Bears sign QB Case Keenum to 1yr $3M deal

[HurricaneBear]

Its less about Tyson and more about believing that a veteran QB is a waste. You are never going to convince me a QB coach or assistant QB coach couldn't do the same exact thing Keenum offers for CWs development, and you also aren't going to convince me that we could not find a comparable back up QB to Keenum mid season. There's no need to have him in camp

[HisRoyalSweetness]

Whoever this Curt Warren fella is, he's got more chance of netting a draft pick than Bagent!

He's written all the right letters, but not necessarily in the right order.

Our American friends won't get that reference!

[wab]

I preface this by saying that I like Bagent. A lot.

However, you typically place value in developing a young backup if you have an old QB or shaky starter. The Bears, by all accounts, are not in that position. This is where a vet like Keenum makes more sense.

I know we all love this idea of flipping Bagent for picks, but when Justin Fields, Mac Jones, Kenny Pickett, and Zach Wilson only fetch throwaway picks...what will Bagent get you? The ONLY way Bagent is going to net you a good pick is if Caleb goes down and Bagent comes in and lights it up.

Keenum just makes sense given the position the Bears are in right now.

For all of the reasons he was signed I agree. But it's a very specific role he has to fill first and foremost and that's to help Johnson and TJ as they build up CW and Bagent as QBs #1 and #2. I would contend that both need development if only because it's rare for a #1 QB to take every snap in every game all season long. So a strong #2 is also needed. One who can step in and save a game or start games and win. Bagent needs to be that guy.

The idea that he may eventually be worth something in trade isn't all that far fetched but right now it's a far distance away from reality. The goal should be to bring it closer to reality before he becomes a UFA for good. His rookie contract is up after this season at which time he becomes a RFA and still inexpensive enough to retain with a tender. I'm expecting that we'll probably do that. That's two more years to see how high he ascends.

This is a discussion we should probably table until late 2026 prior to the need to either extend him, trade him, or allow him to hit FA.

Well he will be a RFA after the season, so they have options.

[Arkansasbear]

Its less about Tyson and more about believing that a veteran QB is a waste. You are never going to convince me a QB coach or assistant QB coach couldn't do the same exact thing Keenum offers for CWs development, and you also aren't going to convince me that we could not find a comparable back up QB to Keenum mid season. There's no need to have him in camp

I disagree. Get a viewpoint from someone who has "been there/done that" can go a long way. He can give insight into how he went about learning new playbooks that the coaches won't be able to do as much. Then he also becomes the "break glass in case of emergency" guy. If vet QBs are a waste, it seems that most teams are very wasteful when it comes to developing young QBs.

[RichH55]

Its less about Tyson and more about believing that a veteran QB is a waste. You are never going to convince me a QB coach or assistant QB coach couldn't do the same exact thing Keenum offers for CWs development, and you also aren't going to convince me that we could not find a comparable back up QB to Keenum mid season. There's no need to have him in camp

I disagree. Get a viewpoint from someone who has "been there/done that" can go a long way. He can give insight into how he went about learning new playbooks that the coaches won't be able to do as much. Then he also becomes the "break glass in case of emergency" guy. If vet QBs are a waste, it seems that most teams are very wasteful when it comes to developing young QBs.

This really cuts both ways IMHO

[Bearfacts]

Its less about Tyson and more about believing that a veteran QB is a waste. You are never going to convince me a QB coach or assistant QB coach couldn't do the same exact thing Keenum offers for CWs development, and you also aren't going to convince me that we could not find a comparable back up QB to Keenum mid season. There's no need to have him in camp

That's because you're ignoring Johnson and his staff's opinion that they cannot offer to CW and Bagent what a vet QB can whose played so many games as a starting QB before. That's probably understandable in view of the fact that you never have done it either. Tough to do when you have no personal reference and don't believe others opinions who happen to be the decisions makers behind that decision.

Maybe it will help to see it in reference to how companies often ask an employee leaving a position to train their replacement rather than having a department head do it since the employee has more current experience doing that job and will be seen as the better trainer. That's pretty common too.

