EAST RUTHERFORD, NJ - DECEMBER 08: Santonio Holmes #10 of the New York Jets carries the ball against the Oakland Raiders during the first half at MetLife Stadium on December 8, 2013 in East Rutherford, New Jersey. The Jets defeat the Raiders 37-27. (Photo by Maddie Meyer/Getty Images)
Updated: September 26, 2014 1:10PM
1. What do you think of the Bears adding Santonio Holmes as their third receiver?
There was a time when Santonio Holmes was a pretty darn good receiver in this league. I don’t know anything about him personally, but he seemed to be a little bit disgruntled at the end of his career in New York. I know that he was a very reliable receiver for a long time, so I guess you’d have to say it’s a good pickup.
2. Considering Jay Cutler’s fragility over the last few seasons, how important is the battle for the backup QB position on the Bears?
The backup quarterback isn’t important until you need him. People don’t even know who he is for a long time until you get a key injury to your starter. Then everyone in the world knows him. You have to have a guy the team trusts and that they know can do the job. I think the Bears have that.
3. Do you think the Browns made the right decision to go with Brian Hoyer over Johnny Manziel as their starting quarterback?
You draft people to play. Brian Hoyer is a great young man, and so is Manziel. They’re both going to go through a learning process. I understand why they’re doing it this way. But in my case, if I draft a guy, I’m going to play him. I’ll give you an example. The Jaguars drafted Blake Bortles with the third pick. Then they say he’s not going to be the starter. I’m not sure I understand that. I think you bring people in because you have evaluated their talent and you want to give them a shot at being the starter, a leader of your football team. Cleveland is in a rebuilding stage right now, so I don’t know that either guy will set the world on fire. But if it were me, I would start Manziel.
4. There seemed to be a lot of backlash over your Redskins comments this week. Do you stand by those remarks? Is there anything you wish to change or clarify?
Let me say this right now: How long has the Washington team been called the Redskins? Eighty-some years? Why didn’t it come up before then? Because we have people that sit around and think, ‘Maybe we can cause a stir over this.’
If an American Indian found it to be offensive, I can understand it perfectly. But for some, somebody, that that’s their job — to stir up crap. To go out and say it’s offensive. If an American Indian says it’s offensive, that’s fine — I’m all for changing it. But I don’t want some liberal to come out and say, ‘This is wrong.’ I don’t think it’s derogatory. A lot of people might think it’s derogatory. I don’t. Now, that’s my opinion. That doesn’t make me right. But that’s my opinion, and I’m entitled to that opinion. And I’ll stay with that opinion until I go to my grave. I don’t find it offensive. And I don’t know if the Indians do.
You know, the logo, to me, is classic. It’s a warrior — it’s a brave person. It signifies something noble to me. To me! Other people can look at it any way they want to. Did I answer the question?