A Little Clarification On Orton's Record...

[Broncos Mtnman]

I don't know if this has been covered, considering the number of Cutler threads, but I did some research on the win/loss records of Kyle Orton (since there are those who think that's the ONLY measurement of a QBs abilities) and it was very interesting.

Basically, Kyle had the benefit of not only playing when the opponent was held to 21 points or less, but he got to play when the opponent was held to 10 points or less.

___________________________________

In 2005, Orton's record was 10-3 when the defense held the opponent to 21 points or less. However, that is a slightly misleading stat....

In 8 of those games, the defense held the opponent to 10 points or less, something our defense only managed ONE TIME in Cutler's 37 starts. His record in those games was 7-1. Jay won his game for a 1-0 record.

In 2007, Orton's record was 1-1 when the defense held the opponent to 21 points of less. In the win, the defense again held the opponent to 10 points or less.

In 2008, Orton's record was 6-1 when the defense held the opponent to 21 points or less. Once again, a misleading stat, because in three of those games, the defense held the opponent to 10 points or less.

So to summarize....

Orton is 17-5 (.772) in games where the defense held the opponent to 21 points or less, which is worse than Jay's 12-1 record (.923). However, when you consider that 12 of Orton's starts were games where the defense held the opponent to 10 points or less (heck - Plummer or Griese can win a game if the opponent doesn't score any more than that) and Orton's record was 11-1 (.916) in those games, which means that Jay's record as a starter is better when the opponent scores 21 or less than Kyle's record is when the opponent scores 10 or less.

But hey, the defense doesn't matter, does it?

:coffee:

[Broncospsycho77]

Kyle Orton plays for the Denver Broncos, though.

[Peerless]

As I said in that thread on Bmania, that post simply wins. Great research, I appreciate it.

[MOtorboat]

So, it's not really clarifying anything?

He's still 21-12, yes?

[ktrain]

But hey, the defense doesn't matter, does it?

:coffee:

Hey mountain man, what is that picture of Jeff George doing in your Signature??

[Shazam!]

Mtn, now you and I know what Plummer fans went through once upon a time don't we?

[honz]

Jay Cutler > Kyle Orton in terms of talent. However, Orton actually wants to be here and he wins football games, therefore Orton > Cutler.

[NameUsedBefore]

Seeing as how people have countered with empty, wasteful posts, I think you've done a good job here Mtn.

[MOtorboat]

Seeing as how people have countered with empty, wasteful posts, I think you've done a good job here Mtn.

I could rehash the fact that his stats were comparable, pre-injury, in 2008, to Cutler's in the first seven games...I don't really feel like doing it, but I could, if you really find it necessary.

They are about as useful as the stupid points stat, which time and time again disproves the ENTIRE idea of "franchise" quarterbacks.

[honz]

Seeing as how people have countered with empty, wasteful posts, I think you've done a good job here Mtn.

Orton is 1-3 when his team gives up more than 30 points. I think Cutler is like 3-13 or something? Not sure of the exact numbers, but their winning %'s are pretty much the same in those situations. Look, Cutler is a better talent than Orton no doubt, but the dude was clearly looking for a way out. He didn't want to be our QB. What's done is done, and we now have a QB that went 9-7 with an average defense and an offense that scored more than ours did last year.

[Buff]

No one says defense doesn't matter...

So once you get beyond that, what is the point you're trying to make? Is it that we should all be really mad that Cutler got traded? Do you think we should fire McDaniels after everything else that has already happened?

Should we all just be mad forever?

[Northman]

All i used to hear was that Jake was a winner and that QB's are judged on wins. If thats the case than Jay isnt a winner and Orton is. Although i personally dont follow that mantra to try and discredit Orton for leading his team to victory is just as naive as the guy who says Jay was supposed to do it all by himself.

[Foochacho]

Well since Orton is an offensive player how bout we look at what his offense did. What's it matter if the defense held them to less than 10 points if he is scoring over 21? If the other team did score over 21 they would of lost anyways. Let's see the games last year that the bears won when they held opponents to 21 points or less.

CHI 29 @ IND 13
PHI 20 @ CHI 24
CHI 34 @ DET 7
CHI 27 @ STL 3
JAC 10 @ CHI 23
GB 17 @ CHI 20

Looks like kyle's offense did more than enough to win most of these games whether the teams scored 21 points or not.

Now since we are looking at how the offense performed let's see how many games denver's offense scored 21 points or less.

DEN 19 @ KC 33
TB 13 @ DEN 16
JAC 24 @ DEN 17
DEN 7 @ NE 41
MIA 26 @ DEN 17
OAK 31 @ DEN 10
DEN 10 @ CAR 30
DEN 21 @ SD 52

That is 8 games. 3 of them we scored 10 points or less. Now here is the list of chicago's games when they scored 21 points or less.

CHI 17 @ CAR 20
CHI 20 @ ATL 22
TEN 21 @ CHI 14
CHI 3 @ GB 37
CHI 14 @ MIN 34
GB 17 @ CHI 20

that is only 6 games and only 1 game with 10 points or less.

So by using your argument of the 21 point and 10 point thing and applying it to the offense (which is what really matters when you talk about a quarterback) instead of the defense. Kyle orton wins with less weapons than Jay.

[MOtorboat]

So by using your argument of the 21 point and 10 point thing and applying it to the offense (which is what really matters when you talk about a quarterback) instead of the defense. Kyle orton wins with less weapons than Jay.

/thread

[Thnikkaman]

« AFL versus NFL: the Super Bowls
Lots of new data added to the site »
Adjusting quarterback win-loss records, part I
Posted by Doug on Wednesday, March 25, 2009

Last summer I wrote a post that rated field goal kickers according to their accuracy compared to league average. And I also adjusted each kicker’s field goal percentage to account for the distance of his attempts. If one kicker attempted a bunch of chippies while another was kicking a lot more long ones, then we should take that into account when comparing their percentages.