In quite a few years of Keenum's career he's been hired by other teams to do precisely what the Bears will ask him to do. Houston was the last team to do it where he worked with Stroud. If the Bears had not hired him it's very likely another team would've and he would not have been available mid season. Poles wanted to bring in the right kind of guy, in his opinion Keenum was the right kind of guy, so they had to hire him now not later.

But that's OK. You can remain unconvinced.

[dplank]

Case Keenum's career numbers just aren't that bad, I really don't get it. 66 starts gives us a good idea who he is, and he's just what you want from a backup IMO. Career numbers: 62.3% comp percentage, 79 TDs against 51 INTs, 84.6 QBR. He was a starter for 2 seasons, he went 17-13 and had a 98.3 and 81.2 QBR respectively and averaged over 3,700 yards. He's had 11 career game winning drives. He's 36, which is old for a starter but for a backup isn't any issue. His days of starting were 2017/18 so it's not THAT long ago.

I honestly think people just have something stuck in their heads that isn't lining up with reality.

[HurricaneBear]

Case Keenum's career numbers just aren't that bad, I really don't get it. 66 starts gives us a good idea who he is, and he's just what you want from a backup IMO. Career numbers: 62.3% comp percentage, 79 TDs against 51 INTs, 84.6 QBR. He was a starter for 2 seasons, he went 17-13 and had a 98.3 and 81.2 QBR respectively and averaged over 3,700 yards. He's had 11 career game winning drives. He's 36, which is old for a starter but for a backup isn't any issue. His days of starting were 2017/18 so it's not THAT long ago.

I honestly think people just have something stuck in their heads that isn't lining up with reality.

No not at all. We just value different things. You think it's important for a backup to have experience in an attempt to keep a team afloat. I'm not sure if it's you but some of you think a vet back up is valuable for the off the field mentorship they can provide young QBs.

I don't think a back up keeps a team afloat unless the stars align and that can happen for any back up from a rookie to a 15 year vet.

I think mentorship is highly overrated and very dependent on the people involved. For example, how much mentoring did Justin Fields receive from two vet QBs in Andy Dalton and Nick Foles? From reports it sounds like they didn't get along. And even if they do get along, I just feel you can get the same value from coaching staff. Theres also the whole too many voices in the QBs head thing to worry about. I honestly want our QB talking to Johnson and his OC and his QB coach and that's it.

Then there's the salary cap. Yes he makes hardly anything, but that's just a little less money for someone else vs having a rookie contract backup. You may not care about that but for me that's an issue.

So no, he is not what I want in a primary backup. Tyson Bagent is. Austin Reed could fill that roll too. Drafting a late round rookie can fill that roll. That's what I want in my backup QB. None of you have to agree, but can you stop saying things like "you aren't living in reality" or being condescending like @Bearfacts please? I'm not being insulting to any of you and I am quiet clear headed in my beliefs of backup QBs. I've felt this way for many years. It's ok to have different opinions.

[wab]

There's nothing wrong with valuing different things. But there is a reason that nearly every young QB in the NFL has a veteran behind him. Caleb was an outlier last year.

You just don't see QB depth charts with two rookies or a rookie and a 1st/2nd year guy.

[dplank]

Case Keenum's career numbers just aren't that bad, I really don't get it. 66 starts gives us a good idea who he is, and he's just what you want from a backup IMO. Career numbers: 62.3% comp percentage, 79 TDs against 51 INTs, 84.6 QBR. He was a starter for 2 seasons, he went 17-13 and had a 98.3 and 81.2 QBR respectively and averaged over 3,700 yards. He's had 11 career game winning drives. He's 36, which is old for a starter but for a backup isn't any issue. His days of starting were 2017/18 so it's not THAT long ago.

I honestly think people just have something stuck in their heads that isn't lining up with reality.

No not at all. We just value different things. You think it's important for a backup to have experience in an attempt to keep a team afloat. I'm not sure if it's you but some of you think a vet back up is valuable for the off the field mentorship they can provide young QBs.

I don't think a back up keeps a team afloat unless the stars align and that can happen for any back up from a rookie to a 15 year vet.

