Kyyle23 Posted March 19, 2009 Share Posted March 19, 2009 QUOTE (Jenks Heat @ Mar 19, 2009 -> 09:05 AM) That was priceless although he was bullied into saying something. Im guessing it was B&B that roasted this guy? If you call them and start making outlandish claims they will definitely bully you into backing up that claim with some sort of reasoning. And that is usually when people say some duuuuuuumb things Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Chappas Posted March 19, 2009 Share Posted March 19, 2009 QUOTE (kyyle23 @ Mar 19, 2009 -> 09:12 AM) Im guessing it was B&B that roasted this guy? If you call them and start making outlandish claims they will definitely bully you into backing up that claim with some sort of reasoning. And that is usually when people say some duuuuuuumb things That is exactly what happened. The caller claimed that Orton could some better throws than Cutler and they kept yelling, "what throw"....then he got nervous and spouted out the deep ball. It was really funny actually. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyyle23 Posted March 19, 2009 Share Posted March 19, 2009 QUOTE (Jenks Heat @ Mar 19, 2009 -> 09:15 AM) That is exactly what happened. The caller claimed that Orton could some better throws than Cutler and they kept yelling, "what throw"....then he got nervous and spouted out the deep ball. It was really funny actually. If there was one thing I could cut out of B&B, it is "angry" bernstein. Sometimes when he is in a really good mood it doesnt matter what people say, he will just laugh at them. But there are times when he is called out or disagrees with a caller that he comes off as the pompous ass that everyone thinks he is. Personally I dont see him in as bad of a light as everyone else does, but I could understand why they dislike him when he pulls that stuff. But as soon as you try and call out Bernstein, the call is OVER. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanOfCorn Posted March 19, 2009 Share Posted March 19, 2009 QUOTE (MurcieOne @ Mar 18, 2009 -> 10:14 PM) If the Bears are MUCH better suited for a game manager... then we should resign ourselves to the fact that we will never make consistent runs at the superbowl. It's not a coincidence that teams with pro bowl level talent at QB are seemingly in the title games (Conf. Champ, SB) every year. In fact, the only time we've made it to a title game in the past 20+ years was with --- a "gunslinger." The "game manager" tag is another way of saying... you have an average or below average QB. Orton is around average right now. Find me a trend of teams winning the SB with avg QB play and we can talk. While this team isn't a SB contender with Cutler... we're a lot closer to having a legitimate chance to win the big game with him than without him. Trent Dilfer says hi. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanOfCorn Posted March 19, 2009 Share Posted March 19, 2009 QUOTE (kyyle23 @ Mar 19, 2009 -> 09:18 AM) If there was one thing I could cut out of B&B, it is "angry" bernstein. Sometimes when he is in a really good mood it doesnt matter what people say, he will just laugh at them. But there are times when he is called out or disagrees with a caller that he comes off as the pompous ass that everyone thinks he is. Personally I dont see him in as bad of a light as everyone else does, but I could understand why they dislike him when he pulls that stuff. But as soon as you try and call out Bernstein, the call is OVER. That's exactly what I dislike about B&B. There are times when they think they know EVERYTHING about EVERYTHING. Now granted, they let the idiots do the talking more often than not by letting them through, but sometimes they just seem to think they are so superior...and that's when I switch to the Afternoon Saloon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyyle23 Posted March 19, 2009 Share Posted March 19, 2009 QUOTE (CanOfCorn @ Mar 19, 2009 -> 10:20 AM) That's exactly what I dislike about B&B. There are times when they think they know EVERYTHING about EVERYTHING. Now granted, they let the idiots do the talking more often than not by letting them through, but sometimes they just seem to think they are so superior...and that's when I switch to the Afternoon Saloon. having sat in the hotseat of a call in show, I sympathize(to a degree) with B&B and the idiots they deal with consistently, and I know they gear the show to let the idiots on instead of the smart callers, but it does get to be too much sometimes even for me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MurcieOne Posted March 19, 2009 Share Posted March 19, 2009 QUOTE (CanOfCorn @ Mar 19, 2009 -> 10:19 AM) Trent Dilfer says hi. Trent Dilfer is great on NFL Live. However, if your going to use him as a part of a trend... you may want to include some additional names. Last 12 SuperBowls 98 -- Elway, Favre (both pro bowlers) 99 -- Elway, Chandler (both pro bowlers) 00 -- Warner, McNair (both pro bowlers 01 -- Dilfer, Collins (neither pro bowlers) 02 -- Brady, Warner (both pro bowlers) 03 -- Johnson, Gannon (both pro bowlers) 04 -- Brady, Delhomme (both pro bowlers) 05 -- Brady, McNabb (both pro bowlers) 06 -- Roethlisberger, Hasselback (both pro bowlers) 07 -- Manning, Grossman (manning -- PB) 08 -- Manning, Brady (Brady -- PB) 09 -- Roethlisberger, Warner (both pro bowlers) 20 of the last 24 SB Qb's made the pro bowl. Now that fact is not without its faults... but i think its generally indicative that Trent Dilfer is an exception to the rule... and definitely not a TREND. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoodAsGould Posted March 19, 2009 Share Posted March 19, 2009 QUOTE (MurcieOne @ Mar 19, 2009 -> 10:38 AM) Trent Dilfer is great on NFL Live. However, if your going to use him as a part of a trend... you may want to include some additional names. Last 12 SuperBowls 98 -- Elway, Favre (both pro bowlers) 99 -- Elway, Chandler (both pro bowlers) 00 -- Warner, McNair (both pro bowlers 01 -- Dilfer, Collins (neither pro bowlers) 02 -- Brady, Warner (both pro bowlers) 03 -- Johnson, Gannon (both pro bowlers) 04 -- Brady, Delhomme (both pro bowlers) 05 -- Brady, McNabb (both pro bowlers) 06 -- Roethlisberger, Hasselback (both pro bowlers) 07 -- Manning, Grossman (manning -- PB) 08 -- Manning, Brady (Brady -- PB) 09 -- Roethlisberger, Warner (both pro bowlers) 20 of the last 24 SB Qb's made the pro bowl. Now that fact is not without its faults... but i think its generally indicative that Trent Dilfer is an exception to the rule... and definitely not a TREND. Pretty much the only crappy QB's of that bunch are Dilfer, Collins, Johnson, and Grossman. And in Dilfer's case that defense was pretty special good similar to that of the 85 Bears defense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted March 19, 2009 Share Posted March 19, 2009 QUOTE (CanOfCorn @ Mar 18, 2009 -> 11:32 AM) 1) Most important! The market has been set by the Matt Cassel trade. I know Cassel hasn't done anything near what Cutler has done, but Cassel was given the franchise tag and I believe the Chiefs got him AND Vrabel for a second rounder. There was talk that the Chiefs were willing to give the #3 pick up for that, and the Patriots wanted the #34 pick for financial reasons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knightni Posted March 19, 2009 Share Posted March 19, 2009 So, Tampa leads with a #1 and a #3? Really? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MurcieOne Posted March 19, 2009 Share Posted March 19, 2009 QUOTE (knightni @ Mar 19, 2009 -> 02:37 PM) So, Tampa leads with a #1 and a #3? Really? source? I'm trying to find that story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knightni Posted March 19, 2009 Share Posted March 19, 2009 QUOTE (MurcieOne @ Mar 19, 2009 -> 06:14 PM) source? I'm trying to find that story. It was watching ESPN News this afternoon. Michael Smith talked about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MurcieOne Posted March 19, 2009 Share Posted March 19, 2009 QUOTE (knightni @ Mar 19, 2009 -> 05:29 PM) It was watching ESPN News this afternoon. Michael Smith talked about it. i see i see Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knightni Posted March 19, 2009 Share Posted March 19, 2009 QUOTE (MurcieOne @ Mar 19, 2009 -> 06:38 PM) i see i see http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=3996493 2:15 in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GREEDY Posted March 20, 2009 Share Posted March 20, 2009 How many in that long list of quarterbacks have looked excellent one year and borderline bad the next??? Almost all of them! How can that be???? Maybe their circumstance, the situation AROUND THEM, changed: for the worse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MurcieOne Posted March 20, 2009 Share Posted March 20, 2009 QUOTE (GREEDY @ Mar 20, 2009 -> 03:04 PM) How many in that long list of quarterbacks have looked excellent one year and borderline bad the next??? Almost all of them! How can that be???? Maybe their circumstance, the situation AROUND THEM, changed: for the worse. A) almost all of them? maybe we're not looking at the same statistics. The only Qb's that got considerably worse on that list were Chandler (injured) Gannon (injured) Roethlisberger (pre-season motorcycle accident) Hasselbeck, and Grossman. B ) nobody will argue that a franchise QB will immediately make a team like the bears into a contender. OF COURSE the talent around him is going to determine that outcome. However, what that list tells you is that UNLESS you have a pro-bowl level QB your team is probably going to face a considerably more difficult time making the superbowl. YES you need a good overall team, but why not GET a franchise QB and then make the team better around him? we've been able to make decent overall teams (Def and Spec teams) but