This is highly non-controversial. Obvious even.

So we’re going to do it again. But instead of kickers, we’ll look at quarterbacks. Instead of field goal percentage, we’ll look at winning percentage. And as our measure of difficulty, we won’t use distance but points allowed by the quarterback’s team. Just as kicking a 45-yarder is more difficult than kicking a 23-yarder, it’s harder for a quarterback to win a game if his defense gives up 30 than if they give up 10.

Highly non-controversial, right?

So here’s the plan, which mirrors the kicker plan exactly:

STEP 1: compute each quarterback’s winning percentage in each of six categories: (1) defense allows 0–10 points, (2) defense allows 11–15 points, (3) defense allows 16–20 points, (4) defense allows 21–25 points, (5) defense allows 26–33 points, and (6) defense allows 34+ points.

STEP 2: in each category, compute how many games that quarterback won compared to how many an average QB would have been expected to win.

STEP 3: sum up the QB’s wins above or below average, across all six categories.

Let’s run through Joe Namath as an example:

defense allows 0–10 points: Joe was the beneficiary of this kind of defensive performance 17 times. An average QB would be expected to win 15.9 of 17 games. Joe went 17-0. So he’s +1.1 wins.

defense allows 11–15 points: 18 games. Joe is 16-2. An average QB would win 13.7. So Joe is +2.3 here.

defense allows 16–20 points: 23 games. Joe is 13-10. An average QB would win 12.1. So Joe is +0.9.

defense allows 21–25 points: 25 games. Joe is 10-15. An average QB would win 9.7. So Joe is +0.3.

defense allows 26–33 points: 24 games. Joe is 6-18. An average QB would win 4.1. So Joe is +1.9.

defense allows 34+ points: 25 games. Joe is 2-23. An average QB would win 0.9. So Joe is +1.1.

Add it all up (and ignore the rounding error) and Namath comes out at +7.6. Do that for every quarterback who has started 50 or more games since 1950 and you get the following list. Lots of commentary and fine print below:

