If you are going to spend any money at any position it should be for the QB since he, moreso than any other position, could win you games even if the rest of your team sucks. Cutler has demonstrated, in the NFL, that he can win games. He can lose games, too.

But, on the whole, unless you plan on completely tanking and rebuilding, getting rid of Marshall, Forte, Bennett, etc., having Cutler gives you a better chance to win games than any rookie QB you'd get in the late 1st/2nd round.

But, a drafted guy could benefit from being in the system and working their way in over time. Meanwhile, you don't completely suck at football.

Palmer vowed to retire before he'd ever play for the Bengals again.

Garrard was injured and didn't play for another 3 years.

Should I go back further? 2010 includes Kyle Orton.

If Jay Cutler is replaced by a rookie, please name me the last QB that was replaced by a rookie that was better than Jay Cutler not due to an injury.

These guys playing this year are replacing Ryan Fitzpatrick, Mark Sanchez, and Josh Freeman.

The year before it was Matt Painter, Rex Grossman, Matt Moore, Colt McCoy, and Tavaris Jackson.

The before that it was Jimmy Clausen, 36 year-old Matt Hasselbeck, David Garrard (injured), Carson Palmer, and 42 year-old Brett Favre.

These teams start guys because they don't have other options, not because it's their best way to win.

But, my point is made. Teams don't scrap QBs who win at a 67% clip (like Cutler has the past 4 years) coming off their best season (which Cutler is on pace to do) in the prime of their career to go with a rookie QB unless there is some crazy circumstance. Palmer is the closest but he gave the Bengals no choice in that decision.

Nobody does that. It would be unprecedented.

But, my point is made. Teams don't scrap QBs who win at a 67% clip (like Cutler has the past 4 years) coming off their best season (which Cutler is on pace to do) in the prime of their career to go with a rookie QB unless there is some crazy circumstance. Palmer is the closest but he gave the Bengals no choice in that decision.

Nobody does that. It would be unprecedented.

Draft a couple of young QB's, let Jay go & use that $20 Million on the defense.

It's more fun to be a victim

There will never be an effective vaccine. I'll never get one anyway.

So you'd give Cutler a 5 year deal? Teams don't franchise QBs who win at a 67% clip (like Cutler has the past 4 years) coming off their best season (which Cutler is on pace to do) in the prime of their career to draft a rookie QB in the first two rounds either. That also would be unprecedented by your own criteria.

No matter what happens, this is what I would do:

I'd give him a reasonable contract and draft a QB. If he won't be reasonable, I'd franchise tag him.

It's more fun to be a victim

There will never be an effective vaccine. I'll never get one anyway.

Using two of the few draft picks they have on the QB is not smart. Use one for sure, not two.

You bitch and moan almost every single day here about the money Peppers is making, and now you are calling for the Bears to throw $20million to the defense? You are just a special kind of suck, SH.

The downside is that BRick will have a lot more ammo to post with.

The Bears also have a lot of questions for next year. They have the fewest number of guys under contract for next year in the entire league. No reason to purposely make the QB one of those glaring question marks.

That is why you make the move next year. The Bears are going to have some major problems next year. They seem to have major problems this year. Waiting another year to start actively developing a new quarterback means a wasted year. It's different when you are in win now mode but the Bears likely won't be next year.

The defense needs the most help. The Bears need DL, DT, LB, CB & S.

It's more fun to be a victim

There will never be an effective vaccine. I'll never get one anyway.

If he sucks to end the year, I don't think I'd offer the contract. I'm guessing his injury is going to linger until the end of the year.

I'd just tag him and evaluate him next year. It's only going to be about $6-7 mil more than he's getting now and you'll be saving $17 mil from getting rid of Peppers alone.

So the Bears need all this help on defense, and you are advocating them spending two draft picks on the quarterback position?

It's more fun to be a victim

There will never be an effective vaccine. I'll never get one anyway.

I'm pretty sure Peppers can't be cut (he won't provide any cap relief).

So, am I assuming that the "franchise Cutler" people are thinking the Bears are at least potential Super Bowl contenders next year if they do?

So, am I assuming that the "franchise Cutler" people are thinking the Bears are at least potential Super Bowl contenders next year if they do?

It's more fun to be a victim

There will never be an effective vaccine. I'll never get one anyway.

All but about 6 teams are potential Super Bowl contenders every year. It's the NFL.

The Chiefs were 2-14 last year.

You don't need to be a Super Bowl favorite at the beginning of the season to get there. We've had 10-6 and 9-7 teams get to and win the Super Bowl recently. All the Bears need to do is get to the playoffs, and then win 3 or 4 games.

Cutler gives them the best chances to do that than anybody they could draft at this point.

I can't look at the defense and think they have a chance at the Super Bowl this year or next year. Maybe everything will get fixed.

I view this year as the end of the line for this group at least on defense. There are a few young players on offense to build around though.

Save money and throw it at the defense so you can bitch about the next guy being overpaid.