Jimmy Mac: QB's go to die in Chicago

TheWinman

2020 CCS Survivor Fantasy Football Champion
Joined:
Aug 21, 2012
Posts:
7,040
Liked Posts:
2,687
Location:
Ann Arbor, MI
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago White Sox
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
  1. Notre Dame Fighting Irish
Looked like a washed up drunk by 1987, IMO.

Overrated frat boy that could not stay healthy because he showed up to camp to drink tall boys of Budweiser rather than practice being a National Football League quarterback and then blamed literally everything and everyone else for his failures when the reality was he cared less about being a professional than Jay "Don't Care!" Cutler.

"Punky QB"

I mean are you ****ing kidding me?!?

Jim McMahon is ****ing rubbish.
you're way off on this one.
 

shoez90

Active member
Joined:
Nov 13, 2013
Posts:
826
Liked Posts:
420
The guy managed game and played when he needed to. We had a few great years bcuz of him. He was hot tempered and could stand the Ditka backlash. He's not wrong either, I'm fukin tired of being the doormat to the fuks up North but we consistently keep it up. Our franchise is great, fans are diehard but everything after that needs to be rethought. We have had good players and coaches at ti.es and we still can't get over the hump as a regular contender. The Pack has owned the north for a decade already. And Detroit might not be a push over this year schedule might prove Mc a prophet. We have another dilfer, Stewart in our two QBs.
 

mecha

Well-known member
Joined:
Aug 21, 2012
Posts:
12,849
Liked Posts:
10,172
Jim McMahon was good in that era. he had way better pieces around him then than the Bears have now, which if I'm not mistaken, is probably the difference maker here. I stand by my previous point I've been saying throughout all this pipe dream bullshit of trading 18 picks to get Watson that with this unit it doesn't matter who the quarterback will be. it would be more productive to fix all the other blemishes first, but I wouldn't be opposed to taking a flyer on a quarterback in the draft. that doesn't fuck up 3 future drafts to achieve, and maybe shit will stick to the wall this time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Myk

TezMaKai

Well-known member
Joined:
Aug 21, 2012
Posts:
4,551
Liked Posts:
3,215
Location:
Des Plaines, IL
He's not wrong. The Bears have always failed to address the quarterback position and I don't think he stepped out of line at all.

If the McCaskey's are all about profit, then SOMETHING needs to be done about the QB situation because fans are getting fed up with this win by running da footbaw and defense mentality like it's 1985 or some shit.

How many SB's did that "Great" bears team win again?
 

KittiesKorner

CCS Donator
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '20
Joined:
Jan 4, 2011
Posts:
45,912
Liked Posts:
40,610
Location:
Chicago
You don’t need to have cte to agree with him. Maybe you need it to disagree with him
 

Myk

85in25
Joined:
Sep 27, 2010
Posts:
11,028
Liked Posts:
4,426
Jim McMahon was good in that era. he had way better pieces around him then than the Bears have now, which if I'm not mistaken, is probably the difference maker here. I stand by my previous point I've been saying throughout all this pipe dream bullshit of trading 18 picks to get Watson that with this unit it doesn't matter who the quarterback will be. it would be more productive to fix all the other blemishes first, but I wouldn't be opposed to taking a flyer on a quarterback in the draft. that doesn't fuck up 3 future drafts to achieve, and maybe shit will stick to the wall this time.


That's what I say. There's no sense in moving up now if it hurts the chances of fixing the offense now and in the future. That will just be repeating the same mistakes.
 

Top