G W ExpW Diff
=========================================
Peyton Manning 191 124 92.8 +31.2
John Elway 252 162 134.5 +27.5
Tom Brady 128 101 73.9 +27.1
Brett Favre 291 181 154.7 +26.3
Dan Marino 258 155 129.8 +25.2
Joe Montana 187 133 109.1 +23.9
Ken Stabler 158 103 80.7 +22.3
Johnny Unitas 194 124 106.7 +17.3
Daryle Lamonica 97 70 53.1 +16.9
Jim Kelly 177 110 93.2 +16.8
Steve Young 157 102 85.8 +16.2
Roger Staubach 131 96 79.9 +16.1
Norm Van Brocklin 105 63 47.7 +15.3
Terry Bradshaw 177 121 106.3 +14.7
Dan Fouts 178 89 76.4 +12.6
Randall Cunningham 144 85 72.8 +12.2
Danny White 102 67 55.5 +11.5
Bobby Layne 139 83 71.6 +11.4
Kurt Warner 112 65 53.6 +11.4
Y.A. Tittle 139 78 66.8 +11.2
Frank Ryan 90 58 47.8 +10.2
Bill Nelsen 79 42 32.1 +9.9
Fran Tarkenton 250 130 120.1 +9.9
Otto Graham 78 61 51.3 +9.7
Stan Humphries 87 53 43.7 +9.3
Joe Theismann 132 83 74.3 +8.7
Jeff Hostetler 88 55 46.6 +8.4
Steve McNair 163 96 87.7 +8.3
Ben Roethlisberger 81 59 51.0 +8.0
Rich Gannon 139 80 72.3 +7.7
Steve Grogan 138 75 67.4 +7.6
Joe Namath 132 64 56.4 +7.6
Dave Krieg 184 101 93.6 +7.4
Drew Brees 109 56 48.7 +7.3
Matt Hasselbeck 112 62 54.8 +7.2
Bert Jones 99 47 40.1 +6.9
Jim Hart 182 87 80.1 +6.9
Trent Green 115 56 49.1 +6.9
Philip Rivers 54 36 29.2 +6.8
Jake Delhomme 89 55 48.2 +6.8
Marc Bulger 90 41 34.2 +6.8
Jay Schroeder 104 64 57.6 +6.4
Mark Rypien 85 52 45.6 +6.4
Eli Manning 78 46 39.8 +6.2
Ed Brown 98 55 49.1 +5.9
Charley Johnson 124 59 53.2 +5.8
Billy Kilmer 121 63 57.3 +5.7
John Brodie 164 76 70.6 +5.4
Don Meredith 89 49 43.7 +5.3
Warren Moon 213 105 100.2 +4.8
Brian Sipe 113 57 52.2 +4.8
Jack Kemp 111 67 62.4 +4.6
Jim Plunkett 154 80 75.4 +4.6
George Blanda 108 55 50.5 +4.5
Dan Pastorini 122 59 54.6 +4.4
Tony Eason 56 31 26.9 +4.1
Daunte Culpepper 99 43 38.9 +4.1
Bob Griese 162 98 94.1 +3.9
Sonny Jurgensen 149 69 65.1 +3.9
Troy Aikman 180 105 101.3 +3.7
Phil Simms 169 101 97.3 +3.7
Len Dawson 167 99 95.6 +3.4
Earl Morrall 108 67 63.6 +3.4
Neil Lomax 102 47 43.7 +3.3
Bart Starr 167 103 99.7 +3.3
David Woodley 58 37 33.8 +3.2
Boomer Esiason 178 83 79.8 +3.2
Jim Zorn 106 44 40.9 +3.1
Jim McMahon 103 70 66.9 +3.1
Michael Vick 71 40 36.9 +3.1
Jake Plummer 142 71 68.1 +2.9
Donovan McNabb 143 91 88.5 +2.5
Jeff Garcia 122 60 57.6 +2.4
Wade Wilson 74 38 35.6 +2.4
Charlie Conerly 92 58 55.7 +2.3
Marc Wilson 61 32 29.7 +2.3
Neil O'Donnell 107 58 55.7 +2.3
Brad Johnson 132 76 74.1 +1.9
Bobby Hebert 103 56 54.1 +1.9
Rodney Peete 89 46 44.2 +1.8
Brian Griese 83 45 43.3 +1.7
Mike Phipps 73 38 36.3 +1.7
Pat Haden 60 37 35.5 +1.5
Mike Tomczak 78 45 43.5 +1.5
Roman Gabriel 159 86 84.8 +1.2
Vince Ferragamo 59 30 28.8 +1.2
Babe Parilli 104 50 48.9 +1.1
Tom Flores 67 31 30.1 +0.9
Kordell Stewart 86 50 49.1 +0.9
Gus Frerotte 95 45 44.2 +0.8
Tobin Rote 119 51 50.2 +0.8
Elvis Grbac 73 41 40.2 +0.8
Carson Palmer 66 32 31.4 +0.6
Aaron Brooks 92 39 38.5 +0.5
Billy Wade 86 41 40.7 +0.3
Ken Anderson 178 93 92.7 +0.3
Craig Morton 154 86 85.8 +0.2
Doug Flutie 68 38 37.9 +0.1
John Hadl 169 82 82.0 +0.0
Jeff Blake 100 39 39.0 -0.0
Tommy Kramer 114 56 56.0 -0.0
Mark Brunell 160 83 83.1 -0.1
Erik Kramer 70 32 32.4 -0.4
Jay Fiedler 63 38 38.4 -0.4
Scott Mitchell 73 32 32.5 -0.5
Bernie Kosar 115 56 56.6 -0.6
Chad Pennington 83 45 45.8 -0.8
Don Majkowski 57 26 26.8 -0.8
Steve Bartkowski 131 60 60.9 -0.9
Bubby Brister 77 38 39.4 -1.4
Jon Kitna 116 46 47.5 -1.5
Richard Todd 112 50 51.5 -1.5
Milt Plum 103 56 57.9 -1.9
Chris Chandler 155 69 71.0 -2.0
Bob Avellini 51 23 25.8 -2.8
Gary Danielson 61 28 31.0 -3.0
Eric Hipple 58 28 31.1 -3.1
Ken O'Brien 112 50 53.2 -3.2
Jim Everett 158 66 69.3 -3.3
Bill Kenney 77 34 37.7 -3.7
Joe Kapp 52 26 29.8 -3.8
Jeff George 127 47 51.0 -4.0
Mark Malone 55 24 28.0 -4.0
Joe Ferguson 175 80 84.3 -4.3
Dave M. Brown 60 26 30.8 -4.8
Chris Miller 94 35 39.8 -4.8
Kerry Collins 171 82 86.9 -4.9
Mike Livingston 75 31 36.0 -5.0
Drew Bledsoe 199 101 106.1 -5.1
Greg Landry 99 44 49.1 -5.1
Eddie LeBaron 81 26 31.3 -5.3
Tim Couch 59 22 27.5 -5.5
Steve Beuerlein 104 48 53.6 -5.6
Cotton Davidson 54 20 25.7 -5.7
Lynn Dickey 113 46 51.7 -5.7
Rick Mirer 68 24 29.8 -5.8
Bob Berry 52 20 25.8 -5.8
Doug Williams 88 42 47.8 -5.8
Bill Munson 66 27 33.2 -6.2
Jim Harbaugh 145 68 74.7 -6.7
Bobby Douglass 53 16 22.8 -6.8
Trent Dilfer 119 63 69.8 -6.8
Mike Pagel 54 17 23.8 -6.8
Tony Banks 78 35 41.9 -6.9
Lamar McHan 73 24 31.0 -7.0
Steve DeBerg 144 54 61.2 -7.2
Ron Jaworski 151 77 86.4 -9.4
Norm Snead 158 52 61.6 -9.6
Joey Harrington 76 26 36.2 -10.2
David Carr 79 23 34.1 -11.1
Vinny Testaverde 219 92 103.4 -11.4
Archie Manning 139 35 52.4 -17.4

[Thnikkaman]

Fine print:

1. This includes all regular- and post-season games.

2. You might be wondering about era/league effects. It’s easier to win if your defense allows 20 points in the 1961 AFL than it is to win if you defense allows 20 points in the 1974 NFL. Though I didn’t mention it above, I actually did attempt to account for this. What I did was to compute the “average quarterback’s expected wins” for a given category by looking at all games in that category in the same league within two years. For example, if I’m examining Joe Namath’s 1966 season, the expected winning percentage for category (1) games, e.g., is computed by looking at all category (1) AFL games from 1964 to 1968.

Thoughts:

1. Don’t forget that the line labeled “Peyton Manning” is really Peyton Manning, Marvin Harrison, Edgerrin James, Jeff Saturday, Tony Dungy/Jim Mora/Tom Moore, Mike Vanderjagt, and a cast of thousands. What it isn’t, though, is the Colts’ defense. Or at least not as much as Manning’s raw record is. More on this later.

