Sixxgunn wrote:How many other rookie QB's accomplished what he did?
Alot......because he didn't accomplish anything. The Bears D and running game did. Ben Roethlisberger was a good rookie QB that comes to mind. NOT Kyle Orton.
So name the other ones who won as many games as he did. He did what he had to do to make the team win. Isn't that the job of the QB? As for the Dilfer reference, there is a HUGE difference there. Dilfer was an established vet, while Kyle was a ROOKIE. Not too many rookies can come in and handle that kind of pressure and not destroy their team. Let's see who was worse than Kyle Orton this year:
Brett Favre----Future HOFer
Kerry Collins--Stellar offensive players
Michael Vick---League poster child
Drew Brees----no explanation needed
Drew Bledsoe--experienced vet
And most of the other teams in the league as well.
You'll say, all those guys had a better year than Orton and I'll say, show me the wins. Tom Brady was a guy that rarely put up stunning numbers, but he got wins. I can recall a couple of sub-100 yd games from Brady that they won. That's all that matters. Don't blow this up into a Brady/Orton comparison thing because it isn't. That was just an example of mass thinking. I think what a guy doesn't do is just as important as what a guy does do. And what he didn't do this year was huge. I'm not starting a fight for the sake of argument, I just feel that it was a gross error in judgement not to at least have gotten some consideration (maybe not win it, but consideration), considering the amount of wins generated by a team that was predicted to be 32nd in the NFL, and not expected to get more than 3 wins by many, including myself. I'm off my soapbox.