You gotta love the flutie magic

[The Senator]

Right, and I guess Fluties 22-9 record as a starter had nothing to do with the fact that we had a top ranked defense.

So we've come full circle - thank you for helping me make my point. Rob Johnson had that same top ranked defense and supporting offensive cast, yet only managed to rack up a 7-10 record in the same 3-year period. Somehow, Flutie found ways to win that others couldn't.

[BuffaloPride]

So we've come full circle - thank you for helping me make my point. Rob Johnson had that same top ranked defense and supporting offensive cast, yet only managed to rack up a 7-10 record in the same 3-year period. Somehow, Flutie found ways to win that others couldn't.

There you go again. The best example you can give me is to compare Flutie to the worst quarterback in Bills history? I'll tell you what, explain to me why Flutie tanked so badly in San Diego without comparing him to RJ. Can you do that?

[The_Philster]

So we've come full circle - thank you for helping me make my point. Rob Johnson had that same top ranked defense and supporting offensive cast, yet only managed to rack up a 7-10 record in the same 3-year period. Somehow, Flutie found ways to win that others couldn't.

yet again, you seem to be claiming that someone is giving RJ credit for anything. Didn't your parents teach you anything about dishonesty is a disgusting character trait. That's the problem with your Flutie worshippers...you can't defend him on his own merits...no wonder you go by the name The Senator....you'd make a hell of a politician

 

For the last time, NO ONE IS DEFENDING RJ....SO BRINGING HIM UP DOES NOTHING TO PROVE YOUR POINT!!!

[The Jokeman]

So we've come full circle - thank you for helping me make my point. Rob Johnson had that same top ranked defense and supporting offensive cast, yet only managed to rack up a 7-10 record in the same 3-year period. Somehow, Flutie found ways to win that others couldn't.

Factor in that RJ had one NFL start, and a win, prior to coming here that would make his record to that point 8-10, not too shabby for a player with only 18 starts to his file. Yet again as stated earlier yes Flutie was a better QB then RJ but there might have been a chance that RJ could have improved his play had we left him as the starter in 1998/1999 but no way of really knowing for sure. Yet he wasn't as bad as some like to make him out to be when factor in how truly inexperienced he was compared to Flutie. As everyone seemingly wants to descredit or forget how great RJ played in games against San Fran and St Louis and New Orleans in 1998. Not to mention 1999 against Indy. Infact had Donovan Greer stayed in his lane and tackled Kevin Dyson we'd all be talking about RJ's heroic play without a shoe in the now infamous Music City Miracle. Of course am sure the Flutie faithful would find a way to lament at anything RJ could do short of winning us a Super Bowl, which in all honesty don't think Doug or Rob could have done for us as don't think our D could have stopped the Rams in 1999.

Can I quote you on that? Because you're the only one that used those words.

 

But I guess Miami didn't score points off the Moulds fumble in the 1st quarter, the Smedley interference penalty in the 2nd, or the facemask penalty on Cummings in the 4th. I guess Flutie wasn't 21 for 36 and 360 yards. The Bills vaunted run defense didn't yield over 100 rushing yards. And I guess Moulds didn't blow a late touchdown opportunity with that 15 yard penalty for bumping the official. It all came down to Flutie's fumble.

There goes that selective Flutie fan memory again. As Flutie had another fumble in that game besides the game clinching one. Not to mention a costly interception just before half time.

[The Senator]

There you go again. The best example you can give me is to compare Flutie to the worst quarterback in Bills history? I'll tell you what, explain to me why Flutie tanked so badly in San Diego without comparing him to RJ. Can you do that?

No, there you go again, running in circles, chasing your tail.

 

Can you explain why the Bills went 4-12 in 1986 and 7-9 in '87 with Jim Kelly at QB? (And don't say I'm comparing Kelly and Flutie - I'm not!) Some teams are just so bad that even the best QBs can't save 'em.

 

In the case of the Flutie and the Chargers, they were 1-15 the season before Flutie arrived, had just gone thru a complete front-office overhaul, and coach Mike Riley was on the way out. Also, Flutie was 40 years old - even the best have to hang it up eventually.

 

Keep digging - you may come up with a valid point in another 20 pages or so.

[Peter]

The team didn't fumble the ball on that last play, he did. But I guess thats the philosophy right? When we won games it was all because of Flutie and when we lost it was on the team as a whole.

 

Those of you who remember Flutie's post game interviews will remember that he used the word "I" when WE won and used the word "we" when we lost.