we HAVE NOT had an offense that can consistenly score! So yes... getting Jay Cutler wont make the offensive line magically better, or turn his receivers into pro bowlers... but he will solidify the one position that is PARAMOUNT to all others and fill a need this team hasn't been able to fill for 60 years! If we follow your line of reasoning... we will assemble a team that is finally good enough to support a franchise QB, but have no franchise QB. Then we will need to find a franchise QB... which this organization has already proven, it cannot do. So the rest of the team around the slightly above average to poor QB will have to carry us to the superbowl... which as indicated by that list... does not happen with any frequency. I like my plan better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lostfan Posted March 20, 2009 Share Posted March 20, 2009 QUOTE (MurcieOne @ Mar 20, 2009 -> 04:52 PM) A) almost all of them? maybe we're not looking at the same statistics. The only Qb's that got considerably worse on that list were Chandler (injured) Gannon (injured) Roethlisberger (pre-season motorcycle accident) Hasselbeck, and Grossman. B ) nobody will argue that a franchise QB will immediately make a team like the bears into a contender. OF COURSE the talent around him is going to determine that outcome. However, what that list tells you is that UNLESS you have a pro-bowl level QB your team is probably going to face a considerably more difficult time making the superbowl. YES you need a good overall team, but why not GET a franchise QB and then make the team better around him? we've been able to make decent overall teams (Def and Spec teams) but we HAVE NOT had an offense that can consistenly score! So yes... getting Jay Cutler wont make the offensive line magically better, or turn his receivers into pro bowlers... but he will solidify the one position that is PARAMOUNT to all others and fill a need this team hasn't been able to fill for 60 years! If we follow your line of reasoning... we will assemble a team that is finally good enough to support a franchise QB, but have no franchise QB. Then we will need to find a franchise QB... which this organization has already proven, it cannot do. So the rest of the team around the slightly above average to poor QB will have to carry us to the superbowl... which as indicated by that list... does not happen with any frequency. I like my plan better. If Angelo paid an inordinate amount of money in a trade and re-did Cutler's contract with a bunch of guaranteed money without quickly building an offense around him (admittedly, once you have the QB, that's the easy part), the only thing that will happen is Culter will struggle badly, be run out of town, and fans will once again be calling for Angelo's head. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MurcieOne Posted March 20, 2009 Share Posted March 20, 2009 QUOTE (lostfan @ Mar 20, 2009 -> 04:11 PM) If Angelo paid an inordinate amount of money in a trade and re-did Cutler's contract with a bunch of guaranteed money without quickly building an offense around him (admittedly, once you have the QB, that's the easy part), the only thing that will happen is Culter will struggle badly, be run out of town, and fans will once again be calling for Angelo's head. Thats a risk a good team must be willing to take. I'm not sure how Angelo would pay money in a trade (i'm assuming you mean give up picks). I would be hesitant to agree with you about running Cutler out of town. A) if he has been given a bunch of guaranteed money (as you say) hes not going to be run out of town B ) I think that Cutler would - if anything - give Angelo/Lovie more of a honeymoon period because their success/failure would be tied to Cutler. C) What makes you think Cutler will struggle badly? Why not sign a RT (Levi Jones, I guess), and a WR (Holt?), you already have Matt Forte and the offensive line wasn't pathetic last year. If Chris Williams is the player we thought when we drafted him... your offensive line would be pretty average. Forte, Olsen, Clark, Holt (or Harrison or Toomer etc...) Hester (ugh) thats not an offense that would struggle badly with Cutler at the helm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lostfan Posted March 20, 2009 Share Posted March 20, 2009 QUOTE (MurcieOne @ Mar 20, 2009 -> 05:39 PM) Thats a risk a good team must be willing to take. I'm not sure how Angelo would pay money in a trade (i'm assuming you mean give up picks). I would be hesitant to agree with you about running Cutler out of town. A) if he has been given a bunch of guaranteed money (as you say) hes not going to be run out of town B ) I think that Cutler would - if anything - give Angelo/Lovie more of a honeymoon period because their success/failure would be tied to Cutler. C) What makes you think Cutler will struggle badly? Why not sign a RT (Levi Jones, I guess), and a WR (Holt?), you already have Matt