quote:

Originally posted by Grave Digger:
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.

Well, you yourself mention a better arm and more mobility. So there's that.

With Cutler we know he's capable of throwing for 243 yards and 1.5 TDs per game at the NFL level over a stretch of 2-3 seasons, since those are his career averages. Yes, he's NEEDED to more than Orton, and he's had better wide receivers, but he's proven that he actually can do it when called upon to do it. Lots of guys get the opportunity or need to pass that often and simply implode and get benched.

With Orton all we know is that he's capable of averaging 177 yards and 1 TD per game, because those are his career averages (over a similar number of games, 33 compared to 37). Sure, maybe if he had Cutler's wideouts and defense he'd have done the same, but there's no evidence of that.

So you've got a guy who was drafted 2 rounds earlier, has a stronger arm and better mobility, who's put up much better numbers at the NFL level. Anything else (what Orton might have done in Denver, and what Cutler might have done in Chicago) is speculation, so far anyway.

quote:

Originally posted by Grave Digger:
Why?

By nearly every measurable characteristic (size, speed, arm strength, scrambling ability, passing stats, etc.) there's little doubt as to who the more desirable QB is.

Obviously, intangibles are VERY important (or else every physically gifted QB drafted in the first round would succeed, and every over-achieving late-rounder would fail), but they're tough to gauge with such young QBs. I think it's WAY premature to call Orton a better leader and decision maker. The Denver players seemed to think Cuttler was a pretty good leader and his decision making, using your rationale, would have been adversely impacted by the team's lack of a go-to runner and woeful defense. They were playing from behind nearly every game.

Not saying it's a slam-dunk that Cuttler sets the world on fire here, but your green and gold glasses must be pretty foggy if you don't think the Bears upgraded the position.

B-N-D

quote:

Originally posted by BearNDesert:


Not saying it's a slam-dunk that Cuttler sets the world on fire here, but your green and gold glasses must be pretty foggy if you don't think the Bears upgraded the position.

B-N-D

That's it exactly. It is a definite position upgrade, but the Bears have so many other offensive questions that Cutler's success is far from certain.
Too be honest, and this is just me. If I were the Bears, I would much rather have the draft picks back and work towards building up the line and skill positions on offense and keep Orton vs. give away a lot of picks for a good young QB with no one to throw to, and a suspect O-line.


Max, I have a hard time believing that McDaniels is the only one that wanted Cutler gone. If that is the case the Broncos have serious leadership issues. I suppose it's possible, but if it is true, then Bowlen has to be one of the most hands-off owners in the league.

quote:

Originally posted by Mr.Yuck:
That's it exactly. It is a definite position upgrade, but the Bears have so many other offensive questions that Cutler's success is far from certain.

This is true. Someone asked me a couple months ago, before the trade, who would I rather have? Cutler or Boldin? And I answered Boldin.

It's the chicken and the egg thing: Do good receivers make the QB, or does a good QB make the receivers. Jerry Angelo seems to think it's the latter. Time will tell...

B-N-D

quote:

Originally posted by Mr.Yuck:
Max, I have a hard time believing that McDaniels is the only one that wanted Cutler gone. If that is the case the Broncos have serious leadership issues. I suppose it's possible, but if it is true, then Bowlen has to be one of the most hands-off owners in the league.

It's certainly possible that everyone in the organization wanted to break ties with "Shanahan's guy" after firing him. All I know is that there was no indication of any kind that the Broncos weren't happy with Cutler until after the Cassel stuff came out, and it can't be a coincidence that McDaniels and Cassel were both with New England last year. Put it this way, if Cassel hadn't been available via trade, is there any doubt that Cutler would still be Denver's quarterback? Not to me. Apart from the rumors about partying or that maybe Cook would be seeking a new contract or whatever, wasn't the guy everything they could have hoped for when they drafted him three years ago? I really think most "NFL observers," fans, whatever, felt that quarterback was about the only position on the Broncos that they were all set at.

An Orton-Boldin Tandem is far scarier to me then Cutler-Hester.....or whomever the Bears send out at WR right now.

Max, I'm sure we'll never know what really happened behind the scenes or how everyone in Denver really felt.
You may very well be correct in assuming that if Cassel was not trade bait that Cutler is still a Bronco.

One thing though....I know the GM/Owner need to stand behind a new coach, but if the Cutler trade ultimately DID result from him not being McDaniels guy.....then as I posted earlier there are some leadership issues in Denver. Someone higher up should have told McDaniels to STFU!
Make nice and move on.

Though I blame McDaniels for things falling apart, it seems like he made a good faith effort after the fact to patch things up and Cutler wouldn't have it. So, both sides had some fault.

Bowlen probably got used to being hands-off because Shanahan really did make all the decisions for about a dozen years or so.

Don't get me wrong....I definitely think there was fault on both sides.