 

It just goes to show you that when we won, it must have been only because of Flutie, and when we lost, it had to be someone else's fault.

[Peter]

Factor in that RJ had one NFL start, and a win, prior to coming here that would make his record to that point 8-10, not too shabby for a player with only 18 starts to his file. Yet again as stated earlier yes Flutie was a better QB then RJ but there might have been a chance that RJ could have improved his play had we left him as the starter in 1998/1999 but no way of really knowing for sure. Yet he wasn't as bad as some like to make him out to be when factor in how truly inexperienced he was compared to Flutie. As everyone seemingly wants to descredit or forget how great RJ played in games against San Fran and St Louis and New Orleans in 1998. Not to mention 1999 against Indy. Infact had Donovan Greer stayed in his lane and tackled Kevin Dyson we'd all be talking about RJ's heroic play without a shoe in the now infamous Music City Miracle. Of course am sure the Flutie faithful would find a way to lament at anything RJ could do short of winning us a Super Bowl, which in all honesty don't think Doug or Rob could have done for us as don't think our D could have stopped the Rams in 1999.

 

There goes that selective Flutie fan memory again. As Flutie had another fumble in that game besides the game clinching one. Not to mention a costly interception just before half time.

 

Great post.

[BuffaloPride]

No, there you go again, running in circles, chasing your tail.

 

Can you explain why the Bills went 4-12 in 1986 and 7-9 in '87 with Jim Kelly at QB? (And don't say I'm comparing Kelly and Flutie - I'm not!) Some teams are just so bad that even the best QBs can't save 'em.

 

In the case of the Flutie and the Chargers, they were 1-15 the season before Flutie arrived, had just gone thru a complete front-office overhaul, and coach Mike Riley was on the way out. Also, Flutie was 40 years old - even the best have to hang it up eventually.

 

Keep digging - you may come up with a valid point in another 20 pages or so.

I'm not offering you points I'm giving you facts. All you are giving me is comparisons between Flutie and Johnson. You saying Flutie was better than Johnson is like me saying Angelina Jolie is hotter than Whoopie Goldberg. It's a no brainer dude, we all get it. But it doesn't prove to me or any other Flutie detractor that he was a good quarterback. Flutie didn't do anything here in Buffalo that any other AVERAGE quarterback couldn't have done behind the stellar play of a great defense. The fact that Johnson couldn't do it only proves he was below average. No one here will argue that. But you seem to put Flutie on some kind of pedestal like he walks on water. Check out his Qb ranking in 98 and tell me if he was anymore than average. Then check out where our defense ranked that same year and get back to me.

[The Senator]

Factor in that RJ had one NFL start, and a win, prior to coming here that would make his record to that point 8-10, not too shabby for a player with only 18 starts to his file. Yet again as stated earlier yes Flutie was a better QB then RJ but there might have been a chance that RJ could have improved his play had we left him as the starter in 1998/1999 but no way of really knowing for sure. Yet he wasn't as bad as some like to make him out to be when factor in how truly inexperienced he was compared to Flutie. As everyone seemingly wants to descredit or forget how great RJ played in games against San Fran and St Louis and New Orleans in 1998. Not to mention 1999 against Indy. Infact had Donovan Greer stayed in his lane and tackled Kevin Dyson we'd all be talking about RJ's heroic play without a shoe in the now infamous Music City Miracle. Of course am sure the Flutie faithful would find a way to lament at anything RJ could do short of winning us a Super Bowl, which in all honesty don't think Doug or Rob could have done for us as don't think our D could have stopped the Rams in 1999.

I was simply comparing their records over the same 3-season period on the same team with the same supporting cast.

 

As for RJ improving 'had we left him as the starter', it's not like the Bills 'yanked' him. I can't possibly imagine someone like Jim Kelly letting Doug Flutie snatch the starting QB job by having a bruised rib keep him sidelined for 7 weeks. You tape the thing, suck it up, and keep your job. RJ was a wuss, and that allowed Flutie to move up. But lets leave RJ and Kelly out of the discussion - every time I mention one of them to help make a point, folks say I'm comparing them to Flutie. I'm not.

 

I'm just trying support the point of the original poster that Flutie was a good QB, but the Flutie-bashers will have none of it. It's really quite amusing how they refuse to acknowledge that simple, incontrovertible statement of fact. Say that Flutie was a good QB, and all of sudden, with unbelievable vitriol, you're called a 'Flutie-worshipper', or you 'have your head in his crotch'.

 

There goes that selective Flutie fan memory again. As Flutie had another fumble in that game besides the game clinching one. Not to mention a costly interception just before half time.

No, there goes someone trying to have it both ways again. You guys are real quick to cry foul and say that "Flutie didn't win those games- the team did", but then you talk out of the other side of your mouths and say that Flutie alone is responsible for the playoff loss to Miami.

 

I simply point out that Flutie alone didn't cost us that game - there were critical errors by others, including the defense, that were key factors.

 

Try again.

[The_Philster]

I'm just trying support the point of the original poster that Flutie was a good QB, but the Flutie-bashers will have none of it. It's really quite amusing how they refuse to acknowledge that simple, incontrovertible statement of fact. Say that Flutie was a good QB, and all of sudden, with unbelievable vitriol, you're called a 'Flutie-worshipper', or you 'have your head in his crotch'.

The original poster obviously didn't watch him play in 99...he was a good QB in 98 but was awful in 99. How do you defend that the runt kept tucking the ball to run when he had Andre and Moulds WIDE OPEN downfield? A lot of those drives he did that on stalled and they would've ended in TDs had Flutie been even an average QB. How does a good QB do that so frequently? I watched it from the endzone...there's Andre or Moulds wide open while Flutie's tucking the ball away and running. Jaws pointed it out on NFL Matchup back in the day, too.

[The Jokeman]

I was simply comparing their records over the same 3-season period on the same team with the same supporting cast.

 

As for RJ improving 'had we left him as the starter', it's not like the Bills 'yanked' him. I can't possibly imagine someone like Jim Kelly letting Doug Flutie snatch the starting QB job by having a bruised rib keep him sidelined for 7 weeks. You tape the thing, suck it up, and keep your job. RJ was a wuss, and that allowed Flutie to move up. But lets leave RJ and Kelly out of the discussion - every time I mention one of them to help make a point, folks say I'm comparing them to Flutie. I'm not.

 

I'm just trying support the point of the original poster that Flutie was a good QB, but the Flutie-bashers will have none of it. It's really quite amusing how they refuse to acknowledge that simple, incontrovertible statement of fact. Say that Flutie was a good QB, and all of sudden, with unbelievable vitriol, you're called a 'Flutie-worshipper', or you 'have your head in his crotch'.

 

 

No, there goes someone trying to have it both ways again. You guys are real quick to cry foul and say that "Flutie didn't win those games- the team did", but then you talk out of the other side of your mouths and say that Flutie alone is responsible for the playoff loss to Miami.

 

I simply point out that Flutie alone didn't cost us that game - there were critical errors by others, including the defense, that were key factors.

 

Try again.

RJ's inability to avoid injury was a big reason for his inability to develop. I don't fault Flutie for that. Yet I do fault the coaching staff for not putting him back in there. As to me Flutie always was a band aid on a deep cut and to date that cut hasn't gotten any better as seen by the parade of QBs we've seen here since Kelly retired. Yet again there's no telling for sure if RJ would have been another band aid or not but would have preferred to see it then Flutie. I see a similar thing happening in Arizona right now with Warner vs Leinart. Granted Warner has shown to be a far superior QB then Flutie ever was but ultimately they might be better suited going with Leinart if looking beyond this year but in this cap driven NFL most teams don't understand or take the time to develop QBs anymore.

 

In terms of pointing out that Flutie alone wasn't the sole reason we lost the 1998 playoff game, fair enough but it just shows he wasn't a great QB. My point is that you want to give Doug credit for his wonderous winning percentage compared to RJ yet then quick to blame the rest of the team for his loss to Miami. Well how about looking back at RJ's W/L and see how many you can squarely blame on RJ. I can point out one loss that shouldn't be pinned on him, that was the 1998 loss to St Louis when the D couldn't hold off Tony Banks for a game winning TD. Not to mention RJ got hurt late in that game but Flutie couldn't kill the clock in the final minutes either.

[Steely Dan]

Senator, I'm not advocating for Philster or anyone else, as you well know, I have my own viewpoints.

 

However, I disagree with a few items here:

 

- The original poster didn't exactly dissuade folks from debating flutie's greatness. the thread title is "you gotta love the flutie magic", to which many of us responded that--indeed--no you do not have to love flutie or his perceived "magic". some folks have stated their reasons concisely (i'd like to think i'm one of them), and some have not (in fact, some have failed miserably to do so--no handles will be mentioned).

