I am not sure of Vikings and Bucs due to unknown cap status but damn right the other teams will pay Cutler.

_________________
Elections have consequences.

You only play 1 QB at a time. Either way, it is wasted money.

The NFL is shifting to a model where many of the best teams went with rookies. It's probably the second best way to do it besides "Have a future hall of fame QB" and much more likely to work.

What teams are legitimate Super Bowl contenders with average to above average veteran QB's making fairly big money?

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

This.

_________________
Elections have consequences.

Right. AP makes a lot. So if they gave Cutler a big deal, 40% of their pay roll would be going to two offensive players. Not to mention the big deal they gave to Jennings last off season. So that's 3 players making over 50% of their money. Which means they'd have to go cheap on defense and offensive line.

The other teams might pay him. But does Cutler wnat to go to the Jags or Raiders? Those teams are far away. I could see the Cardinals for him, though. That's a decent roster.

New Orleans
Denver
New England
Baltimore
Dallas
Green Bay

Atlanta was the best team in the NFC last year for most of the year.

_________________
You know me like that.

It's actually easier to do it now with the rookie scale.

_________________
Be well

GO BEARS!!!

I still say the coach and GM like Cutler and he'll get a 4 or 5 year deal with the Bears.

Starting a QB on a rookie deal is a model. Lots of teams are doing it to great success. Seattle, Indianapolis, San Francisco, and Washington(last year at least) have all done it. The Jets and Buffalo are doing it this year though both those teams are bad enough that they aren't real contenders. Some of them had a cheaper veteran backup at the start but those went away quickly.

It's not a guarantee of anything obviously but when compared to the list of teams who stuck with a non-hall of fame QB it's proving to be a better model.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

Yup. Bears, Detroit, Chiefs, Chargers, and Eagles all have QBs making fairly big money that are legitimate playoff contenders as things stack up right now.

_________________

Brees, Manning, Brady, and Rodgers are not above average veteran QB's. They are future hall of famers. If you believe Cutler is a future hall of famer then of course you keep him.

In the NFL today, here is my list of how you best compete.
1) Future hall of fame QB.
2) Good production from a QB on a rookie deal and spend money elsewhere.

Signing a big money deal for an average to above average veteran is well below either of those.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

Giants and Pittsburgh are having down years but have Super Bowl trophies that can make them feel better about the strategy.

_________________
You know me like that.

Huh? All of those teams QB's are super stars with the exception of the Ravens. All are better than Cutler too.

_________________
Be well

GO BEARS!!!

I was of the mindset that the Bears would have to re-sign Cutler. I've changed my mind.

Unless it is a ridiculously team-friendly deal, I just can't see them doing it. Too much money and way too many other holes on the team.

Both won Super Bowls with QB's on rookie deals.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

Indy and Washington have top top draft picks.

Seattle signed the big money guy so that wasn't their strategy. They lucked into Wilson for the most part.

San Fran has Jim Harbaugh who is a genius and can do no wrong.

_________________
You know me like that.

You can only mention those teams because the QBs there are decent to good; that doesn't make it a "model," it just means they drafted well. And the success of Wilson or Luck or whomever has no bearing on the likelihood of the Bears' chances next year if they start a rookie QB. The ultimate indicator is talent, and those teams happen to have talented rookie QBs.

I will say that Marshawn Lynch and the defense are far more important to Seattle's chances than Russell Wilson, and I don't think you can mention Luck or RGIII since those were can't-miss, obvious prospects who would have been taken first or second in the draft by every team in the league. The Bears are likely to be drafting at spots in which no can't-miss prospect is available at the QB spot.

_________________
Successful calls:

Kyrie Irving will never win anything as a team's alpha: check
T.rubisky is a bust: check
Ben Simmons is a liability: check
The Fields Cult is dumb: double check

2013 CSFMB ROY

Before everybody reframes my position, I was the one that wanted to tag Cutler for a year to prove himself and sign him if he's leading them to a Super Bowl. If he does that, I'd pay him because he's probably a superstar at that point given the defense would likely suck at that time.

_________________
You know me like that.

Washington traded for that draft pick.

Indianapolis chose to get rid of the greatest QB of all time instead of keeping him around a year. Oh, but how will we compete without the 12th best QB for the first 7 games of 2013?

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

And both won with veteran QBs on big deals. So, what they hell are we arguing?

