RLflutie7 Posted July 25, 2009 Posted July 25, 2009 another article: Headline: Ditka decides against waiting a year for Flutie. Gordon Forbes USA today. NFL week 7. Coach Mike Ditka, embarrassed by the Chicago Bears offense with Steve Fuller and Mike Tomczak at quarterbacks, has decided the time is right to bring in Doug Flutie. The original plan was to sign Flutie for the 1987-88 seasons and hand him a Bears playbook to study in a nearby hotel. Then the Minnesota Vikings held the Bears to 190 yards - Fuller completed 13 of 22 passes and was sacked seven times - and Ditka decided the future is now. "Mike has decided to accelerate (Flutie's signing)," Bears general manager Jerry Vainisi said. "It is our intention for him to come in and compete for one of the quarterback jobs. "I don't want to say all of the quaterbacks, because we don't see him as being the guy to replace (oft-injured starter) Jim McMahon." Flutie could appear at the Bears training complex as early as this week. Vainisi said the club would seek a two-week exemption for the USFL refugee. "We want to put him in a position where he can learn the system and possibly be available later this year," Vainisi said. "This would make him better prepared to compete for the quaterback job next training camp." Skip two paragraphs. Flutie will be welcomed by Ditka, but maybe not by McMahon. Last week after the Bears obtained Flutie's rights, McMahon second-guessed the front office. Skip one paragraph. McMahon's comments upset Vainisi "We're doing this strictly for the future," he said. "We wouldn't bring him in here to compete with McMahon anyhow. Mike's just not satisfied with the production of the other two quarterbacks." Bob Woolf, Flutie's agent, said Flutie understands and "doesn't want to disrupt anything, but just wants an opportunity. If it's next year, fabulous. If it's this year, more than fabulous."
RLflutie7 Posted July 25, 2009 Posted July 25, 2009 From Steve McMichaels: Tales from the Chicago Bears sideline (book). Welcome Bambi (page 139). Doug Flutie was supposed to solve our quaterback problems, hail the conquering hero, the Heisman winner, the guy who hadn't really been given a chance to prove himself in the NFL because he was only about five foot nothin'. It wasn't the easiest deal for him. They brought him in late, taught him the system and threw him out there in the playoffs against the Redskins, who gave him fits. Of course, some of his teammates did, too. There was a lot of talk that nobody on the team really liked Flutie, mostly because he had Thanksgiving dinner with Ditka, but really it was all on the offensive side of the ball. I think they really felt like he was the usurper to Jim McMahon's throne, so he wasn't going to be accepted. Somebody even started calling him "Bambi", not the manliest nickname in a football locker room. I don't know who started it, but I have to admit it fit. You know, the little baby deer, how a deer runs around - he was kind of a prancer back there. Me, the only problem I had with Flutie was him throwing two f*cking interceptions and fumbling the ball twice against Washington in the playoff game. I don't give a sh-- if he eats dinner with Ditka. If he'd had have gone out there and won the Superbowl, I'd be fine with him being the quaterback. But he didn't Four f*cking turnovers. We lost 27-13 to Jay Schroeder. Of course, I don't know if Sid Luckman would have helped us against the Redskins that day. Sometimes things just don't go your way. I mean, some days you have to beat a double-team to get free, but the quaterback holds the ball too long, so you get a sack. There was a time in this game, Schroeder's first touchdown pass where we ran a blitz. I was on the line of scrimmage, got off with the ball, the line parted, blocking the other guys, and I was set free. I ran back there as fast as I could, nobody touching me, he backed up, threw it falling over backard as I hit him. Touchdown pass. sh-- happens like that, it ain't your day, baby. For the record, if I'm running the team, I'm looking for a quaterback too. Maybe not a midget like Flutie, but somebody. Jim getting hurt and us having to play Flutie in the first place, that's why I love Jim, but I say it's his fault we didn't win three Superbowls in the 80s. He was getting hurt all the time. It ain't his fault, now. But, dammit, every dynasty had one quarterback." Book was wrote in 2004. Funny stuff.
rstencel Posted July 25, 2009 Posted July 25, 2009 How bad does a teams history have to be, that someone like Flutie would be someone people miss. Convenient how everyone forgets the guys ego made TO's look small, but he didnt have the talent to back it up. The guy got cut as much for the attitude he gave when he wasnt getting his way, and the way he could divide a locker room, as much as he was for not being able to beat out the "fill in the blank QB" that he was up against, anywhere outside of the Canadian Football League. He may have been a very succesfull QB in the league, if his ego doesnt get him banished to CFL till went to buffalo, but by then, his CFL success didnt exactly help his ego. IMO, next to the trade of 1st and 4th for Rob Johnson, signing him was the worst moves the bills made in the 80's.