 

- just for the sake of reference, i'm going to compare the statistics of Flutie's 1999 performance to another un-named QB:

 

Flutie: 264/478--55.2%--3,171 yds--6.6 YPA--19 TDs--16 INTs--1 rush TD

QB2: 268/429--62.5%--3,051 ysd--7.1 YPA--19TDs--14 INTs--1 rush TD

 

Pretty similar performances, wouldn't you say? Now, everyone go ahead and take a guess as to the identity of QB2, then scroll down for the answer...

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

QB2 = J.P. Losman (2006)

 

 

 

Please try not to be ridiculous. I believe Jim Kelly also lost some games (6 playoff games, actually). Flutie's record as a starter in Buffalo was 22-9. That's how I can say he found ways to win.

 

 

You're comparing Doug Flutie to Jim Kelly and I'm ridiculous? I'm still waiting for you to explain his losing record in the playoffs. Remember, all he does is win.

 

 

And because the Bills lost that game, Flutie's not a winner. Priceless.

 

He's not a playoff winner. The "Flutie magic" seems to be revealed as an illusion in the playoffs.

 

 

Can I quote you on that? Because you're the only one that used those words.

 

But I guess Miami didn't score points off the Moulds fumble in the 1st quarter, the Smedley interference penalty in the 2nd, or the facemask penalty on Cummings in the 4th. I guess Flutie wasn't 21 for 36 and 360 yards. The Bills vaunted run defense didn't yield over 100 rushing yards. And I guess Moulds didn't blow a late touchdown opportunity with that 15 yard penalty for bumping the official. It all came down to Flutie's fumble.

 

 

Factor in that RJ had one NFL start, and a win, prior to coming here that would make his record to that point 8-10, not too shabby for a player with only 18 starts to his file. Yet again as stated earlier yes Flutie was a better QB then RJ but there might have been a chance that RJ could have improved his play had we left him as the starter in 1998/1999 but no way of really knowing for sure. Yet he wasn't as bad as some like to make him out to be when factor in how truly inexperienced he was compared to Flutie. As everyone seemingly wants to descredit or forget how great RJ played in games against San Fran and St Louis and New Orleans in 1998. Not to mention 1999 against Indy. Infact had Donovan Greer stayed in his lane and tackled Kevin Dyson we'd all be talking about RJ's heroic play without a shoe in the now infamous Music City Miracle. Of course am sure the Flutie faithful would find a way to lament at anything RJ could do short of winning us a Super Bowl, which in all honesty don't think Doug or Rob could have done for us as don't think our D could have stopped the Rams in 1999.

 

There goes that selective Flutie fan memory again. As Flutie had another fumble in that game besides the game clinching one. Not to mention a costly interception just before half time.

 

I reiterate; He's not a playoff winner. The "Flutie magic" seems to be revealed as an illusion in the playoffs.

 

 

I was simply comparing their records over the same 3-season period on the same team with the same supporting cast.

 

As for RJ improving 'had we left him as the starter', it's not like the Bills 'yanked' him. I can't possibly imagine someone like Jim Kelly letting Doug Flutie snatch the starting QB job by having a bruised rib keep him sidelined for 7 weeks. You tape the thing, suck it up, and keep your job. RJ was a wuss, and that allowed Flutie to move up. But lets leave RJ and Kelly out of the discussion - every time I mention one of them to help make a point, folks say I'm comparing them to Flutie. I'm not.

 

I'm just trying support the point of the original poster that Flutie was a good QB, but the Flutie-bashers will have none of it. It's really quite amusing how they refuse to acknowledge that simple, incontrovertible statement of fact. Say that Flutie was a good QB, and all of sudden, with unbelievable vitriol, you're called a 'Flutie-worshipper', or you 'have your head in his crotch'.

 

 

No, there goes someone trying to have it both ways again. You guys are real quick to cry foul and say that "Flutie didn't win those games- the team did", but then you talk out of the other side of your mouths and say that Flutie alone is responsible for the playoff loss to Miami.

I simply point out that Flutie alone didn't cost us that game - there were critical errors by others, including the defense, that were key factors.

 

Try again.

 

1. It's not an incontrovertible fact.

2. Flutie fans point to a myriad of different players for their contributions to the loss and when Dougie has almost more than them combined they ignore it and blame "the team". The title of this thread mentions "Flutie Magic" and has been pointed out the magic was made by an illusionist.

[DC Tom]

Untrue. Flutie would have an AFC Championship ring, but not a Super Bowl ring.

 

 

Wow.

 

Someone needed "Who gets a Superbowl Ring" explained?

 

Wow.

