ESPN NFC North Blog

Posted by ESPN.com's Kevin Seifert

We feel your frustration. Really, we do.

This week's "Have at it" topic was perfect for debating -- but not so much when it came to choosing a winner. We asked you to name the NFC North's most desirable quarterback situation, knowing full well that each team's depth chart left something to be desired.

As a result, we heard nominations for all four teams among the 500-plus responses. While I didn't chart each answer, I'm confident that anecdotally more people chose the Chicago Bears -- with Kyle Orton starting, Rex Grossman serving as the backup and Caleb Hanie providing hope for the future -- than any other team.

Those answers were typified by Rob of Washington, D.C., who actually professes to root for Green Bay.

As a long time Packer fan I would love to say GB. However, Chicago may have the best situation. Orton is not great, but the Bears don't need great. [Matt] Forte can run and they have a great defense. With all the junk about Grossman everybody forgets it was Orton who lead the Bears to the playoffs in 2005. Grossman led the Bears to the SB in 2006 so they have Qbs with experience and know how to play winning Chicago football.

Rob of Chicago arrived at the Bears by process of elimination:

I never thought I would be saying this anytime soon, but the Bears are most solid at the QB position. [Minnesota's Gus] Frerotte has seen his better days in this league, and I don't think [Tarvaris] Jackson has what it takes to make it as a starter. [Green Bay's Aaron] Rodgers looked great the first two weeks and got the hype rolling, but since has looked quite human and may be injured leaving the Pack with 0 experience. The Lions are still the Lions, and cannot find a way to get the ball to their big name receivers. While many Bears fans become nauseous when they remember that Wrecks Grossman is their backup, Orton has been an efficient game manager and doesn't have a history of injuries. Don't forget, Caleb Hanie looked like a messiah in the preseason.

There were plenty of votes for the Packers, based primarily on the position that Rodgers is the best starter in the division. Daryl of Alberta fell into that group:

The Packers have the best situation at QB because they have a future there with Rodgers, who has played well, but is not a great QB, yet
Rodgers is proving he's a good, young QB with some bumps ahead of him. ... That is by far the best situation in the division, as he has two draft picks waiting in the wings behind him as well.

Some responders noted the Packers' unproven backup situation with rookies Matt Flynn and Brian Brohm. But as Topekatd13 wrote:

Aaron Rodgers would be the starter on any of those teams. And that's all that matters. There isn't a GM in the league who would rather have two mediocre QBs than a great one and a lousy one backing him up.

Daryl noted the past success of Detroit's Jon Kitna and suggested Kitna's problems this season are not all his fault. There were some Lions fans who agree with that premise and also are excited about the seeing former Michigan State star Drew Stanton on the field sometime this season.

For instance, Kevin of Holland wrote:

The Lions have the best QB situation in the north. Kitna's not better than Rodgers, but he's better than all the rest. Thus Detroit's backup, Drew Stanton, is the best young QB in the North. If he's given playing time, he will be better than Rodgers.

I don't know if I agree on Stanton, but I do know that unproven young quarterbacks get people excited like no other commodity in the NFL.

Some Vikings fans still believe Jackson has an exciting future and think their team has a relatively ideal situation. Consider Chad from St. Cloud's response:

I would certainly take the Vikings' situation. Given that the Vikings have their bases covered by having each type of QB you would want to see: 1) A high potential rookie backup, learning the ropes, and developing in JD Booty. 2) A solid veteran QB in Gus Frerotte. 3) A proven "backup" QB in Tarvaris Jackson. I've always thought, or been reassured this season, that while Jackson has the physical tools to play in the NFL, he doesn't make reads quick enough to get rid of the ball quickly, and doesn't throw a very good deep ball. I would be excited to have Tarvaris be my number 2 guy going into next season while I put all my chips on Booty.

I think Booty falls into the Stanton category of a completely unproven young quarterback, but I understand Chad's point.

My take? I think it's a close call between Green Bay and Chicago, with the Bears getting the edge based on having an appropriately qualified player in each spot.

Orton won't play in many Pro Bowls, but he's proved himself to be a capable starter on a team that relies on the running game and its defense. He needs to work on ball security, but no one is perfect.

Some Bears fans never want to see Grossman on the field again, but in the world of NFL backups, he is more than adequate. The basic premise for a backup is that he can run your offense and provide an opportunity to win a finite number of games. Grossman has proved he can do that.

I don't know what to make of Hanie, given that his preseason success came against third-string defenses. But the No. 3 spot should always be reserved for a young quarterback with some promise who needs development. Hanie fits that description.

I wouldn't say that Orton is superior to Rodgers as a starter, but I'm still not a fan of the Packers having two rookies backing him up. Flynn could prove as early as Sunday that he deserves that role, but it was a risky move by a team with playoff aspirations.