RLflutie7 Posted July 25, 2009 Posted July 25, 2009 How bad does a teams history have to be, that someone like Flutie would be someone people miss. Convenient how everyone forgets the guys ego made TO's look small, but he didnt have the talent to back it up. The guy got cut as much for the attitude he gave when he wasnt getting his way, and the way he could divide a locker room, as much as he was for not being able to beat out the "fill in the blank QB" that he was up against, anywhere outside of the Canadian Football League. He may have been a very succesfull QB in the league, if his ego doesnt get him banished to CFL till went to buffalo, but by then, his CFL success didnt exactly help his ego. IMO, next to the trade of 1st and 4th for Rob Johnson, signing him was the worst moves the bills made in the 80's. Wow! We all have our different view points.
The Dean Posted July 25, 2009 Posted July 25, 2009 Wow! We all have our different view points. I'm still not sure what those three posts were supposed to mean. He went to Chicago, stunk the joint up, and then was traded. Awesome!
RLflutie7 Posted July 25, 2009 Posted July 25, 2009 I'm still not sure what those three posts were supposed to mean. He went to Chicago, stunk the joint up, and then was traded. Awesome! Well Dean, my friend, these were for you baby. Flutie threw like 50 passes for the Bears and people say he was a locker room problem. If these stories show anything. It shows the Bears players (McMahon mostly) didn't want Flutie around. Flutie wasn't going around undermining McMahon as people have said in this thread. Flutie just happened to be where QBs that were starters always got hurt. And that includes New England and Buffalo. Eason had a bad thumb and elbow and Grogan had a sprained neck, so Flutie ended up playing and doing well. Flutie also replaced Grogan in 89 after he stunk the joint up. No ego was involved. People got hurt.
VOR Posted July 25, 2009 Posted July 25, 2009 I'm still not sure what those three posts were supposed to mean. He went to Chicago, stunk the joint up, and then was traded. Awesome! I've never seen so much love for a guy who had a 54.7% completion percentage, almost as many turnovers as TD's, who had maybe 2 good seasons out of 12 in the NFL, and who never won a playoff game.
RLflutie7 Posted July 25, 2009 Posted July 25, 2009 I've never seen so much love for a guy who had a 54.7% completion percentage, almost as many turnovers as TD's, who had maybe 2 good seasons out of 12 in the NFL, and who never won a playoff game. When he played teams won games. In 88, the Pats started off real slow, Flutie came off the bench to put the team in playoff contention and then he got benched. The fans went nuts. Can you blame them?
VOR Posted July 25, 2009 Posted July 25, 2009 When he played teams won games. Well as I was making fun of Mr. WEO over, Michael Vick (forgetting the legal issues) had better stats, was a winning QB, and even led his team to a playoff win. Yet everyone thought he sucked as a QB. Is it because Flutie is 5'2"? White? Wasn't the 1st overall pick? Won the Heisman?
RLflutie7 Posted July 25, 2009 Posted July 25, 2009 Well as I was making fun of Mr. WEO over, Michael Vick (forgetting the legal issues) had better stats, was a winning QB, and even led his team to a playoff win. Yet everyone thought he sucked as a QB. Is it because Flutie is 5'2"? White? Wasn't the 1st overall pick? Won the Heisman? Vick is not a good passer. But he was a good QB. I don't care for Vick as a QB because he runs too much. If he'd give himself a chance to throw, instead of rushing the ball 121 times, then maybe he'd develop as a QB.
Buftex Posted July 25, 2009 Posted July 25, 2009 Vick is not a good passer. But he was a good QB. I don't care for Vick as a QB because he runs too much. If he'd give himself a chance to throw, instead of rushing the ball 121 times, then maybe he'd develop as a QB. You are right about that. Vick just hadn't developed that part of his game yet. There was a stretch of games where he seemed to determined to be a protype pocket QB, as his critics insisted he couldn't be. He was actually pretty effective, and had a much better arm (strength and accuracy) than I think most people realized. Problem was, the Falcons had sub-par receivers who couldn't catch a cold. So, it was back to the scrambling Vick...