I’ve said before that quarterbacks don’t win games (teams do), and I still believe that. But if people are going to talk about QB wins — and it looks like it’s unfortunately too late to put the lid back on that can of snakes — they may as well try to put them into context. This post is is an effort to do that. To oversimplify things a little (or maybe more), Peyton Manning’s record is the product of the efforts of 22 guys. This exercise attempts to narrow that down to 11.

2. I think this exercise has provided me with a new all-time favorite example of Simpson’s Paradox. Check out Daunte Culpepper and Trent Dilfer:

+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Points allowed |
+------------------+-------------+-----------+------------+------------+------------+
| QB | 10 or under | 11--15 | 16--20 | 21--25 | 26 or more |
+------------------+-------------+-----------+------------+------------+------------+
| Daunte Culpepper | 5-0 1.000 | 7-4 0.636 | 17-6 0.739 | 6-7 0.462 | 8-39 0.170 |
| Trent Dilfer | 30-5 0.857 | 9-7 0.563 | 13-8 0.619 | 9-12 0.429 | 2-24 0.077 |
+------------------+-------------+-----------+------------+------------+------------+

Culpepper has him in every category, but Dilfer (63-46) has a better overall record (Culpepper’s is 43-56) because their distribution of opportunities has been so different. Matt Hasselbeck and Bob Griese are another example:

+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Points allowed |
+-----------------+-------------+------------+-------------+------------+------------+
| QB | 10 or under | 11--15 | 16--20 | 21--25 | 26 or more |
+-----------------+-------------+------------+-------------+------------+------------+
| Bob Griese | 53-1 0.981 | 20-7 0.741 | 14-11 0.560 | 7-11 0.389 | 4-31 0.114 |
| Matt Hasselbeck | 25-0 1.000 | 6-2 0.750 | 12-5 0.706 | 11-8 0.579 | 8-35 0.186 |
+-----------------+-------------+------------+-------------+------------+------------+

And you can pair Marc Bulger with just about anyone. Bart Starr, for instance:

+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Points allowed |
+-------------+-------------+------------+-------------+-------------+------------+
| QB | 10 or under | 11--15 | 16--20 | 21--25 | 26 or more |
+-------------+-------------+------------+-------------+-------------+------------+
| Marc Bulger | 8-0 1.000 | 8-1 0.889 | 8-4 0.667 | 9-6 0.600 | 8-38 0.174 |
| Bart Starr | 51-3 0.944 | 17-5 0.773 | 20-10 0.667 | 10-15 0.400 | 5-25 0.167 |
+-------------+-------------+------------+-------------+-------------+------------+

3. Starr is barely above average in this analysis. In Part II, where we make a few more adjustments, he’ll actually come out as below average. What are we to make of this? Those hoping for a Starr-is-a-fraud rant at this point will be disappointed. Maybe it’s just because of the soft spot I have for Troy Aikman, who finds himself ranked similarly. Or maybe it’s because I know that points scored and points allowed are correlated. Bart Starr wasn’t playing defense, but he and the rest of his offensive teammates could have, and probably did have, an indirect impact on the number of points the defense allowed. How much of an impact? That’s tough to say, but that’s the case you have to make if you think Starr is an all-time great, or even, frankly, an all-time good. What this does, in my mind, is eliminate the argument that Starr was good at doing just enough for his team to win. He wasn’t any better at that than Marc Bulger or Tony Eason or Randall Cunningham.

Lest you think this is a canned stat-head rant, let me also call attention to Ken Anderson. If there’s one thing that all historical football stat nerds seem to agree on, it’s that Ken Anderson is underrated. But this analysis says otherwise, ranking him dead average.

[NameUsedBefore]

What is the point... The point is Orton benefited from a stupendous defense. It's very easy to say "21-12, he's a winner!" Looking at the W-L column alone doesn't take a scholar anymore than swimming in the kiddie pool requires olympic credentials. It is only when you dig deeper into the story -- which shouldn't be necessary for anyone who actually watched Denver games last year -- that you realize all the holes and realities that the W-L can gloss over.

I refuse to make excuses for Cutler in games he played bad. If he played bad he played bad, but for this argument it is beside the point. What really should be looked for is if he played bad and still won -- this being a team game where that is possible. This never happened. As I've said plenty of times, Cutler never "won" a game which he played sub-75 QB rating. Ever. He has, on the other hand, "lost", something like five 95+ rating games in one year IIRC.

By the same measure, look at Orton's rookie season and tell me he "won" those games, and then do an about face and tell me Cutler "lost" his.

[MOtorboat]

What is the point... The point is Orton benefited from a stupendous defense. It's very easy to say "21-12, he's a winner!" Looking at the W-L column alone doesn't take a scholar anymore than swimming in the kiddie pool requires olympic credentials. It is only when you dig deeper into the story -- which shouldn't be necessary for anyone who actually watched Denver games last year -- that you realize all the holes and realities that the W-L can gloss over.

I refuse to make excuses for Cutler in games he played bad. If he played bad he played bad, but for this argument it is beside the point. What really should be looked for is if he played bad and still won -- this being a team game where that is possible. This never happened. As I've said plenty of times, Cutler never "won" a game which he played sub-75 QB rating. Ever. He has, on the other hand, "lost", something like five 95+ rating games in one year IIRC.

By the same measure, look at Orton's rookie season and tell me he "won" those games, and then do an about face and tell me Cutler "lost" his.

I guess I'm not sure what your argument is, NUB.

Cutler was bad and he lost. Cutler was good and he still lost?

Frankly, that's not a good sign.

It will be discounted by silly excuses, but no matter how you paint it, Cutler was the quarterback that headed the team with the worst divisional collapse EVER.

Ever.

