He threw two touchdowns.  Chase Daniel is not a good QB, definitely not a starting quality QB in this league.  The guy came in and put up some points.  This is supposed to be the best defense in football and they got shredded on the ground.  Daniel played as well as he could have today, most likely.  

The Bears defense has to hold the L.  Just my opinion.

[blkwdw13 318]

Just now, showtime said:

I'm just saying.  They put up 21 points.  He threw two touchdowns.  Chase Daniel is not a good QB, definitely not a starting quality QB in this league.  The guy came in and put up some points.  This is supposed to be the best defense in football and they got shredded on the ground.  Daniel played as well as he could have today, most likely.  

The Bears defense has to hold the L.  Just my opinion.

Sorry you didn't watch the game, Daniel was not good.

But I'm also not saying Trubisky good.