RLflutie7 Posted July 25, 2009 Posted July 25, 2009 You are right about that. Vick just hadn't developed that part of his game yet. There was a stretch of games where he seemed to determined to be a protype pocket QB, as his critics insisted he couldn't be. He was actually pretty effective, and had a much better arm (strength and accuracy) than I think most people realized. Problem was, the Falcons had sub-par receivers who couldn't catch a cold. So, it was back to the scrambling Vick... I thought he was good, however, he was frustrating to watch. I understand why people thought he stunk. Bottom line though is he got his team to the NFL championship game. He has a unique skill set and another team will sign him. It'll be a team that has an injury at QB. And I'm guessing it could be Tampa or Jacksonville if there are no major injuries. I think Denver could use him but I don't want them to sign him because of his behavior problems.
rstencel Posted July 25, 2009 Posted July 25, 2009 Criticize all you want about him but no QB for the Bills has done as well in the win loss column since Kelly. Yeah, amazing how carreer backups, look good on stats like that. Once defences spend time preping for a QB, they do so much better. He was great off the bench, and for a game or 2. Other than that, he was just like any fill in the blank 2nd string QB. Fans love them all for some reason.
rstencel Posted July 25, 2009 Posted July 25, 2009 Actually thinking about the love for the little EGO trip people still seem to have, TO should do great here.
rstencel Posted July 25, 2009 Posted July 25, 2009 When he played teams won games. In 88, the Pats started off real slow, Flutie came off the bench to put the team in playoff contention and then he got benched. The fans went nuts. Can you blame them? Fans alway love the 2nd stringers. Amazing how good they can look when they have a different style of play than the person they backup, and the defenses didnt prepare for them.
The Dean Posted July 25, 2009 Posted July 25, 2009 Yeah, amazing how carreer backups, look good on stats like that. Once defences spend time preping for a QB, they do so much better. He was great off the bench, and for a game or 2. Other than that, he was just like any fill in the blank 2nd string QB. Fans love them all for some reason. I think he could have been a terrific #2 in the NFL, had his ego allowed him to accept that role.
rstencel Posted July 25, 2009 Posted July 25, 2009 Well Dean, my friend, these were for you baby. Flutie threw like 50 passes for the Bears and people say he was a locker room problem. If these stories show anything. It shows the Bears players (McMahon mostly) didn't want Flutie around. Flutie wasn't going around undermining McMahon as people have said in this thread. Flutie just happened to be where QBs that were starters always got hurt. And that includes New England and Buffalo. Eason had a bad thumb and elbow and Grogan had a sprained neck, so Flutie ended up playing and doing well. Flutie also replaced Grogan in 89 after he stunk the joint up. No ego was involved. People got hurt. Wasnt his playing time that was EGO issue, was the time he was on bench. If you ever spent anytime on the sidelines or the locker room with him, he was the TO of his time, except without the talent.
The_Philster Posted July 26, 2009 Posted July 26, 2009 When he played teams won games. well, in Buffalo, at least in 1999, it was in spite of him, not because of him
Booster4324 Posted July 26, 2009 Posted July 26, 2009 For the record, there were plenty who liked Flutie because he was better than Rob "I hurt myself falling on a football" Johnson. Not because he was a god among men, just the better choice.
Steely Dan Posted July 26, 2009 Posted July 26, 2009 How bad does a teams history have to be, that someone like Flutie would be someone people miss. Convenient how everyone forgets the guys ego made TO's look small, but he didnt have the talent to back it up. The guy got cut as much for the attitude he gave when he wasnt getting his way, and the way he could divide a locker room, as much as he was for not being able to beat out the "fill in the blank QB" that he was up against, anywhere outside of the Canadian Football League. He may have been a very succesfull QB in the league, if his ego doesnt get him banished to CFL till went to buffalo, but by then, his CFL success didnt exactly help his ego. IMO, next to the trade of 1st and 4th for Rob Johnson, signing him was the worst moves the bills made in the 80's. I agree with a lot of what you said, but it was the 90's not the 80's. Well Dean, my friend, these were for you baby. Flutie threw like 50 passes for the Bears and people say he was a locker room problem. If these stories show anything. It shows the Bears players (McMahon mostly) didn't want Flutie around. Flutie wasn't going around undermining McMahon as people have said in this thread. Flutie just happened to be where QBs that were starters always got hurt. And that includes New England and Buffalo. Eason had a bad thumb and elbow and Grogan had a sprained neck, so Flutie ended up playing and doing well. Flutie also replaced Grogan in 89 after he stunk the joint up. No ego was involved. People got hurt. Is it your opinion that the only reason Flutes was never given the starting role and was cut from teams is because the starters didn't want him around? You really think that NFL coaches don't want to win? Why couldn't he supplant the QB's that kept getting injured if he was so magnificent. I think he could have been a terrific #2 in the NFL, had his ego allowed him to accept that role. If he had stayed around long enough he may have gotten a chance to start. I believe there is no question he was dick while on the Bills as evidenced by the article linked earlier in this thread.
Recommended Posts