[LoyalSoldier]

What is the point... The point is Orton benefited from a stupendous defense. It's very easy to say "21-12, he's a winner!" Looking at the W-L column alone doesn't take a scholar anymore than swimming in the kiddie pool requires olympic credentials. It is only when you dig deeper into the story -- which shouldn't be necessary for anyone who actually watched Denver games last year -- that you realize all the holes and realities that the W-L can gloss over.

I refuse to make excuses for Cutler in games he played bad. If he played bad he played bad, but for this argument it is beside the point. What really should be looked for is if he played bad and still won -- this being a team game where that is possible. This never happened. As I've said plenty of times, Cutler never "won" a game which he played sub-75 QB rating. Ever. He has, on the other hand, "lost", something like five 95+ rating games in one year IIRC.

By the same measure, look at Orton's rookie season and tell me he "won" those games, and then do an about face and tell me Cutler "lost" his.

What I told a friend the other day was

"The offense could have played better, but the defense couldn't have played any worse."

[NameUsedBefore]

I guess I'm not sure what your argument is, NUB.

Cutler was bad and he lost. Cutler was good and he still lost?

Frankly, that's not a good sign.

It will be discounted by silly excuses, but no matter how you paint it, Cutler was the quarterback that headed the team with the worst divisional collapse EVER.

Ever.

No, it isn't a good sign when you score plenty of points, play a solid 100+ QB rating game, only to be outdone by Devin Hester returning punts and kicks. The "sign" gets worse when you replace that good QB play -- and ensuing loss -- with average or bad QB play and expect the exact opposite outcome.

[MOtorboat]

See, the problem with Cutler is that for as many games that the defense lost...and Cutler won...(see San Diego...yes, even sans the bad call)...Cutler lost a lot of games with bad decisions.

The two GLARING games are Oakland at home and Kansas City on the road. That was BAD. Really bad. And the turnover margin is almost strictly on Cutler. And that's not good.

Either way...dude's gone. Time some people get over that fact, or go root for the Bears.

[MOtorboat]

No, it isn't a good sign when you score plenty of points, play a solid 100+ QB rating game, only to be outdone by Devin Hester returning punts and kicks. The "sign" gets worse when you replace that good QB play -- and ensuing loss -- with average or bad QB play and expect the exact opposite outcome.

Can you please describe the losses last year to Kansas City and Oakland?

BTW, they had a combined seven wins.

[hotcarl]

hmmm interesting, so to summarize; having a complete TEAM is preferable to having a single player who can (possibly) bail you out when certain pieces of your defective overall product arent functioning. very interesting...

i hope orton is the one but i doubt it, take heart though you insufferable broncos maniacs, in this life there will be troubles, but the lord will sustain us...


until we meet in paradise,

farewell,
~stephen

[Foochacho]

By the same measure, look at Orton's rookie season and tell me he "won" those games, and then do an about face and tell me Cutler "lost" his.

Why even bring in orton's rookie season? He got thrown in right away while cutler got to sit most of the season and soak it all in. In 2006 orton didn't even play and in 2007 he played in 3 games. The only season we should look at when comparing Cutler and Orton is last season.

[NameUsedBefore]

Can you please describe the losses last year to Kansas City and Oakland?

BTW, they had a combined seven wins.

Yes, Cutler played bad. I actually already dealt with this,


If he played bad he played bad, but for this argument it is beside the point.

Now the discussion is why people think Orton can come in here with his 40-rating "wins" and have the exact opposite outcome.

[NameUsedBefore]

Why even bring in orton's rookie season? He got thrown in right away while cutler got to sit most of the season and soak it all in. In 2006 orton didn't even play and in 2007 he played in 3 games. The only season we should look at when comparing Cutler and Orton is last season.

Asking the wrong guy.

[topscribe]

I don't know if this has been covered, considering the number of Cutler threads, but I did some research on the win/loss records of Kyle Orton (since there are those who think that's the ONLY measurement of a QBs abilities) and it was very interesting.

Basically, Kyle had the benefit of not only playing when the opponent was held to 21 points or less, but he got to play when the opponent was held to 10 points or less.

___________________________________

In 2005, Orton's record was 10-3 when the defense held the opponent to 21 points or less. However, that is a slightly misleading stat....

In 8 of those games, the defense held the opponent to 10 points or less, something our defense only managed ONE TIME in Cutler's 37 starts. His record in those games was 7-1. Jay won his game for a 1-0 record.

In 2007, Orton's record was 1-1 when the defense held the opponent to 21 points of less. In the win, the defense again held the opponent to 10 points or less.

In 2008, Orton's record was 6-1 when the defense held the opponent to 21 points or less. Once again, a misleading stat, because in three of those games, the defense held the opponent to 10 points or less.

So to summarize....

Orton is 17-5 (.772) in games where the defense held the opponent to 21 points or less, which is worse than Jay's 12-1 record (.923). However, when you consider that 12 of Orton's starts were games where the defense held the opponent to 10 points or less (heck - Plummer or Griese can win a game if the opponent doesn't score any more than that) and Orton's record was 11-1 (.916) in those games, which means that Jay's record as a starter is better when the opponent scores 21 or less than Kyle's record is when the opponent scores 10 or less.

But hey, the defense doesn't matter, does it?

:coffee:

I still don't get this whole argument.

Hey, you know I was your most adamant foe in the Jake debates. I still wear
Jake's #16 jersey . . . wore it today, in fact.

Yet before we even knew Jay was to become a Bronco, I was a fan of Jay's.
I'm still a fan of his. He is the most gifted QB in the league, a once-in-a-
generation talent.

But Jay is gone now. And his replacement is talented in his own right . . . not
fully at Jay's level, no, but still a talent. Orton has a blistering fastball in the
short to medium game, his footwork is very good, as well as his pocket
presence. He reads defenses well, and is uncanny in looking off defenders for
one so inexperienced.

