Linda S. wrote:
I thought D. McNeil made some excellent points in his "piece of crap he wrote". I'm sure he still feels the exact same way, even though the trade has given him excitement for the upcoming 2009 campaign.
His two main points against the acquisition of J. Cutler are: 1. His Erratic Play 2. Immaturity. Even the biggest J. Cutler supporters cannot dispute these two caution signals.
Let's take a closer look:
1) D. McNeil starts by stating: Cutler's erratic play is reason enough for Bears general manager Jerry Angelo to pass on cutting a deal for the disgruntled Denver Broncos quarterback. If you need more, Cutler's immature attitude, coupled with the Bears' inability to reach players with those issues, are reasons to steer clear.
.... and backs up his description about the erratic play with these facts:
Cutler has been in the league three years, and his next playoff appearance will be his first.
How is the fact that the Broncos haven't made the playoffs an indicator of Cutler’s erratic play? That just shows that the team as a whole sucks...Cutler just had good #s on a bad team.
I don't see your point here.
Linda S. wrote:
Blame fantasy football. Big numbers have distorted reality so much, we can't decipher what's good anymore. Cutler threw for more than 4,500 yards last season and made the Pro Bowl, but when the Broncos needed him to be ''the man'' and take them to the playoffs, he spit the bit.
Denver lost to Carolina, Buffalo and San Diego in its final three games. Cutler, who earlier in the year said he had a stronger arm than Hall of Famer John Elway, threw two touchdown passes and was intercepted four times in that stretch. His passer rating was lower than 50 in two of the losses.
.... and then follows it all up with this funny quip: Sounds more like Rex Grossman than Elway.
LOL.
Apparently you didn't read the reviews of this column in an earlier thread. Had you done that, you would know that the evaluation of Cutler's performance in the last 3 games were completely inaccurate. His passer rating was over 70 in all 3 games and his performance essentially mirrored his performance in the previous 13 games.
So again, I don't see your point.
Linda S. wrote:
2) To further make his point about the erractic play, D. McNeil provides the reader with more facts. Let's take a look: Cutler threw 25 touchdown passes with 18 interceptions and posted an above-average 86 rating in 2008. He also contributed largely to bad losses to Kansas City -- after a 3-0 start -- and to Oakland in Week 12 at home.
If pointing to 2 subpar games in which the rest of the team also played like garbage is your reason to not trade for Cutler, then you're football retarded. Find me a guy who had 16 great games on an average team...good luck.
Linda S. wrote:
3) The immaturity has been a large issue for the local football squad and here D. McNeil explains: If the Bears had a track record of making good soldiers out of questionable characters, it would be easier to have an open mind. I struggle, however, to imagine coach Lovie Smith and his wingmen helping Cutler see the light.
They didn't do it with Tank Johnson. Or Cedric Benson. Last year, Tommie Harris became a sideshow.
What about the other 100 players they've had that are good soldiers...that doesn't count for anything? Tank Johnson was in trouble with the law, so was Cedric Benson. Cutler never has been. That's not a fair comparison. They're no babysitters, they're football coaches and no team is immune to this.
Your point is not proven.
Linda S. wrote:
4) To further ad his doubts, D. McNeil supplements his arguement with thoughts about L. Staff and his smith: Even if the Bears were able to tame Cutler, there is no evidence they're able to unlock his potential. The Bears never have developed quarterbacks.
Since the Bears didn’t “develop” Grossman or a Orton, then they shouldn’t bother trying? Players make coaches look good more than the other way around. The Bear offense wasn’t that bad last year with Orton. Improvement was made on that side of the ball. With Cutler, I expect to continue to improve on offense. Lovie HAS proven to be able run an effective defense and THAT’S where the improvement is needed most for the upcoming season.
Linda S. wrote:
5) D. McNeil wraps up the article acknowledging that K. Orton is not the answer: It's true the Bears have more questions than answers about Kyle Orton, but Orton shares more with Cutler than people know. With their teams fighting for a wild-card berth, both posted sub-50 ratings in two of their final three games last season.
Both will be 26 when the season begins. Both have shown flashes, then performed like clueless rookies, long after their first seasons.
Again, your comparison is baseless since your stats are flat out wrong. Cutler had only one game with a QB rating below 50…and the final 3 games where his team was fighting for a wild card berth did not include that performance (all three games above a 70 rating…unlike Orton). The fact is that the Bronco defense choked in every one of those games and caused Cutler to have to force the issue and throw some picks…but otherwise his play was solid in those games.
Linda S. wrote:
6) Continuing his stance on J. Cutler's poor attitude, D. McNeil closes with this: I don't see Orton petulantly not replying to a text from his head coach, however, when Smith praises the play of Brett Basanez in a preseason game this August. Orton likely won't be baited into a war of words with another quarterback in his division, the way Cutler was last year with San Diego's Philip Rivers.
Dare I suggest that Orton -- the kid made infamous for an Internet photo of him slurping sour mash in an Iowa bar during his first season -- has a leg up on Cutler when it comes to maturity and leadership?
7) In closing, D. McNeil reiterates what he believes is a MUST intangible of an NFL quarterback; leadership. Something that we all know K. Orton has failed to demonstrate as well as J. Cutler: A good leader must be willing to be unpopular. So far, that's the only part of the job Cutler has down.
Hypotheticals, what ifs, and broad generalizations based solely on one incident that we don’t know both sides of the story and doesn’t affect on field play is a flimsy argument at best…and fluff to fill space at worst. There’s a point, but hardly supported.
Linda S. wrote:
So G. Klooptoz - I don't really see why D. McNeil can't still hold these same reservations about the trade but, at the same time, be excited for the 2009 Chicago Bear season. A new era has begun.
Linda S.
Feel free to have all the reservations about any players and any team, but the Bears are now a better team because they have Cutler, period. What he adds to the team far outweighs any of the perceived negatives attached to him.
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
