Jump to content

2014-2015 NFL Football thread


Recommended Posts

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Oct 6, 2014 -> 05:13 PM)
It's not like I'm looking that hard for reasons to criticize him... he makes the case for me.

 

You literally said you thought it was a good thing a call didn't go the Bears way. Think about that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 8.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

QUOTE (GoSox05 @ Oct 7, 2014 -> 09:10 AM)
Could be a pretty good group of QBs in this draft. I wonder if the Bears have thought about taking one in the first round.

 

Are they to that point yet?

 

Nope, not with the money committed to Cutler for the next 3 years. The money is invested now, boom or bust

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (GoSox05 @ Oct 7, 2014 -> 09:10 AM)
Could be a pretty good group of QBs in this draft. I wonder if the Bears have thought about taking one in the first round.

 

Are they to that point yet?

 

I'm not a Bears fan by any means, but I think they let this year play out and if Cutler proves he can't hang, they start looking into QBs of the future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Oct 7, 2014 -> 10:14 AM)
I'm not a Bears fan by any means, but I think they let this year play out and if Cutler proves he can't hang, they start looking into QBs of the future.

Next year they might look to find a Cutler replacement if they're still struggling along, this year just doesn't fit with his contract. No reason to bench a rookie QB for 2 years.

 

Maybe if you pick one up in rounds 3/4.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Oct 7, 2014 -> 10:13 AM)
Nope, not with the money committed to Cutler for the next 3 years. The money is invested now, boom or bust

 

The Packers let Rodgers sit behind Favre for 3 years so you never know. Especially if they pick in the 20's, there's not as much pressure as picking a QB in the top 5 or so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Oct 7, 2014 -> 09:24 AM)
Next year they might look to find a Cutler replacement if they're still struggling along, this year just doesn't fit with his contract. No reason to bench a rookie QB for 2 years.

 

Maybe if you pick one up in rounds 3/4.

 

There's plenty of reason to have a rookie QB sit on the bench for 2 years. Work on mechanics, learn and understand the offense, and learn to read the defense. As a Bills fan, you saw what happens when you throw a raw rookie QB into the fire and now EJ has been benched 14 starts into his career. Ironically, he was replaced by Kyle Orton who, in his rookie year, was forced into starting action, was absolutely terrible (but kept the Bears in the game), and then went back to the bench when Grossman was healthy. Orton got to sit, watch, and learn the remainder of 2005, all of 2006, and most of 2007; in 2008, he came back, and he was a perfectly average QB and was then a part of the package to bring Jay Cutler to Chicago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Oct 7, 2014 -> 10:42 AM)
There's plenty of reason to have a rookie QB sit on the bench for 2 years. Work on mechanics, learn and understand the offense, and learn to read the defense. As a Bills fan, you saw what happens when you throw a raw rookie QB into the fire and now EJ has been benched 14 starts into his career. Ironically, he was replaced by Kyle Orton who, in his rookie year, was forced into starting action, was absolutely terrible (but kept the Bears in the game), and then went back to the bench when Grossman was healthy. Orton got to sit, watch, and learn the remainder of 2005, all of 2006, and most of 2007; in 2008, he came back, and he was a perfectly average QB and was then a part of the package to bring Jay Cutler to Chicago.

I'd be willing to let a 3rd round pick (Orton) sit on the bench for 2 years, but not a first round pick, not even a late first rounder if the Bears somehow wound up in that boat. Just too much demand for those guys to play, too many requirements of a first rounder.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You guys are nuts...there are a multitude of other positions we need to be drafting with our first pick in the draft over the next couple years. Yeah, if there is someone they really like rounds 3-4, go ahead and take him, but you're going to do that regardless of your starting quarterback situation if you're looking at the backups we have.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Oct 7, 2014 -> 09:51 AM)
I'd be willing to let a 3rd round pick (Orton) sit on the bench for 2 years, but not a first round pick, not even a late first rounder if the Bears somehow wound up in that boat. Just too much demand for those guys to play, too many requirements of a first rounder.

 

I guess I wasn't necessarily talking about a 1st round pick either. I'm just saying it's not a bad thing for the Bears to start looking for QBs.

 

Ultimately though, I have no problem with 1st round QBs sitting for 2 years. None whatsoever.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Oct 7, 2014 -> 10:20 AM)
Haha not a chance for 35. He's at like 11/6 right now? I think 35/17 is realistic.

 

 

Also, 6th in Completion Percentage at 68%. Grass isn't always greener. He is maddening but it could be a hell of a lot worse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Oct 7, 2014 -> 10:22 AM)
All I did was add INTs plus Fumbles from the "projected 16 game" line at that link to come up to 35.

 

 

He's not going to have 35 turnovers. Are you kidding me? I don't care what you added. It's one of the most ridiculous things I've ever seen here and I've seen some pretty ridiculous s*** posted here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The bottom line is there are plenty of other areas to improve while Jay is under contract that will contribute to the Bears winning.

 

And this nonsense about "the Bears will never win a Super Bowl with Jay Cutler" is just ridiculous.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Oct 7, 2014 -> 11:24 AM)
He's not going to have 35 turnovers. Are you kidding me? I don't care what you added. It's one of the most ridiculous things I've ever seen here and I've seen some pretty ridiculous s*** posted here.

Which should tell you that Cutler is losing the ball at a ridiculous rate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Oct 7, 2014 -> 10:22 AM)
All I did was add INTs plus Fumbles from the "projected 16 game" line at that link to come up to 35.

 

 

And that doesn't account for fumbles lost, just fumbles. The number is still ridiculous though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (iamshack @ Oct 7, 2014 -> 10:25 AM)
The bottom line is there are plenty of other areas to improve while Jay is under contract that will contribute to the Bears winning.

 

And this nonsense about "the Bears will never win a Super Bowl with Jay Cutler" is just ridiculous.

 

I do think it's still possible, but it was more likely when he was making 7 figures a season, not 8 figures. In a salary capped league, when he signed that bigger contract, the team became even more dependent on him winning games with his arm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Oct 7, 2014 -> 10:32 AM)
I do think it's still possible, but it was more likely when he was making 7 figures a season, not 8 figures. In a salary capped league, when he signed that bigger contract, the team became even more dependent on him winning games with his arm.

 

The money is seriously the reason I'm up in arms. He's paid like an elite QB when he is a good one. Can you imagine if we had Aaron Rodgers on the Bears?

 

The Bears would be 5-0 easily.

 

I just think the price was too high for Jay and that we could have used that money on some DB's.

Edited by pettie4sox
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (pettie4sox @ Oct 7, 2014 -> 10:35 AM)
The money is seriously the reason I'm up in arms. He's paid like an elite QB when he is a good one. Can you imagine if we had Aaron Rodgers on the Bears?

 

The Bears would be 5-0 easily.

 

I just think the price was too high for Jay and that we could have used that money on some DB's.

 

 

This isn't really true. He's paid the going rate. He's paid what he's worth. Go look around the league and check out other QB contracts for guys comparable to Jay.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (pettie4sox @ Oct 7, 2014 -> 10:35 AM)
The money is seriously the reason I'm up in arms. He's paid like an elite QB when he is a good one. Can you imagine if we had Aaron Rodgers on the Bears?

 

The Bears would be 5-0 easily.

 

I just think the price was too high for Jay and that we could have used that money on some DB's.

 

 

And who was going to play QB in this scenario?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...