Which brings up a point I have repeated several times on three boards: Orton
has only two (2) seasons in the field of play. I don't know why we are trying
to make him as good as Cutler . . . he isn't. But he is still good, and he fits
very well into the system McDaniels apparently is implementing.

So I was, and am, a #16 fan; I was, and am, a #6 fan; and now I'm a #8 fan.
You apparently believe there is one good QB among the three. I believe there
are three good QBs among the three. Yes, I was upset they let Cutler slip
through their fingers. But it is what it is; he's gone. So let's look at the bright
side: that would be in the form of Orton (and a ton of first-day draft picks).

-----

[MOtorboat]

Now the discussion is why people think Orton can come in here with his 40-rating "wins" and have the exact opposite outcome.

Cherry-picking his rookie year isn't representative of his performance last year. Especially those first seven games.

[weazel]

I went out and bought Orton's record, I must have misunderstood this thread. It really wasn't my kind of music...

http://www.cduniverse.com/search/xx/music/artist/Orton,%20Beth/a/Beth%20Orton.htm

[NameUsedBefore]

Cherry-picking his rookie year isn't representative of his performance last year. Especially those first seven games.

Just last year Orton had two 40-rating games in which he "won".


I guess, at the same time, it isn't fair for me to go back into Cutler's career and point out how many of his "losses" came regardless of his play.... But I'm not the one who constantly brings up "21-12", which is more than a 16-game season.

If you want to go by just last year... If Cutler can play balls out and still be in position to lose against the Chargers at the end of the game, what exactly makes that picture look any prettier with Orton?

[MOtorboat]

Just last year Orton had two 40-rating games in which he "won".


I guess, at the same time, it isn't fair for me to go back into Cutler's career and point out how many of his "losses" came regardless of his play.... But I'm not the one who constantly brings up "21-12", which is more than a 16-game season.

If you want to go by just last year... If Cutler can play balls out and still be in position to lose against the Chargers at the end of the game, what exactly makes that picture look any prettier with Orton?

Again...every defensive stat brought up, and points allowed and yada, yada...makes me think that the idea of a "franchise" quarterback is just obsolete.

Could Cutler lead a team that was better all-around to the playoffs? Maybe. I'd like to think so...I spent a good chunk of change on his jersey.

But, the return in a trade might have been higher, plus his attitude bought him a ticket out of town.

Statistics aside, he's gone. Time to jump on the Orton bandwagon...I guess...

[Foochacho]

Heres the stats I like to see how each qb does in the red zone.

Att Comp Pct Yds Avg Lng TD Int 1st 1st% 20+ Sck Rate
Orton- 59 31 52.5 249 4.2 19 13 1 19 32.2 0 3 96.0

Cutler- 84 39 46.4 273 3.2 18 17 4 24 28.6 0 2 74.1

Orton was a 96 percent rate in the red zone with only 1 interception.

[MOtorboat]

Heres the stats I like to see how each qb does in the red zone.

Att Comp Pct Yds Avg Lng TD Int 1st 1st% 20+ Sck Rate
Orton- 59 31 52.5 249 4.2 19 13 1 19 32.2 0 3 96.0

Cutler- 84 39 46.4 273 3.2 18 17 4 24 28.6 0 2 74.1

Orton was a 96 percent rate in the red zone with only 1 interception.

Yes, but his defense...

Oh, shit...that doesn't work here.

Well, crap.

/thread (again)

[getlynched47]

Heres the stats I like to see how each qb does in the red zone.

Att Comp Pct Yds Avg Lng TD Int 1st 1st% 20+ Sck Rate
Orton- 59 31 52.5 249 4.2 19 13 1 19 32.2 0 3 96.0

Cutler- 84 39 46.4 273 3.2 18 17 4 24 28.6 0 2 74.1

Orton was a 96 percent rate in the red zone with only 1 interception.

Those stats don't mean much if Orton can't move us down the field with his grandma arm.

Wasn't Cutler like one of the top in the league in 3rd down?

[NameUsedBefore]

Again...every defensive stat brought up, and points allowed and yada, yada...makes me think that the idea of a "franchise" quarterback is just obsolete.

Could Cutler lead a team that was better all-around to the playoffs? Maybe. I'd like to think so...I spent a good chunk of change on his jersey.

But, the return in a trade might have been higher, plus his attitude bought him a ticket out of town.

Statistics aside, he's gone. Time to jump on the Orton bandwagon...I guess...

No, a franchise QB isn't necessary when the other facets of the team are in place.

Do you think for a moment, just as one example, that the Colts win the Superbowl without Manning?

At the same time, could you have exchanged Trent Dilfer for any number of QBs and had the same result in 2000? Absolutely.

Now which category are we in?

[Foochacho]

If you want to go by just last year... If Cutler can play balls out and still be in position to lose against the Chargers at the end of the game, what exactly makes that picture look any prettier with Orton?

Orton put up 48 against the vikings winning 48-41. The vikings D destroys the chargers. His qb rate for that game 114.

We can cherry pick games and stats all night but whats it going to accomplish. These 2 played on different teams with different schemes and different players.
I think Orton can do great this season but we will have to wait and find out.

[Ravage!!!]

Jay... in his last 36 starts has had to play against teams that put up 30+ points on us 15 times. FIFTEEN out of 36. Thats nearly 50% of the time, he's playing against a team that scored 30+ times.

Just this last season.. out of 16 games... the Broncos had 9 (NINE) games in which we gave up 30+ points. Jay went 3-6

Orton last year.. had 4 games that the defense gave up 30+ points.... he was 1-3.

