[CBFF] [Fwd: Why didn't Bears draft a quarterback?]

[Westmalle van 't vat]

On 5/2/08 8:04 AM, "Phil DeNomme" <pdenomme at gmail.com> wrote:

> You know, I was pretty disappointed they didn't get a QB in the draft.  But
> are the 2 guys they got as UDFA really that much better than the stuff past
> the 5th round?  The only players with some real upside were Dixon and
> Johnson on day 2.

I'm with you, Phil.  At the time, most of you were witness to my temper
tantrum and I apologize.  My frustration with the QB position got the best
of me, I confess.

Now, with the dust settling on the draft, I've come around a bit and am fine
with how the QB issue played out.  Hanie or Hill might actually turn out to
be serviceable NFL QBs--if Kiper is right, Hanie will be.  So the issue is,
do we help ourselves more by picking up a starter quality guy at another
position who just fell to round 4, 5 or 6 or by picking a weak
backup/project QB?  Given our options this year, I favor the former, but I
could imagine years where my ire was justified at not taking a flyer on a
good QB who had fallen (what if Dixon or Johnson were still there in the
late 5th/early 6th?).  That just wasn't the case this year.

Now, if we had not gotten Hanie and Hill, I would have been very worried
because if past precedent serves as any predictor, we will probably be done
to our #3 QB at some point this season.  Sad, but true.  Here's hoping one
of those two guys can play.

Steve