Page 1 2
Related Content: Green Bay Packers
|
Go
|
New
|
Find
|
Notify
|
Tools
|
Reply
|
|
 Location: East Wing of Boris' Mansion
Registered: 12-17-2000
Posts: 10312
|
Posted
Dungy: Jury out on Cutler
By Bob Wolfley of the Journal Sentinel Jun. 3, 2009 1:03 p.m. Former Indianapolis Colts coach Tony Dungy this morning made some interesting observations about the addition of quarterback Jay Cutler to the Chicago Bears. Dungy was on a conference call with reporters because he and former San Diego and New England safety Rodney Harrison have joined NBC-TV's Sunday studio show, "Football Night in America." Dungy made an initial remark about Cutler, which I followed up with a question in the Q&A. NBC's first telecast of the regular season is Chicago at Green Bay on Sept. 13. "I can remember when (Chicago coach) Lovie Smith went there saying we he to beat the Green Bay Packers, that's what this job is all about in Chicago," Dungy said. "They made a move specifically to do that, going out to get Jay Cutler, because of Green Bay's defense and all the press, man coverage, that we have got to have that threat. I think they took a risk. I think they took that risk specifically with beating the Green Bay Packers in mind. "Chicago gave up a lot to get a quarterback they believe is going to be the final piece in the puzzle," Dungy said. "But I'm not sure he has won enough to merit that. It may turn out to be a great move. But I think the jury is out. To me, it was a risky move. But I think that was done with the idea of beating one team." I asked Dungy if he considered Cutler the best starting quarterback in the NFC North. "I think that remains to be seen," Dungy said. "I think he is a very talented guy who can throw the ball very well. But quarterbacking is so much about leadership and so much about doing things under pressure. There is going to be a lot of pressure on him in Chicago because he is being viewed as the missing piece to the puzzle to get them back to the Super Bowl. We'll see about the maturity level. That's what I would question, and some of the things that happened leading to him leaving Denver. That would concern me as a coach. So that's my question. I think he can make all the throws, but quarterbacking is much more than just making throws." -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- jsonline.com/sportswatch Countdown to certain Bear troll fans in 5-4-3...... |
 Location: This is terrrrrrible....this is terrrrible
Registered: 01-06-2006
Posts: 4569
|
Posted
In B4 WWTTCTDSD?
|
 Location: Living life by taking "calculated risks" while hoping for some "luck" along the way...
Registered: 07-13-2000
Posts: 12139
|
Posted
Well, Lovie is 7-3 versus the Green and Gold without Cutler...
|
|
Registered: 04-21-2000
Posts: 916
|
Posted
Gee, thanks for the invitation to post  .Not sure why this is news. To recap: Cuttler is a talented QB who may or may not be the best QB in the NFC North, and the Bears made a risky move that may or may not work out  . Thanks for the insight, Tony! B-N-D |
 Location: Run, Brett, run!
Registered: 10-10-2004
Posts: 2359
|
Posted
Yeah, not exactly news, but since it's Dungy talking...
Has Tony Dungy become the new zeitgeist for the league? The retired coach everyone goes to for a sound bite? |
 Location: I like Dooley better than Lane anyway.
Registered: 03-20-2005
Posts: 8198
|
Posted
I will always wait to hear what Jon Gruden has to say before I make a judgement. There's a guy who walks around with a look on his face like he hates everyone and everything seems stupid to him. That's a guy that will give you a brutally honest opinion.
|
 Location: Northwestern Wisconsin
Registered: 02-02-2000
Posts: 1574
|
Posted
He may or may not be the worst too. Rodgers, Stafford, TJack/Sage.... |
 Location: Rockford, IL
Registered: 02-02-2000
Posts: 1597
|
Posted
Ditto to that. No news there. I hope he has something more informative (or original) to say by the time he goes on the air.  |
 Location: San Diego
Registered: 12-19-2005
Posts: 10549
|
Posted
They're pimping their new show lineup. Every year a new commentator hits the tube and does this PR crap during the dead time of the offseason, all of which is meant to drum up conversation. I guess this is about as 'controversial' as TCTD gets.
|
 Location: The opposite of Iowa
Registered: 01-22-2002
Posts: 13209
|
Posted
Coming from the very classy Dungy, essentially he was saying "God, that was a stupid move by the Bears, but I'm too nice to say that"
|
|
Registered: 02-02-2000
Posts: 202
|
Posted
Most of the media analysis I've heard is way more complementary of Cutler and the Bears move to acquire him. He's called a franchise QB that will stabilize QB for the Bears for the next 10 years. Acquiring a guy like that at the cost of 2 #1s and your current starting QB that has been deemed ok at best is not a risky move at all. Those guys are so rare that virtually no price is too high. I've heard people say he's immediately the best QB in the North, suggesting anyone that thinks differently has some form of mental defect. I'm not necessarily saying he's not the best but I think a fair case can be made for Rodgers by objective means.
Maybe Cutler will flourish and maybe he won't. At least that is how Dungy sees it. Not a whole lot in the media do. To suggest he's offering vanilla analysis that is the same ole', same ole' is simply not true based--at least based on my observations. |
|
Registered: 04-21-2000
Posts: 916
|
Posted
That's about as vanilla as it gets. At least the pundits in the media that are lauding the trade are taking a stand, and there have been plenty of "experts" on the other side of the fence, too. I read one column, by KC Joyner on ESPN.com, who wrote that Cuttler was overrated and would make Bears' fans miss Rex Grossman. I think he's wrong, but at least he offers a strong opinion. Blair's right--this may be "Classy Tony Dungy's" way of being critical. If that's the case, then I'll join Digger for a beer and we'll watch Gruden rip on everyone .B-N-D |
 Registered: 01-11-2002
Posts: 11498
|
Posted
Somebody should let Dungy know that when Lovie Smith was hired, the Packers were the dominant team in the division, having won three straight titles. So at that time doing something specifically "to beat the Green Bay Packers" made sense. Given that the Vikings just won the division and the Bears in fact were in the Super Bowl three years ago (where the quarterback let them down), it does not.
|
 Location: Windsor, WI
Registered: 05-16-2000
Posts: 949
|
Posted
Tell that to Denver. Apparently they didn't think he was such a rarity. |
|
Location: Living life by taking "calculated risks" while hoping for some "luck" along the way...
Registered: 07-13-2000
Posts: 12139
|
Posted
Agreed. And Lovie has succeeded with a 7-3 record (I stated that earlier in the thread). What has me confused about all the Viking and Bears trashing that goes on by Packer fans is that guess what, they both finished with a better record than the Pack last year. The Bears, despite Cutler being a baby, arrogant or whatever, dramatically improved their QB situation. Obviously it came at a steep price but that ain't gonna matter on the field next year. The Vikes, at least in a small way at the moment, upgraded theirs. On paper, the Pack has only improved by the draft and Capers, I guess. Now, do I believe the Pack can win the division? Yes. But they finished third last year and were 6-10. Two fields goals away from 8-8...so what. 6-10 is what it was and that makes them third best until they lace 'em up. |
|
Location: Living life by taking "calculated risks" while hoping for some "luck" along the way...
Registered: 07-13-2000
Posts: 12139
|
Posted
|
 Location: Give me a toot, I'll sell you my soul.
Registered: 01-23-2005
Posts: 5519
|
Posted
It was right the first time. Last time I checked McDaniels is NOT Head Coach, GM, and owner of the Broncos. I do think the Bears got better at QB. It would be foolish to think otherwise. That said.....they still have no one for Cutler to throw to and a suspect O-line. Cutler better hope that Forte has a monster year. |
|
Registered: 01-11-2002
Posts: 11498
|
Posted
No, but it is possible that McDaniels was the only one who actually wanted to trade him. He admitted himself that owner Pat Bowlen wasn't involved in the discussions involving Matt Cassel. "We were contacted multiple times about different scenarios," McDaniels said. "Some of the scenarios we discussed, and we did take part in those conversations. Nothing ever got to the point where we were going to be active on anything. We never went to Mr. (Pat) Bowlen with any scenario that was presented." Later, when all the stuff came out in the press about Cutler being ticked off, Bowlen said "I'm very disappointed. I'm disappointed in the whole picture, not just disappointed that we might lose our star quarterback." It looks like McDaniels got excited about acquiring the QB he'd worked with in New England, sold the GM on it, and then when Cassel was traded elsewhere, this stuff came out (maybe the Patriots? Certainly wouldn't put it past them). And it was only when it was clear the relationship between the coach he'd just hired and his "star quarterback" was irreparable that Bowlen got on board with dealing Cutler away. |
|
Location: I like Dooley better than Lane anyway.
Registered: 03-20-2005
Posts: 8198
|
Posted
Why? Just because Cutler threw for a lot of yards and Orton didn't? Denver had to throw because they went through about 5 starting RBs and their D was crap and Chicago didn't need to throw because Forte was running just fine. I will ask again, what does Cutler offer that Orton didn't? Better arm and more mobility but he's not as good of a leader and his decision making isn't as good. |
 Location: We must (trade for/sign) (insert player name here) immediately for whatever price to save our franchise.
Registered: 01-11-2004
Posts: 13314
|
Posted
have to agree with Yuck, the Bears got better at QB w/o a doubt in my mind.
Orton aspires to be Trent Dilfer |
 Location: Cary,NC - GoPack.com
Registered: 02-05-2004
Posts: 1931
|
Posted
I think theres gonna be more to this situation than just whats on paper. True, looking at just the physical tools of Cutler vs Orton, youd obviously give the nod to Jay. But look at Rex Grossman. All the physical tools too. strong arm, can run, decent deep ball. But he played on this same team without many weapons and he had the maturity of a college kid. see any trends? Lets not confuse Cutler with Montana. Jay is somewhere in the middle of the league statistically. and this is a kid who hasnt really shown much maturity either you can have all the physical tools *cough* Leaf *cough* Grossman, but you have to have alot more to succeed as starting QB in the NFL. |
|
Registered: 01-11-2002
Posts: 11498
|
Posted
I guess I don't see the need to question Cutler's ability just because he might be an immature punk. You note that Denver had about the league's worst defense and that Chicago didn't need to throw to win, both of which are true. So how does that make your point that Orton's a better leader and makes better decisions? Sounds like Orton didn't have to do nearly as much as Cutler for the team to have a chance to win.
By the way, your decision-making argument isn't validated by any numbers. Orton's TD-INT numbers (30-27) are worse than Cutler's (54-37), as is his completion percentage (55 versus 63). Not much question Cutler had better wideouts in Denver, but that still doesn't make your argument for you. It will be interesting to see how Orton's decision-making looks when his defense is giving up 8-10 points more per game. |
 Location: Thanks Ted.
Registered: 10-04-2004
Posts: 12199
|
Posted
Compared to what he had in Denver, I think the biggest problem with Cutler in Chicago is Turner.
|
|
Location: East Wing of Boris' Mansion
Registered: 12-17-2000
Posts: 10312
|
Posted
Stick Aaron Rodgers on the 2008 Bears team. Does he throw for 4000 yards? Nearly 30 TD's? A QB rating of 94?
With those WR's and backfield? Highly doubt it. For as much as a good QB makes for good WR's same holds true when you have talented wideouts, RB's and TE's to throw to. And for Cutler, I think that will be his biggest issue. He has no one remotely as good as Brandon Marshall, at least not yet. And with crap WR's including Hester, the chimes of "Cutler sucks" and "terrible trade" are a defin. possibility in '09. |
|
Location: I like Dooley better than Lane anyway.
Registered: 03-20-2005
Posts: 8198
|
Posted
I wasn't using that to prove my point, I was just pointing that out as the reason why Cutler's numbers are more inflated than Orton's.
I guess I shouldn't have said his decision making is worse but it's definitely not any better. Orton threw an INT every 33 attempts, Cutler every 32. Cutler isn't really an improvement. Orton worked within the system in Chicago and had a winning record for his career, can Cutler say that? I'm not arguing Kyle Orton is anything special, he isn't, I just don't see what it is about Jay Cutler that makes him head and shoulders better than Orton? Please explain it to me because obviously I'm not seeing things clearly. |
| Powered by Social Strata | Page 1 2 |
 | Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
|
©2000 - 2009 TimesFour