Not sure which type owner I would like less. Snyder/Jones type who has to have his hands in everything, or Bowlen type who may indeed be a hands-off owner.
Scratch that. There's no comparison.......Snyder/Jones suck!

quote:

Originally posted by BearNDesert:

Not saying it's a slam-dunk that Cuttler sets the world on fire here, but your green and gold glasses must be pretty foggy if you don't think the Bears upgraded the position.

B-N-D

as I stated earlier, yes the physical measurables are a slight upgrade but theres still a chance his immature personality could create more dissension
and problems than a stronger arm can overcome.

quote:

Originally posted by WolfPack:

as I stated earlier, yes the physical measurables are a slight upgrade ...

And they say drugs are bad for us.

how would you describe the transition to a guy who was rated 16th with an 86.0 rating and 18 interceptions?

my bad, start carving his bust for Canton tonight

quote:

Originally posted by WolfPack:
how would you describe the transition to a guy who was rated 16th with an 86.0 rating and 18 interceptions?

my bad, start carving his bust for Canton tonight

Best player in the world, of course.

quote:

Originally posted by WolfPack:
how would you describe the transition to a guy who was rated 16th with an 86.0 rating and 18 interceptions?

my bad, start carving his bust for Canton tonight

He had a lot of INTS, that's for sure.

But consider he had a pathetic defense and went through 6 (or was it 7?) RB's due to injuries.

Give him a real RB (Forte) and a better Defense and he might end up with less INTS.

yeah he could. the 24th ranked D cant stay in that range if they want to help Jay.
Im curious how Forte will perform in his 2nd year. Teams will plan for him, but with Cutler back there its interesting how theyll approach it. For that first game, Id still focus on Forte and make Jay beat you until he burns ya.

Few players will be watched more closely than Cutler this season.

Rivers is a FA next season. Chargers are cheap. If the Bears or Vikes get him, then Ill soil myself. that kid is a leader.


btw, has there been any comparisons b/w Cutler and Grossman on the Bears board?
I see alot of similarities personally.

quote:

Originally posted by BearNDesert:
Not saying it's a slam-dunk that Cuttler sets the world on fire here, but your green and gold glasses must be pretty foggy if you don't think the Bears upgraded the position.

B-N-D

I think Cutler is an upgrade, I do, but I don't think he's as much of an upgrade as what's being touted. I think he's slightly better, only because of his arm strength and mobility.

I guess maybe, for me, it comes down to Ron Turner. Is Jay Cutler going to make Ron Turner a better coordinator? I doubt it. I happen to think Kyle Orton isn't a half bad QB, he played within his system and he won games. Stats don't mean anything if you aren't winning games. Statistically, Chicago's defense wasn't much better than Denvers, so Orton won 9 games with a good running game but no receivers, a banged up line, and a below average defense. Cutler won 8 games with a good passing attack but a bad defense and a bad running game. Cutler also had the advantage of a pretty good offensive coach while Orton did not. So really, he's not THAT much better of a QB in my opinion.

My other question is on the scheme. You would think they are going to rework their offense a bit to get Cutler a fair amount of passes to justify what they had to give up to get him? Are they going to throw the ball more at the expense of their running game, which if I'm not mistaken was the driving force behind those 9 wins? That doesn't seem smart. So what if they decide to stick to what they were doing and feed the ball to Forte at the expense of Cutler's stats, how is that going to go over with Cutler? Cutler getting upset about something small is a legit concern considering that's how he ended up in Chicago. Cutler is used to throwing the ball 600 times, he doesn't have a good enough group of receivers to pull that off in Chicago.

quote:

Originally posted by Grave Digger:

I guess maybe, for me, it comes down to Ron Turner. Is Jay Cutler going to make Ron Turner a better coordinator? I doubt it.

I hate to admit it, but I'm actually a closet Ron Turner...fan. The guy has done a pretty good job of milking the "talent" on his side of the ball to its fullest. If you look at the Bears' offensive rankings the past few years, they're pretty solid...especially when you factor how few difference makers he's had to work with during his tenure. (In contrast to the defensive side of the ball, which is loaded with talent, but has underachieved.)

This year, however, he SHOULD have a top 10 player at every skill position except WR, so the pressure will be on to deliver.

quote:

Originally posted by WolfPack:

btw, has there been any comparisons b/w Cutler and Grossman on the Bears board?
I see alot of similarities personally.

Other than a strong arm, I don't see that many similarities. Grossman is inaccurate, immobile and injury prone...things you can't say about Cutler. Sure, he's prone to the occassional bad decision and forced ball, but Cutler was the highest rated QB in the 4th quarter last year (when constantly playing from behind). That tells me he wasn't chucking the ball up into double coverage (Grossman's usual MO).

I think the only thing I'll miss from Grossman is his Play Action ability. The dude could disguise it better that almost any QB I've ever seen.

B-N-D

Cutler is definitely better talent-wise but what about his head?

Is he the kid with the million dollar arm and 2 cent brain? We know Cutler can handle success but can he handle it when times get tough? I guess we'll find out soon enough when he gets to face the Dominator's 3-4 defense.

Everything the Bears do is risky.