Forte and the offensive line wasn't pathetic last year. If Chris Williams is the player we thought when we drafted him... your offensive line would be pretty average. Forte, Olsen, Clark, Holt (or Harrison or Toomer etc...) Hester (ugh) thats not an offense that would struggle badly with Cutler at the helm. - by "payment" I meant what Angelo actually gave Denver (I'm not at all opposed to bringing Cutler here, but I don't want him if it means a retardedly one-sided package) - the ones who would run him out are the bipolar dumbass Bears fans who will lay the blame solely at Cutler's feet not recognizing the circumstances. I live and breathe Bears football but goddamn if they don't have a dumbass fanbase. - He would struggle because I was talking about as the offense is currently constructed and assuming that the previously mentioned one-sided trade would include a player like Olsen or Forte plus whatever else, and that Angelo is going to half-ass his rebuilding of the O-line, like he is doing now. He doesn't seem to put much value into the O-line and it annoys me to no end, in fact I was shocked when he actually did the right thing and drafted Chris Williams last year (back injury notwithstanding). Of course, if Angelo somehow completely changed his approach to that and added a legit WR everything I've said here is moot, minus the loss of key players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knightni Posted March 20, 2009 Share Posted March 20, 2009 Angelo sucks at drafting 1st round guys anyway - where's the downside? We don't draft another guy who ends up getting arrested or injures himself right after we sign him? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyyle23 Posted March 20, 2009 Share Posted March 20, 2009 I am fairly positive that the solution is to do nothing because it will never get better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted March 23, 2009 Share Posted March 23, 2009 QUOTE (lostfan @ Mar 18, 2009 -> 06:39 PM) That's because he was old, and sucked. He did his last couple of years in Green Bay too actually. He was pretty damn good his final season in Green Bay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted March 23, 2009 Share Posted March 23, 2009 QUOTE (MurcieOne @ Mar 18, 2009 -> 08:14 PM) If the Bears are MUCH better suited for a game manager... then we should resign ourselves to the fact that we will never make consistent runs at the superbowl. It's not a coincidence that teams with pro bowl level talent at QB are seemingly in the title games (Conf. Champ, SB) every year. In fact, the only time we've made it to a title game in the past 20+ years was with --- a "gunslinger." The "game manager" tag is another way of saying... you have an average or below average QB. Orton is around average right now. Find me a trend of teams winning the SB with avg QB play and we can talk. While this team isn't a SB contender with Cutler... we're a lot closer to having a legitimate chance to win the big game with him than without him. Brady is pretty much a game manager, but he's also incredibly productive. Its not as if Brady is ridiculous talented, he's just very very smart and accurate and makes quick decisions and great plays. So I think the key is you need an above average QB, but a game manager can very well be an above average QB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted March 23, 2009 Share Posted March 23, 2009 QUOTE (MurcieOne @ Mar 19, 2009 -> 08:38 AM) Trent Dilfer is great on NFL Live. However, if your going to use him as a part of a trend... you may want to include some additional names. Last 12 SuperBowls 98 -- Elway, Favre (both pro bowlers) 99 -- Elway, Chandler (both pro bowlers) 00 -- Warner, McNair (both pro bowlers 01 -- Dilfer, Collins (neither pro bowlers) 02 -- Brady, Warner (both pro bowlers) 03 -- Johnson, Gannon (both pro bowlers) 04 -- Brady, Delhomme (both pro bowlers) 05 -- Brady, McNabb (both pro bowlers) 06 -- Roethlisberger, Hasselback (both pro bowlers) 07 -- Manning, Grossman (manning -- PB) 08 -- Manning, Brady (Brady -- PB) 09 -- Roethlisberger, Warner (both pro bowlers) 20 of the last 24 SB Qb's made the pro bowl. Now that fact is not without its faults... but i think its generally indicative that Trent Dilfer is an exception to the rule... and definitely not a TREND. Awesome post Mark. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lostfan Posted March 23, 2009 Share Posted March 23, 2009 QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Mar 22, 2009 -> 10:31 PM) He was pretty damn good his final season in Green Bay. Yeah 2007 kind of came out of nowhere. He was hot garbage in '05 and '06 though (especially in '05). Obviously I'm a Bears fan, but objectively, I fully supported the Pack's front office shoving him out the door when he tried to push his way back in unannounced. Hindsight only proved them right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts