Has anybody really stopped to tally the hard numbers? Drafted
Chicago Bears quarterbacks vs. free agent and trade acquired Bears quarterbacks. Given how the organization seems to have favored the latter over the past three decades alone, it's fair to ask. Do they really believe that approach is best or are they really that backwards?
The only way to get a definitive answer is by digging deep into the numbers. Given the unreliable stat keeping in the early days of the league though, this will be restricted to just the Super Bowl era. That means the 1966 season to the present day. The numbers being compiled will be as follows: win-loss record, winning percentage, total number of playoff appearances and Super Bowl appearances.
The end game is simple. To discover whether or not the myth that drafting quarterbacks is more beneficial to the franchise is true. Numbers can lie but not in this case. In fighting terminology, this would be a technical knockout.
Drafted Chicago Bears quarterbacks vs. FAs and Trades
The Draft
- Record: 184-187-1 (.495 winning percentage)
- Playoff trips: 9
- Super Bowls: 2
Free Agents/Trades
- Record: 168-195-3 (.462 winning percentage)
- Playoff trips: 4
- Super Bowls: 0
It is undoubtedly a clean sweep for the drafted quarterbacks in this comparison. While both categories reveals how inept the team is at developing the position with overall losing records, one at least sucks far less than the other. Drafted quarterbacks have more wins, fewer losses, more than double the playoff appearance and the only two Super Bowl appearances. Not to mention the lone Lombardi trophy (thanks Jim McMahon).
[video width="1280" height="720" mp4="https://www.sportsmockery.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Walter-Payton-Highlights-1985-Week-3-Chicago-at-Minnesota-1.mp4"][/video]
If nothing else this sends a loud and clear message. Don't buy in too much to the whole Mike Glennon hype campaign by GM Ryan Pace. If he actually believes what he's saying, he'll just end up suffering the same fate as other predecessors like Phil Emery, Jerry Angelo and Mark Hatley did. Men who chose to put their stock in big trade or free agent acquisitions rather than truly committing to the drafting and development of a quarterback.
If he doesn't, then it's just a GM saying what he has to say to keep a player on his roster focused on his job. Meanwhile his real agenda will be finding the actual QB of the future in the upcoming 2017 NFL draft. Will he do it at the #3 pick? He's certainly trying hard to indicate it will be all about best player available.
Here's the thing about that. His draft board is nothing like the boards of anybody else in the media or fan base. So players they believe are high on the Bears' list might not even be considered an option. At the same time there is a definite possibility he could view at least one of the top quarterbacks as a legitimate possibility for that pick. Especially when considering the positions' importance.
Pace likes to fancy himself a student of the draft, having been a scout and executive for 15 years now. Well if he knows his football history, he'll clearly see his quest for "sustained long-term success" isn't coming via free agency or a trade.