You have to draft a guy to put him on a rookie deal. What do you do then? Cut him loose? No, you pay him like NYG and Pitt and win more Super Bowls.

If Cutler proves good, you keep him while you start to develop your rookie and develop him into the next big money Super Bowl winning guy.

_________________
You know me like that.

No, it's a model. The Jets and Bills did it last year. We'll see 3 or 4 teams at least do it in this draft.
Washington traded to get RGIII. The Colts released the greatest QB of all time because they wanted to allocate resources better. It's definitely a model.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

I don't know what may be available but I would keep Cutler for the right price on a short term deal. I would also use one of my first 2 picks on a QB. Marshall and Forte probably only have about 2 or 3 good years left and the defense isn't going to get better. Not sure if Cutler has what it takes to lead this team by himself. He has the talent but that hasn't gotten him far. You would probably be better off starting over next season. It appears that is what Emery had in mind.

_________________
Be well

GO BEARS!!!

Yes, they traded up to get a top draft pick.

The Colts released an injured guy to take a once-in-a-decade prospect. That's not really a model. That's Providence.

_________________
You know me like that.

The model they used was to go young and try and win with a QB on a rookie deal. It worked pretty well. Other teams are doing it now. It's a lot more successful than keeping an average veteran QB for big money.
No, you keep him of course.
Proves good? How many years will we give him? At his age, is he suddenly going to become better than above average?

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

That statement needs the context of his age and a neck injury that many were doubting his ability to ever play again.

It's clear you don't think Jay Cutler is good enough to win a Super Bowl regardless of the talent around him on either side of the ball. That's fine, it might be correct.

I think he is. He's not that far behind Joe Flacco talent or ability wise.

The likelihood of drafting a QB good enough to lead the Bears to the Super Bowl in the next few years is next to nothing when you consider the state of the defense. If they are going to go, it's going to be because they are scoring a ton of points.

At the very least i would franchise Jay for next year and quite possibly the year after that being mindful of QB's available when my draft position comes up.

_________________
Team Cutler.

I'm too lazy to do the quote thing.

So if that was NYG and Pitt's "model" why did they sign them to long term big money deals? Because the "model" is to try to find a good QB.

If you keep the guy on the low money model and sign them to a big contract, it's not really a model.

You give him 1 year after this one. I think I've been pretty clear with that. Yes, he may become better than average.


Mac and Meat are having this exact discussion right now.

_________________
You know me like that.

It's not a model.

Playing young, cheap, good QBs is only a model if you cut them once they demand an increase in pay at the end of the rookie deal, and draft a new, young, QB in order to perpetuate the young, inexpensive QB "model."

The atrophied, middling, expensive QBs you speak of were once cheap prospects themselves (Brady, Manning, Manning, Brees), but they've become expensive, older QBs because their teams were interested in the model of finding a good QB, playing him, and then locking him in for the next decade at whatever the cost.

_________________
Successful calls:

Kyrie Irving will never win anything as a team's alpha: check
T.rubisky is a bust: check
Ben Simmons is a liability: check
The Fields Cult is dumb: double check

2013 CSFMB ROY

I'm not sure what you're arguing here. Obviously they kept both guys because they were winners. Eli didn't exactly have a cap friendly deal. The point is if you can draft a guy and develop him it makes more sense to do that than overpay a wildly inconsistent guy over 30.

_________________
Be well

GO BEARS!!!

Unless the entire thing is blown up in the offseason, this is probably the move that makes the most sense for the Bears. Cutler can be a stop-gap guy at the very least until the QB of the future can be drafted or otherwise acquired via trade or free agency.

_________________

Of course it is. But, for now, this is what the Bears have. A talented, underachieving QB still in the prime years of his career. You have the ability to kick the tires on this guy for another year or two and see if he can put it together.

You can still do the whole "find a guy in the draft and develop him into Ben Roethlisberger but less creepy" thing while trying to take advantage of the talents of Jay Cutler and riding a strong-armed guy to a Super Bowl.

A rookie isn't going to win the Super Bowl so you need a plan for next year. This is the best option for 2014 and maybe you luck into the great years of Jay Cutler's career. If you don't, you move on.

I don't know how to present this any clearer.

_________________
You know me like that.

It is a model. Draft pick vs veteran free agent. Draft a young QB and play him while he doesn't cost a lot and build the rest of your team with the savings.

_________________
Be well

GO BEARS!!!