Expensive Quarterback Mistakes in the NFL, and How to Avoid

JABF There is no "change of luck" in drafting a qb for this team. The Bears rarely in their entire history have drafted a QB in the first round; when they have they have normally been solid, not always but most teams don't always hit on every position let alone QB. McMahon, Harbaugh recently were decent to good starters in the NFL, HoF'rs no. Hell even Rex was able to get to the SB, although most of that wasn't b/c of him and sometimes just out of spite. Bears need to start TRYING to draft qb's before we can say they aren't good at it.

As for those stating the Contract had nothing to do w/the Bears not drafting a qb high, if that were true, there would be some recent history w/other teams to support it. So lets take a look at high end qb contracts; I'll deal w/"older" QBs or not elite QB's to keep it fair:
Pitt/Big Ben 2 big contracts since 08, no qb's taken in the first 3 rounds
Balt/Flacco 2 big contracts since 2013, no qb's taken in the first 3 rounds
Dal/Romo 2 big contracts since 08 no qb's taken in first 3 rounds
NO's/Brees 1 big contract(2012-2016) 1 qb drafted in 2015 3rd rd.
SF/Colin K 1 big contract, no qb's taken
Chi/Cutler, 1 big contract, no qb's taken

So if these contracts were not prohibiting teams from drafting qb's to eventually replace their current either older or bad qb's, why aren't they drafting them? It's not JUST about the money, it's about what is implied; ie this guy has to be our starter b/c we cannot afford to have that money sitting on the bench. Don't believe me, Dallas is now looking to trade Romo(won't happen b/c of that contract btw it makes him untradeable).

There is an implicit understanding of what happens w/these contracts, and that is the guy is going to be the starter for most of, if not all of, that contract. So you aren't going to draft his replacement in the first 2-3 years of a 4-5 year contract and lose 1/2 or more of that rookie contract sitting on the bench. I think it's a mistake mind you, but that's what the nfl trend is. So yes giving that contract to Cutler has put this team in a position to ignore the fact that he's 1 bad and 2 has no legitimate backup to try and take his place yet.

Bukt, I agree Tenn was never going to trade w/Chicago for Cutler..unless the trade was completely 1 sided; but that doesn't mean the Bears didn't try, and I 100% believe they did.

OF those listed I only thought about excluding Brees. Big Ben and Romo are better, but both have been at it a long time and have had issues w/health at times, Ben has only 2 years since 2010 of 16 games played, and only 1 more w/15. Romo's health is well documented. So I think they are relevant to the conversation.

I agree w/you btw, that the last 2 years shouldn't have been relevant, but it appears that it was.