I think mentorship is highly overrated and very dependent on the people involved. For example, how much mentoring did Justin Fields receive from two vet QBs in Andy Dalton and Nick Foles? From reports it sounds like they didn't get along. And even if they do get along, I just feel you can get the same value from coaching staff. Theres also the whole too many voices in the QBs head thing to worry about. I honestly want our QB talking to Johnson and his OC and his QB coach and that's it.

Then there's the salary cap. Yes he makes hardly anything, but that's just a little less money for someone else vs having a rookie contract backup. You may not care about that but for me that's an issue.

So no, he is not what I want in a primary backup. Tyson Bagent is. Austin Reed could fill that roll too. Drafting a late round rookie can fill that roll. That's what I want in my backup QB. None of you have to agree, but can you stop saying things like "you aren't living in reality" or being condescending like @Bearfacts please? I'm not being insulting to any of you and I am quiet clear headed in my beliefs of backup QBs. I've felt this way for many years. It's ok to have different opinions.

Yea no problem I wasn't trying to be condescending, my "not lining up with reality" comment was specific to folks who have said that Case Keenum is complete trash - his career says otherwise. He's not great nor a guy you want as your starter, but he appears to be a perfect backup for a young QB.

I actually agree with you on the mentorship aspect, I think that's largely overblown particularly when you have a QB coach and, in our case, a HC who played the position. It can be useful if you don't have that, but most teams do. I'm looking at Keenum purely as in the light of "who do I want stepping in and playing if Caleb gets dinged up and misses a couple weeks". And I'm far more comfortable with Keenum in that spot, Bagent COULD be ok but his one stint with us worries me a lot. I value the safety and knowing what you'll get from a vet vs the unknown of a guy who has hardly played. I feel a guy like Ben Johnson would know how to adjust his plan with Keenum, I worry he will have a hard time doing that with an unknown like Bagent or Reed.

And then I'll say again, if we go through camp and Bagent is looking like the better option, then that's fine we roll with him. I trust Johnson to make that decision, but I view Keenum as a good signing because it actually give Johnson a decision to make and we aren't 100% reliant on Bagent being a good option. Where we clearly disagree is that I think it's a really bad plan to have 3 QB's on your roster that are all really young, having a vet in there just makes sense to me. And it makes sense to Ben Johnson as well, which should tell you something IMO.

[UOK]

I don't think this is as big of a deal as some may make it. Keenum is there to be the number three.

Bagent is worth his weight in gold, and Poles loves the guy. Keenum isn't on the team to do anything more than be a veteran presence in the room. Think of him as this year's Marcedes Lewis, except he likely will never play a snap barring a disastrous scenario.

[Arkansasbear]

Case Keenum's career numbers just aren't that bad, I really don't get it. 66 starts gives us a good idea who he is, and he's just what you want from a backup IMO. Career numbers: 62.3% comp percentage, 79 TDs against 51 INTs, 84.6 QBR. He was a starter for 2 seasons, he went 17-13 and had a 98.3 and 81.2 QBR respectively and averaged over 3,700 yards. He's had 11 career game winning drives. He's 36, which is old for a starter but for a backup isn't any issue. His days of starting were 2017/18 so it's not THAT long ago.

I honestly think people just have something stuck in their heads that isn't lining up with reality.

No not at all. We just value different things. You think it's important for a backup to have experience in an attempt to keep a team afloat. I'm not sure if it's you but some of you think a vet back up is valuable for the off the field mentorship they can provide young QBs.

I don't think a back up keeps a team afloat unless the stars align and that can happen for any back up from a rookie to a 15 year vet.

I think mentorship is highly overrated and very dependent on the people involved. For example, how much mentoring did Justin Fields receive from two vet QBs in Andy Dalton and Nick Foles? From reports it sounds like they didn't get along. And even if they do get along, I just feel you can get the same value from coaching staff. Theres also the whole too many voices in the QBs head thing to worry about. I honestly want our QB talking to Johnson and his OC and his QB coach and that's it.

Then there's the salary cap. Yes he makes hardly anything, but that's just a little less money for someone else vs having a rookie contract backup. You may not care about that but for me that's an issue.

So no, he is not what I want in a primary backup. Tyson Bagent is. Austin Reed could fill that roll too. Drafting a late round rookie can fill that roll. That's what I want in my backup QB. None of you have to agree, but can you stop saying things like "you aren't living in reality" or being condescending like @Bearfacts please? I'm not being insulting to any of you and I am quiet clear headed in my beliefs of backup QBs. I've felt this way for many years. It's ok to have different opinions.

I hope you didn't take anything I posted as any attempt to attach you. Like you said we just see different value in having a vet QB on the roster for a young QB. The point of you make about Fields did to a degree have me sour on him as a person. The team tried to bring in a wealth of knowledge for him to tap into and he seemed to have the approach of "I know what to do, I don't need those guys." Seems like a bad move on his part. When I started my current job, I was constantly asking the senior judges for advice. Now that I'm the longest serving guy, I tap into the other judges to get ideas about how to be better.

[southdakbearfan]

Case Keenum's career numbers just aren't that bad, I really don't get it. 66 starts gives us a good idea who he is, and he's just what you want from a backup IMO. Career numbers: 62.3% comp percentage, 79 TDs against 51 INTs, 84.6 QBR. He was a starter for 2 seasons, he went 17-13 and had a 98.3 and 81.2 QBR respectively and averaged over 3,700 yards. He's had 11 career game winning drives. He's 36, which is old for a starter but for a backup isn't any issue. His days of starting were 2017/18 so it's not THAT long ago.

I honestly think people just have something stuck in their heads that isn't lining up with reality.

No not at all. We just value different things. You think it's important for a backup to have experience in an attempt to keep a team afloat. I'm not sure if it's you but some of you think a vet back up is valuable for the off the field mentorship they can provide young QBs.

I don't think a back up keeps a team afloat unless the stars align and that can happen for any back up from a rookie to a 15 year vet.

I think mentorship is highly overrated and very dependent on the people involved. For example, how much mentoring did Justin Fields receive from two vet QBs in Andy Dalton and Nick Foles? From reports it sounds like they didn't get along. And even if they do get along, I just feel you can get the same value from coaching staff. Theres also the whole too many voices in the QBs head thing to worry about. I honestly want our QB talking to Johnson and his OC and his QB coach and that's it.

Then there's the salary cap. Yes he makes hardly anything, but that's just a little less money for someone else vs having a rookie contract backup. You may not care about that but for me that's an issue.

So no, he is not what I want in a primary backup. Tyson Bagent is. Austin Reed could fill that roll too. Drafting a late round rookie can fill that roll. That's what I want in my backup QB. None of you have to agree, but can you stop saying things like "you aren't living in reality" or being condescending like @Bearfacts please? I'm not being insulting to any of you and I am quiet clear headed in my beliefs of backup QBs. I've felt this way for many years. It's ok to have different opinions.

Agreed. The bears have almost always had a veteran backup, many better than keenum. I can’t remember a single time it mattered.

I do remember a rookie Kyle orton keeping the boat afloat for a young Rex grossman.

[Arkansasbear]

No not at all. We just value different things. You think it's important for a backup to have experience in an attempt to keep a team afloat. I'm not sure if it's you but some of you think a vet back up is valuable for the off the field mentorship they can provide young QBs.

I don't think a back up keeps a team afloat unless the stars align and that can happen for any back up from a rookie to a 15 year vet.

I think mentorship is highly overrated and very dependent on the people involved. For example, how much mentoring did Justin Fields receive from two vet QBs in Andy Dalton and Nick Foles? From reports it sounds like they didn't get along. And even if they do get along, I just feel you can get the same value from coaching staff. Theres also the whole too many voices in the QBs head thing to worry about. I honestly want our QB talking to Johnson and his OC and his QB coach and that's it.

Then there's the salary cap. Yes he makes hardly anything, but that's just a little less money for someone else vs having a rookie contract backup. You may not care about that but for me that's an issue.

So no, he is not what I want in a primary backup. Tyson Bagent is. Austin Reed could fill that roll too. Drafting a late round rookie can fill that roll. That's what I want in my backup QB. None of you have to agree, but can you stop saying things like "you aren't living in reality" or being condescending like @Bearfacts please? I'm not being insulting to any of you and I am quiet clear headed in my beliefs of backup QBs. I've felt this way for many years. It's ok to have different opinions.

Agreed. The bears have almost always had a veteran backup, many better than keenum. I can’t remember a single time it mattered.

I do remember a rookie Kyle orton keeping the boat afloat for a young Rex grossman.

McCown when Cutler went down played well. Heck, it was reported some wanted to stick with him.

But I'm still in the boat that Keenum will be QB3 and Bagent will be the one who comes in to do mop up duty once we are up 35 in the fourth quarter. I'd say that happen in 8 of the first 16 games. He will come in after the first snap is taken by CW in game 17 so CW keeps his streak of games started alive. Keenum is just a sounding board in the QB room and on the sidelines during games.

[southdakbearfan]

Agreed. The bears have almost always had a veteran backup, many better than keenum. I can’t remember a single time it mattered.

I do remember a rookie Kyle orton keeping the boat afloat for a young Rex grossman.

McCown when Cutler went down played well. Heck, it was reported some wanted to stick with him.

But I'm still in the boat that Keenum will be QB3 and Bagent will be the one who comes in to do mop up duty once we are up 35 in the fourth quarter. I'd say that happen in 8 of the first 16 games. He will come in after the first snap is taken by CW in game 17 so CW keeps his streak of games started alive. Keenum is just a sounding board in the QB room and on the sidelines during games.

Yeah, mccown who was 2-3 as a starter, put up stats against some historically bad defenses. Nobody but the Chicago media wanted him as a starter.

[dplank]

I fail to see what the problem is with giving Ben Johnson more options to choose from.

[Johnny Bollocks]

No not at all. We just value different things. You think it's important for a backup to have experience in an attempt to keep a team afloat. I'm not sure if it's you but some of you think a vet back up is valuable for the off the field mentorship they can provide young QBs.

I don't think a back up keeps a team afloat unless the stars align and that can happen for any back up from a rookie to a 15 year vet.

I think mentorship is highly overrated and very dependent on the people involved. For example, how much mentoring did Justin Fields receive from two vet QBs in Andy Dalton and Nick Foles? From reports it sounds like they didn't get along. And even if they do get along, I just feel you can get the same value from coaching staff. Theres also the whole too many voices in the QBs head thing to worry about. I honestly want our QB talking to Johnson and his OC and his QB coach and that's it.

Then there's the salary cap. Yes he makes hardly anything, but that's just a little less money for someone else vs having a rookie contract backup. You may not care about that but for me that's an issue.

So no, he is not what I want in a primary backup. Tyson Bagent is. Austin Reed could fill that roll too. Drafting a late round rookie can fill that roll. That's what I want in my backup QB. None of you have to agree, but can you stop saying things like "you aren't living in reality" or being condescending like @Bearfacts please? I'm not being insulting to any of you and I am quiet clear headed in my beliefs of backup QBs. I've felt this way for many years. It's ok to have different opinions.

Agreed. The bears have almost always had a veteran backup, many better than keenum. I can’t remember a single time it mattered.

I do remember a rookie Kyle orton keeping the boat afloat for a young Rex grossman.

Was that the season he drove 99 yards with time running out to beat the Lions?

[HisRoyalSweetness]

Yeah, mccown who was 2-3 as a starter, put up stats against some historically bad defenses. Nobody but the Chicago media wanted him as a starter.

Actually McCown went 3-2 as the starter in 2013 and 1-1 in 2011, making him a rare commodity in Chicago over the last decade and a half: a QB with a winning record as a starter. Was Trubisky the only other one?

In 2013 there were certainly questions being asked as to whether the Bears should ride the hot hand when McCown threw 13 TD and only 1 INT after Cutler got hurt 5 minutes into the second quarter against Washington with the Bears down 17-10.

They ended up losing that one in a shootout 41-45 after Washington scored the winning TD with 49 seconds to go, but McCown led them to a win over the Packers in the next game (one of only 4 such victories since 2010 ). It was in Green Bay too. With 10 minutes to go McCown led the Bears on an 18 play 80 yard drive lasting just shy of 9 min which ended in a chip shot FG that extended their lead to 7 points and left the Packers with just 46 seconds on the clock.

Cutler returned for the Lions game, but went out late in the 4th quarter with the Bears down 14-13. The Lions extended their lead to 21-13 on the next drive before McCown came in with 2:28 to go and led the Bears on a 74 yard TD drive with 47 seconds on the clock but the 2pt conversion failed and they couldn't recover the onside kick resulting in a 21-19 loss.

McCown then led the team to an overtime win against the Ravens, lost to the Rams, lost to the Vikings in overtime during which Robbie Gould missed a 47 yarder to win it and then finished with a 45-28 drubbing of the Cowboys.

Cutler returned and beat the Browns then got blown out in Philadelphia and the season ended with that infamous winner-takes-all rematch with the Packers (a loss that was not Cutler's fault).

In his 5 starts and that game against Washington McCown never had a game with a passer rating below 90 and 4 games with a rating over 100. He finished the season with a 109.0 rating.

The team couldn't have asked for more from their backup QB.

[wab]

This is such a weird argument.

[southdakbearfan]

Yeah, mccown who was 2-3 as a starter, put up stats against some historically bad defenses. Nobody but the Chicago media wanted him as a starter.

Actually McCown went 3-2 as the starter in 2013 and 1-1 in 2011, making him a rare commodity in Chicago over the last decade and a half: a QB with a winning record as a starter. Was Trubisky the only other one?

In 2013 there were certainly questions being asked as to whether the Bears should ride the hot hand when McCown threw 13 TD and only 1 INT after Cutler got hurt 5 minutes into the second quarter against Washington with the Bears down 17-10.

They ended up losing that one in a shootout 41-45 after Washington scored the winning TD with 49 seconds to go, but McCown led them to a win over the Packers in the next game (one of only 4 such victories since 2010 ). It was in Green Bay too. With 10 minutes to go McCown led the Bears on an 18 play 80 yard drive lasting just shy of 9 min which ended in a chip shot FG that extended their lead to 7 points and left the Packers with just 46 seconds on the clock.

Cutler returned for the Lions game, but went out late in the 4th quarter with the Bears down 14-13. The Lions extended their lead to 21-13 on the next drive before McCown came in with 2:28 to go and led the Bears on a 74 yard TD drive with 47 seconds on the clock but the 2pt conversion failed and they couldn't recover the onside kick resulting in a 21-19 loss.

McCown then led the team to an overtime win against the Ravens, lost to the Rams, lost to the Vikings in overtime during which Robbie Gould missed a 47 yarder to win it and then finished with a 45-28 drubbing of the Cowboys.

Cutler returned and beat the Browns then got blown out in Philadelphia and the season ended with that infamous winner-takes-all rematch with the Packers (a loss that was not Cutler's fault).

In his 5 starts and that game against Washington McCown never had a game with a passer rating below 90 and 4 games with a rating over 100. He finished the season with a 109.0 rating.

The team couldn't have asked for more from their backup QB.

And couldn’t have asked for better timing to play a string of the worst pass defenses in the nfl.

And it was 2-3 as the starter of record.

[Bearfacts]

Quote; So no, he is not what I want in a primary backup. Tyson Bagent is. Austin Reed could fill that roll too. Drafting a late round rookie can fill that roll. That's what I want in my backup QB. None of you have to agree, but can you stop saying things like "you aren't living in reality" or being condescending like @Bearfacts please? I'm not being insulting to any of you and I am quiet clear headed in my beliefs of backup QBs. I've felt this way for many years. It's ok to have different opinions.

In what way am I being condescending? I'm truly curious how you arrived at that.

My point was pretty simple. Signing Keenum was a decision that was undoubtedly made or greatly influenced by Ben Johnson. So let me ask you this. Do you trust Ben Johnson as the Bears HC? If you do why do you believe your opinion of the need for Keenum is far better than his? Because that's essentially what you're saying.

I can't make it any more straightforward than that brother.

[Shadow]

Bears have 4 QBs for the off season and Training Camp. Lets see who stays after cuts. QB 3 may be Keenum or it may end up being Reed. Now is not the time to worry about it.

[HisRoyalSweetness]

And it was 2-3 as the starter of record.

Why do you persist in saying this? You're wrong.

As a starter in 2013 McCown beat:
Green Bay (27-20)
Baltimore (23-20 in OT)
Dallas (45-28)

He lost to:
St Louis (42-21)
Minnesota (23-20 in OT)

In 2011 he beat Minnesota (17-13) and lost to Green Bay (35-21).

Overall as a starter in Chicago he was 4-3. (It would have been 5-2 if the usually reliable Robbie Gould had made the 47 yard FG against the Vikings in OT.)

If you win more than you lose with your backup QB then that's a great outcome. He was also fun to watch during those games in 2013 and more importantly kept the team in the hunt for the division title and the playoffs.

With two games to go they only needed one win. Even after getting blown out by the Eagles all they needed was to beat the Packers at Soldier Field, but blew it thanks to Lance Briggs and his defensive teammates inexplicably forgetting not one but two fundamentals they'd had drilled into them for years, play to the whistle and always pick up a loose ball, and then completely blowing the coverage on 4th and 8 and conceding a 48 yard TD with 46 seconds to go.

I really don't get the negativity around McCown. Compared to so many other QBs that have come through Chicago he played well when called on.

The Bears couldn't get more wins than losses with:
Cutler (51-51, 52-52 including playoffs)
Hanie (0-4)
Campbell (0-1)
Clausen (0-1)
Barkley (1-5)
Hoyer (1-4)
Glennon (1-3)
Daniel (1-2)
Foles (3-5)
Dalton (3- 3)
Fields (14-30)
Bagent (2-2)

After last season Williams is going to have to win a lot of games before he gets in the black as a starting QB (5-12).

I was wrong about Trubisky being the only one with a winning record as a starter in the last 15 years though:
Trubisky (29-21, 29-23 including playoffs)
McCown (4-3)
Collins (1-0)

In his lone start Todd Collins completed a stonking 6 of 16 pass attempts for 32 yards and threw 4 INTs for a 6.2 passer rating and got benched for Caleb Hanie, but somehow the Bears did win thanks to 3 INTs of their own and a stellar day for Matt Forte (166 yards rushing with 2 TDs and 22 of the teams 51 receiving yards).

Ultimately what the above shows is that having a veteran backup hasn't meant the Bears have had any more success than having a young backup with little or no experience. We know all too well that finding good starting QBs hasn't been the Bears forte but neither has finding decent backups. McCown proved to be a rare exception.

So I'm happy to run with Bagent and his 2-2 record as an undrafted rookie and if Keenum makes the 53 too then I'm fine with that given his 30-36 career record as a starter and 3-1 record since 2021.

[wab]

I doubt Keenum gets cut. Half his salary is guaranteed and there's virtually no cap savings if they let him go during final cuts. 3mil isn't a lot of money for the Bears, but I don't think they want to eat all that money just for a camp arm.

Maybe Bagent gets released so that he can have a chance to compete somewhere. Maybe they keep 3 and Reed goes back to the PS. We will have to wait and see.

[HisRoyalSweetness]

I doubt Keenum gets cut. Half his salary is guaranteed and there's virtually no cap savings if they let him go during final cuts. 3mil isn't a lot of money for the Bears, but I don't think they want to eat all that money just for a camp arm.

Maybe Bagent gets released so that he can have a chance to compete somewhere. Maybe they keep 3 and Reed goes back to the PS. We will have to wait and see.

According to Spotrac his contract is lower than initially reported, but pretty much all guaranteed.

They have it as 1 year for $2.25m made up of a base salary of $1.255m, a $900k signing bonus and a $95k workout bonus.

Apparently on the workout bonus isn't guaranteed, but given he's virtually certain to earn that it may as well be. It does mean his dead cap hit is $2.155m though.

Bagent has a cap hit of $1.4m and his dead cap is a tiny $8k.

I'll still be surprised if Bagent doesn't make the roster though and I doubt a $2.155m dead cap will preclude Poles from cutting Keenum. It does make it a little more likely they'll carry 3 QBs though. The Lions kept 3 last season.

[southdakbearfan]

And it was 2-3 as the starter of record.

Why do you persist in saying this? You're wrong.

As a starter in 2013 McCown beat:
Green Bay (27-20)
Baltimore (23-20 in OT)
Dallas (45-28)

He lost to:
St Louis (42-21)
Minnesota (23-20 in OT)

In 2011 he beat Minnesota (17-13) and lost to Green Bay (35-21).

Overall as a starter in Chicago he was 4-3. (It would have been 5-2 if the usually reliable Robbie Gould had made the 47 yard FG against the Vikings in OT.)

If you win more than you lose with your backup QB then that's a great outcome. He was also fun to watch during those games in 2013 and more importantly kept the team in the hunt for the division title and the playoffs.

With two games to go they only needed one win. Even after getting blown out by the Eagles all they needed was to beat the Packers at Soldier Field, but blew it thanks to Lance Briggs and his defensive teammates inexplicably forgetting not one but two fundamentals they'd had drilled into them for years, play to the whistle and always pick up a loose ball, and then completely blowing the coverage on 4th and 8 and conceding a 48 yard TD with 46 seconds to go.

I really don't get the negativity around McCown. Compared to so many other QBs that have come through Chicago he played well when called on.

The Bears couldn't get more wins than losses with:
Cutler (51-51, 52-52 including playoffs)
Hanie (0-4)
Campbell (0-1)
Clausen (0-1)
Barkley (1-5)
Hoyer (1-4)
Glennon (1-3)
Daniel (1-2)
Foles (3-5)
Dalton (3- 3)
Fields (14-30)
Bagent (2-2)

After last season Williams is going to have to win a lot of games before he gets in the black as a starting QB (5-12).

I was wrong about Trubisky being the only one with a winning record as a starter in the last 15 years though:
Trubisky (29-21, 29-23 including playoffs)
McCown (4-3)
Collins (1-0)

In his lone start Todd Collins completed a stonking 6 of 16 pass attempts for 32 yards and threw 4 INTs for a 6.2 passer rating and got benched for Caleb Hanie, but somehow the Bears did win thanks to 3 INTs of their own and a stellar day for Matt Forte (166 yards rushing with 2 TDs and 22 of the teams 51 receiving yards).

Ultimately what the above shows is that having a veteran backup hasn't meant the Bears have had any more success than having a young backup with little or no experience. We know all too well that finding good starting QBs hasn't been the Bears forte but neither has finding decent backups. McCown proved to be a rare exception.

So I'm happy to run with Bagent and his 2-2 record as an undrafted rookie and if Keenum makes the 53 too then I'm fine with that given his 30-36 career record as a starter and 3-1 record since 2021.

My dyslexia reversing stats.

[HisRoyalSweetness]

My dyslexia reversing stats.

Fair enough.

I guess that's made looking at a lot of Bears stats more palatable in recent years. 12-5 looks so much better than 5-12.

[artbest01]

IMO, the signing of Keenum is predominately about Caleb. There appears to be a school of thought in NFL circles that first and second year QBs can benefit greatly from having a veteran backup in the room and on the sideline. There are some who surmise that Caleb would have benefited greatly from having a mentor on the roster a year ago. IMO, Bagent is a fairly serviceable backup, but there's not a lot he can offer #18 vis-a-vis experience/wisdom/advice etc.

Ben Johnson likely identified this as a gap and the Bears filled it with Case Keenum.

[RichH55]

Case Keenum's career numbers just aren't that bad, I really don't get it. 66 starts gives us a good idea who he is, and he's just what you want from a backup IMO. Career numbers: 62.3% comp percentage, 79 TDs against 51 INTs, 84.6 QBR. He was a starter for 2 seasons, he went 17-13 and had a 98.3 and 81.2 QBR respectively and averaged over 3,700 yards. He's had 11 career game winning drives. He's 36, which is old for a starter but for a backup isn't any issue. His days of starting were 2017/18 so it's not THAT long ago.

I honestly think people just have something stuck in their heads that isn't lining up with reality.

2017/18 is quite long ago in fact. I wish that weren't true....but it very much is

[RichH55]

I fail to see what the problem is with giving Ben Johnson more options to choose from.

This isn't an option .....it's just a Vet voice in the room - nothing more.

He's a guy who can help when Ben Johnson has to do other things besides just coaching up the QB

And in case this happens to our OC and his family