Why? He'd be a good backup QB. Better than Barkley. If they had moved on from Loggains I could see moving on, but they can sign him for cheap and actually address QB with either a high draft pick or a Jimmy G trade. Either of which will again require the lion's share of the 1st team reps leaving little time for the backup to get up to speed.
Once the Bears have a QB as the starter for a season or two and they actually decide to keep the OC as well, hey, they can get silly and try to "develop" a backup for cheap. Until then, go with the easiest way even if it is a bit more expensive.
I can't get his Houston play out of my mind. He made Cutler look good. Really good. I did not see those meltdowns in Chicago, but I never saw wins either.
As long as they make a significant move at starting QB, I don't really care what they do for backup. I figure Hoyer would be easier to manage because they could ignore him for another year and focus on the rookie or Jimmy G.
I would flip my lid if Hoyer was signed to be the starting QB, just like I would if they had signed McCown to be the starter. They are veteran backups. They have their place as mercenaries and placeholders in the NFL. If they don't want to develop a backup because they have a new rookie starter, then Hoyer would be fine.
The flip side, if the Bears were going to roll with Cutler for another year, then I would not want to see Hoyer back. Cutler already got a year with Loggains, and since Log is back, then they can roll with Barkley or Shaw or whoever is cheaper with more potential.