In 2005 (the last time he started bfore 2007)... he didn't start a game where the team gave up 30+ points.

I realize taht Jay is no longer here.. and Orton is our hope. But if you are going to throw around his "win-loss" record... you MUST be prepared to accept those that can see the REASONS behind those records. The w-l record is not an individual stat.

[Foochacho]

Those stats don't mean much if Orton can't move us down the field with his grandma arm.

Wasn't Cutler like one of the top in the league in 3rd down?

does everyone besides Jay Cutler have a grandma arm? Have you ever watched Kyle Orton play? I see alot of bears game being in bears country. The Bears hold their camps in my town. The dude has got a good arm there is nothing wrong with it.

[DenBronx]

Heres the stats I like to see how each qb does in the red zone.

Att Comp Pct Yds Avg Lng TD Int 1st 1st% 20+ Sck Rate
Orton- 59 31 52.5 249 4.2 19 13 1 19 32.2 0 3 96.0

Cutler- 84 39 46.4 273 3.2 18 17 4 24 28.6 0 2 74.1

Orton was a 96 percent rate in the red zone with only 1 interception.


thats a good stat to have. however, orton had matt forte in the redzone. the broncos completely ignore rbs in day one and it shows in the redzone. how might we have looked with forte last year? instead were stuck with injury prone torain, jordan and buckhalter. whooo hoooo im so excited! :coffee:

[Ravage!!!]

No, a franchise QB isn't necessary when the other facets of the team are in place.

Do you think for a moment, just as one example, that the Colts win the Superbowl without Manning?

At the same time, could you have exchanged Trent Dilfer for any number of QBs and had the same result in 2000? Absolutely.

Now which category are we in?

Exactly. EXACTLY right.

Yo can NOT just win with just "any QB"..... thats why there has only been 6 SB wins since 1967 that haven't had a franchise (quality since they weren't franchise back then) QBs.

You 'can' win.. but the odds and chances are EXTREMELY hard compared to having a franchise QB on your team. Thats just so easy to understand. :salute:

[Foochacho]

Jay... in his last 36 starts has had to play against teams that put up 30+ points on us 15 times. FIFTEEN out of 36. Thats nearly 50% of the time, he's playing against a team that scored 30+ times.

Just this last season.. out of 16 games... the Broncos had 9 (NINE) games in which we gave up 30+ points. Jay went 3-6

Orton last year.. had 4 games that the defense gave up 30+ points.... he was 1-3.

In 2005 (the last time he started bfore 2007)... he didn't start a game where the team gave up 30+ points.

I realize taht Jay is no longer here.. and Orton is our hope. But if you are going to throw around his "win-loss" record... you MUST be prepared to accept those that can see the REASONS behind those records. The w-l record is not an individual stat.

the win loss record is not an individual stat that is why I broke down earlier the points Orton and Jay put up in these games. I was trying to factor out the defense. And offensively Kyle wins and he wins with less.

[Ravage!!!]

thats a good stat to have. however, orton had matt forte in the redzone. the broncos completely ignore rbs in day one and it shows in the redzone. how might we have looked with forte last year? instead were stuck with injury prone torain, jordan and buckhalter. whooo hoooo im so excited! :coffee:

Not to mention.. when you are on a team that throws the ball 600 times in a season... the other team is NOT worried about the run.

We know how hard it is to complete a pass on 3rd and long...because the other team knows what you are going to do, and they can play 'pass defense' as well as put their ears back and rush/blitz or drop more into the passing lanes.

Thats how it was for the Broncos on EVERY play... and in the redzone, its just that much harder to clear out and open up the field since the safeties don't drop deep, and the LBs don't have to drop as deep or watch as much space.

[NameUsedBefore]

I was trying to factor out the defense.

Can't do this for a few reasons... The most easy to point out being turnovers and the effect on starting position; both of which Denver was last in, neither of which really have much to do with the offense.

You can also flip this around and say turnovers on the offense can negatively affect the defense. Completely correct, but you only had to watch the games last year to see this was pretty much an irrelevant event.

[Ravage!!!]

Orton put up 48 against the vikings winning 48-41. The vikings D destroys the chargers. His qb rate for that game 114.

We can cherry pick games and stats all night but whats it going to accomplish. These 2 played on different teams with different schemes and different players.
I think Orton can do great this season but we will have to wait and find out.

The "team one beat team B.. and team B beat team C".. SOUNDs great.. but its not reality. Its not real. It doesn't even work for the BCS. Thats not a true gauge of anything in the NFL.

MANY times throughout the season a team will lose to someone they shouldn't have... so it throws out that entire scale.

When we won the Super Bowls... we never beat the Chiefs twice in that season..... does that mean the Chiefs were a better team than we were since they beat us?

ONly ONE Super Bowl team has gone completely undefeated. So that means they LOST at least ONE game. Does that mean the team that did beat them during the season was better than they were? No. So the fact that the Bears beat the Vikings, and the Vikings beat the Chargers... means nothing.

[NameUsedBefore]

Not to mention.. when you are on a team that throws the ball 600 times in a season... the other team is NOT worried about the run.

We know how hard it is to complete a pass on 3rd and long...because the other team knows what you are going to do, and they can play 'pass defense' as well as put their ears back and rush/blitz or drop more into the passing lanes.

Thats how it was for the Broncos on EVERY play... and in the redzone, its just that much harder to clear out and open up the field since the safeties don't drop deep, and the LBs don't have to drop as deep or watch as much space.

The lack of respect for the run was startling. It's one of the reasons I was reserved about Peyton Hillis. For instance, he ran all over the Jets, but I seemed to be the only one to point out the fact that the linebackers and DBs were already dropping back at the snap without any time to recognize the run first. This is what Denver's offense had to deal with and it shows what a terrific imbalance on offense can do (it also belies the most common statistic brought up which is Denver's run-capabilities last year based on YPC).

