And then he attempted to deflect the question by asking the caller a question how well Cutler would do in Seattle's system and Wilson, vice versa, in the Chicago system. And when that line of thought didn't work either, the conversation turned to, "Who else are you going to pay, if not Cutler?"

That question is interesting given that the Bears passed on Russel Wilson to draft Shea McLellin.

Obviously every team, even Seattle, underrated Wilson by a large degree but it just points out once again the fallacy in the "How could the Bears succeed if they hadn't paid Cutler like he is an elite qb?" argument.

Caller put Mulligan on the spot this morning to defend Cutler, asking whether he thought Russel Wilson was better than Jay Cutler. Mulligan gave his usual apologist answer for the Bears in saying, yes, and then he realized either how stupid or dishonest that sounded and changed his answer to "I don't know." And then he attempted to deflect the question by asking the caller a question how well Cutler would do in Seattle's system and Wilson, vice versa, in the Chicago system. And when that line of thought didn't work either, the conversation turned to, "Who else are you going to pay, if not Cutler?"

This is why I can't stand Mulligan, because of his Cutler and Bears dishonesty. Of course Wilson is a better quarterback than 30 year old Cutler. He is a superbowl winning quarterback, while in 5 years with the Bears Cutler has won just won playoff game against a mediocre Seattle team. Wilson also beat Rodgers, which Cutler doesn't do. As to his rhetorical question about who are you going to pay, you can draft a quarterback in the 1st round which the Bears have not done since Grossman, but Emery is too smart for us all in drafting the likes of McClellin instead. Just admit already that the Bears made a mistake with Cutler, Mulligan, and maybe you get a shred of your credibility back. You don't help yourself by pointing out to us that McCown had a better record in the Trestman system than Cutler.

It isn't really up for debate that Wilson is better is it?

Is Peyton Manning better than Cutler?

I know you're making a point here...

Just ya know....its kind of a ridiculous question


Anyway, it'd be easier to list QB's who are worse than Cutler


E.J. Manuel
Chad Henne
Geno Smith

That's depressing. Thanks RPB.

Anyway, it'd be easier to list QB's who are worse than Cutler


E.J. Manuel
Chad Henne
Geno Smith

This isn't even a debate. It's still unclear whether Cutler is even as good as McCown.

Only amongst the dim.

While Wilson is better the question is still irrelevant. The Bears clearly think Cutler is good enough to get them to the SB, and if he does it wouldn't be the first time a QB outside of the top 5 or top 10 best QBs made and won a Superbowl.

While Wilson is better the question is still irrelevant. The Bears clearly think Cutler is good enough to get them to the SB, and if he does it wouldn't be the first time a QB outside of the top 5 or top 10 best QBs made and won a Superbowl.

Even Wilson is probably not a top 5 QB. Here are mine:

Manning
Rodgers
Brady
Luck
Brees

Other than Dilfer what other QB in the 25-32 range has won a Super Bowl?

I'll start from non-top 10 QBs, and I'll limit to to making a Superbowl:

Kaep
Flacco
Grossman
Hasselback
Roethlisberger (rookie version)
Brad Johnson
Delhomme
Kerry Collins

On the bubble: Eli Manning

The question simply highlights just how screwed the Bears are by paying Cutler what they are.

It's clear they are paying him on what they hope he can be. Every year that goes by makes that less likely to happen. The Bears need Cutler to be better than Wilson this year. Otherwise, Cutler is not good enough to get them to a Super Bowl.