[Booster4324]

The point is...NO ONE has defended RJ in the least and for anyone to keep bringing him up in an effort to defend Flutie is idiotic and dishonest...I get the urge to insult dishonest people because dishonesty is a sickening character trait..differing views are fine...bold-faced lies are not. Once you bring up RJ in an effort to defend Flutie, you can't be taken seriously...because you aren't defending Flutie...you're just ranting like a lunatic.

As far as Flutie not being your hero? If you think Flutie played far from crappy in 1999, that statement is suspect to say the least. He continually ignored wide open WRs downfield and tucked the ball and ran...drives stalled that would've ended in TDs if he had played even average.

Also, giving credit to any single player for a team's win-loss record is insulting to the rest of the team. Everyone knows the #1 defense in the league carried that team. Flutie's play helped cost us a few games that year and almost cost us a few more. Stats only matter in fantasy football....they don't mean a thing in actual game play

 

[Tcali]

There you go again. The best example you can give me is to compare Flutie to the worst quarterback in Bills history? I'll tell you what, explain to me why Flutie tanked so badly in San Diego without comparing him to RJ. Can you do that?

he was 40+ yrs old....

[DC Tom]

There you go again. The best example you can give me is to compare Flutie to the worst quarterback in Bills history?

 

Who here is comparing Doug Flutie to Gary Marangi?

 

That's why this "debate" is so silly. Most of you geniuses have lost all sense of perspective.

[Lori]

Can I quote you on that? Because you're the only one that used those words.

 

But I guess Miami didn't score points off the Moulds fumble in the 1st quarter, the Smedley interference penalty in the 2nd, or the facemask penalty on Cummings in the 4th. I guess Flutie wasn't 21 for 36 and 360 yards. The Bills vaunted run defense didn't yield over 100 rushing yards. And I guess Moulds didn't blow a late touchdown opportunity with that 15 yard penalty for bumping the official. It all came down to Flutie's fumble.

You're right about that, anyway ...

 

It was Reed.

 

Didn't even have to look it up. Which makes me wonder about some of the other stats in this thread, not that I give enough of a damn to actually fact-check all of them.

[2020 Our Year For Sure]

I'm not offering you points I'm giving you facts. All you are giving me is comparisons between Flutie and Johnson. You saying Flutie was better than Johnson is like me saying Angelina Jolie is hotter than Whoopie Goldberg. It's a no brainer dude, we all get it. But it doesn't prove to me or any other Flutie detractor that he was a good quarterback. Flutie didn't do anything here in Buffalo that any other AVERAGE quarterback couldn't have done behind the stellar play of a great defense. The fact that Johnson couldn't do it only proves he was below average. No one here will argue that. But you seem to put Flutie on some kind of pedestal like he walks on water. Check out his Qb ranking in 98 and tell me if he was anymore than average. Then check out where our defense ranked that same year and get back to me.

You seem to be underrating the value of an average NFL starting quarterback.

 

The 16th best quarterback on the planet Earth? Yeah, I think I'll take that.

[Mr. WEO]

#1 Defense in the league deserved a lot more credit for that record than the midget did...anyone who watched the 99 Bills knows that

 

you left out ineffective, overrated by his worshippers, and attention-seeking or noodle-armed

 

The point is, most people that aren't blind to Flutie's many faults aren't defending RJ in any way. Everyone agrees that RJ sucked as a QB. The thing you Flutie-worshippers seem to think is that since Rob sucked, it automatically made Flutie good. It didn't. Guess what? Both QBs sucked...just in different amounts..and I think we all agree that Flutie sucked less. Doesn't mean he didn't suck, though. Contrary to what Flutie-worshippers seem to believe, it IS possible for more than one player at the position to suck

Take 1985 for example...Vince Ferragamo and Bruce Mathison were the 2 starting QBs for the Bills...are you saying one of them was actually good?

 

wow.

 

 

This guy deserves some sort of prize for his skills at persuasion. I just can't think of what would be an appropriate reward.

[RLflutie7]

I wanted to shed some light on Doug Flutie's time with the Chicago Bears.

 

I've read this thing about how Flutie had problems with every team he played for and it's not true in my view.

 

Anyway, here's some articles that I have from that time that I had. Most of these newspaper stories will be the whole story with some paragraphs left out.

 

USA Today:

 

By David Leon Moore

USA Today

 

Headline: Packers put Flutie, Fusina back in action.

 

Doug Flutie and Chuck Fusina, unemployed stars of the dormant USFL, got the telephone calls they had been waiting for.

 

Now it's up to the judgement of the struggling Green Bay Packers if they can play in the NFL. Both quarterbacks had workouts Tuesday for the 0-4 Packers.

 

Fusina, 29, who quarterbacked two USFL Championship teams, tried out first.

 

"He didn't seem to show the layoff you might expect. He looked to be in good condition and threw the ball well," said Packers director of player procurement Chuck Hutchinson.

 

Flutie, 23, the former Heisman Trophy winner who is considered by some teams as too short (5-9) to succeed in the NFL, worked later.

 

Asked what he thought of Flutie's half-hour, closed workout with receivers, Coach Forrest Gregg said, "Interesting."

 

Flutie's NFL rights are owned by the LA Rams, who selected him in the 11th round of the 1985 draft. The Rams last week signed Purdue rookie Jim Everett.

 

My take: The Rams signed Everett and were not interested in Flutie because they signed Everett.

 

 

The next article should clear up the most debated things here on Flutie's time with the Bears.

 

Sporting News article or Chicago Tribune:

 

Headline: Some Bears question trade for Doug Flutie

 

Chicago - He had yet to sign a contract and his rights had only belonged to the Chicago Bears for an hour. But that didn't stop Doug Flutie from dreaming.

 

"I can see the publicity shots now," Flutie said. "Me standing knee-high to the "Fridge".

 

First, the 5-9 QB has to make it onto the field with William Perry and the rest of the defending NFL champion Bears, but at least he was one step closer.

 

One minute before the October 14 NFL trading deadline, the Bears acquired the rights to Flutie from the LA Rams, who selected the former Heisman Trophy winner in the 11th round of the 1985 draft. The Bears, who also received a fourth-round pick in the 87 draft from LA, gave up third and sixth-round picks for the rights to Flutie. Contract talks were expected to begin, with the Bears planning to sign Flutie to a contract beginning in 1987. However, they could subsequently sign him to a 1986 contract if injuries created a problem at QB.

 

After winning the Heisman Trophy in 1984, Flutie signed a six-year $8 million contract with the New Jersey Generals of the USFL. The first three years of that agreement worth, $3.95 million, were guaranteed.

 

Skip two paragraphs.

 

When Flutie became officially clear of his USFL obligations October 7, time was of the essence with the NFL trading deadline a week away. The Rams had no interest in signing Flutie, but knew a deal was necessary. Flutie was planning to report to the Rams, ready to sign, if no deal was made and threatening a grievance if he wasn't signed or released. That would have left the Rams with nothing.

 

Chicago and Green Bay were the teams most interested. The Packers offered a sixth-round pick, but the Rams wanted to switch positions in the second round of the 87 draft with Green Bay, a price that was too high for the Packers. Flutie had also said the Bears were the only team with which he would agree to sign a future contract.

 

However, Coach Mike Ditka wasn't thinking about the future.

 

"It may work out we'll have him this year," Ditka said. "That was my original thought - to bring him in now. The trade was my decision and I'll live with it. I had to talk long and hard with a lot of people in this organization before the trade was made."

 

Some Bears questioned the move, however. Quaterback Jim McMahon, still nursing a sore shoulder, wore a red jersey with Flutie's number (22) during an October 15 practice.

 

"There's a lot of unhappy ball players here right now," McMahon said. "Why bring in another quaterback? Why not bring in another receiver or defensive back, or something where we need help.?"

 

Claiming the Bears had capable backup quaterbacks in Steve Fuller and Mike Tomczak, McMahon questioned Ditka's loyalty.

 

Responded Ditka: "When you analyze what's best for the business and what's best for the football team, if you put loyalty ahead of talent, you've got some problems. If we were 0-6, who would be loyal to me? Ask them (the players) how many were loyal to me when we were 3-6 in 1982."

 

McMahon wasn't the only Bears player to have an opinion of the trade for Flutie's rights. To wit:

 

Defensive lineman William Perry "Good luck. That's what I say.

 

Center Jay Hilgenburg: "I suppose I'm a little disappointed. I feel bad for our QBs. I hope he does have to make the team. I hope it isn't given to him."

 

Linebacker Otis Wilson: I don't think he's gonna get no million dollars around here. What's he worth to me? How much change have I got in my pocket?"

 

Ditka dismissed the criticisms and negative reactions.

 

"I frankly don't give a damn," he said. "Wasn't that a line in a movie?

 

I think it's a bargain and if you don't tak advantage of bargains, you're foolish."

 

 

 

My take: It was McMahon who started the complaining. He was always hurt.