[Foochacho]

thats a good stat to have. however, orton had matt forte in the redzone. the broncos completely ignore rbs in day one and it shows in the redzone. how might we have looked with forte last year? instead were stuck with injury prone torain, jordan and buckhalter. whooo hoooo im so excited! :coffee:

Last year the bears and broncos both had 15 rushing tds. The broncos had 200 yds more rushing yards on 47 less attempts. So whats your point? That the bears had a worse rushing attack?

I posted passing stats and Orton wins with less of a running game. Cool thanks for pointing out the rushing attack.:rolleyes:

[NameUsedBefore]

Case in point.

[Foochacho]

The "team one beat team B.. and team B beat team C".. SOUNDs great.. but its not reality. Its not real. It doesn't even work for the BCS. Thats not a true gauge of anything in the NFL.

MANY times throughout the season a team will lose to someone they shouldn't have... so it throws out that entire scale.

When we won the Super Bowls... we never beat the Chiefs twice in that season..... does that mean the Chiefs were a better team than we were since they beat us?

ONly ONE Super Bowl team has gone completely undefeated. So that means they LOST at least ONE game. Does that mean the team that did beat them during the season was better than they were? No. So the fact that the Bears beat the Vikings, and the Vikings beat the Chargers... means nothing.

I posted this to point out how stupid bringing up the charger game was. The point you are trying to make is going to the wrong person.

[Ravage!!!]

I posted this to point out how stupid bringing up the charger game was. The point you are trying to make is going to the wrong person.

AHhh.. sorry.. I did jump in the middle there. My bad

[getlynched47]

does everyone besides Jay Cutler have a grandma arm? Have you ever watched Kyle Orton play? I see alot of bears game being in bears country. The Bears hold their camps in my town. The dude has got a good arm there is nothing wrong with it.

Yes I've seen Orton play :rolleyes:

I also saw him at Purdue, and he's got a decent arm (it's probably stronger than Plummer's arm was).

I hope McDaniels can work his magic with Orton, because if there's one thing Orton has that's excellent, it's his leadership qualities.

[Foochacho]

I understand what you are trying to say with the bears having more in the box so they have a harder time running and an easier time passing. While it is the opposite for the broncos. But you also have to figure in play calling and receiving threats. Shanny could of balanced out our running game more even with the scrubs but he didn't. The bears keep a very balanced game with very conservative play calling. Orton isn't going to put up the big numbers in chicago even with eight in the box, not when you have no receiving threats and conservative playcalling. By looking at his low yardage numbers you don't get the whole story.

Shanahan let Cutler open it up and it really padded those stats. Our offense started with awful field position most of the time allowing Jay to rack up alot of yardage stats. But when he brought us in the the redzone he broke down that is a main reason why we didn't score like our team should of. Jay's a good QB but it is unfair to even say he is better than Orton at this time. A better arm yes, better all around well we will have to wait and see.

Orton plays smart and can also put up good numbers who knows he may get a chance to open it up this year and put up some sexy stats too. Time will tell but until then we will never know. And it is definitely getting old comparing stats when stats are impossible to compare.

[NameUsedBefore]

There isn't a single coach in the entire league who would take Orton over Cutler, Fooch.

[Foochacho]

Yes I've seen Orton play :rolleyes:

I also saw him at Purdue, and he's got a decent arm (it's probably stronger than Plummer's arm was).

I hope McDaniels can work his magic with Orton, because if there's one thing Orton has that's excellent, it's his leadership qualities.

Plummer did have a noodle arm there is no denying that. If he had a decent arm he could of been great. Think of all those pathetic lobs he threw up that got picked.

[Foochacho]

There isn't a single coach in the entire league who would take Orton over Cutler, Fooch.

Never said there was, just saying that you can't rag on his performance in chicago. He never really got a fair chance. The season he does, he gets hurt, has a shit o-line, shit receivers and a mediocre running game.

[NameUsedBefore]

Jay's a good QB but it is unfair to even say he is better than Orton at this time. A better arm yes, better all around well we will have to wait and see.


This. Completely untrue at the moment.

Hell, Orton's being on this team alone ends that silliness -- it wasn't a straight up trade, ya know.

[Foochacho]

This. Completely untrue at the moment.

Hell, Orton's being on this team alone ends that silliness -- it wasn't a straight up trade, ya know.

Still stand by my original statement, we will find out later who got hosed on the trade. Neither Jay or Kyle has proven a thing yet. And I don't care about 4500 yds and a probowl nod he didn't deserve. Yds are nothing without points.

I'm i no way saying Jay sucks but i find it unfair to say Kyle does given his circumstances.

[Shazam!]

Still stand by my original statement, we will find out later who got hosed on the trade. Neither Jay or Kyle has proven a thing yet. And I don't care about 4500 yds and a probowl nod he didn't deserve. Yds are nothing without points.

I'm i no way saying Jay sucks but i find it unfair to say Kyle does given his circumstances.

It's a race to see who gets in the postseason first. Two mediocre teams.

[bcbronc]

it's amazing how such a simple, yet important, fact like Cutler didn't want to be here gets left out of the argument by one side.

Cutler OR Orton was never a choice the Broncos had. Cutler demanded a trade, not once but TWICE. Cutler is no longer a Bronco simply because of choices CUTLER made. bitch and moan all you want about letting a "franchise" QB "slip through our fingers" but that so-called franchise QB wanted nothing to do with being a Bronco.

the kid went as far as to show zero respect for the owner of the franchise. say what you want about how the situation played out, but Cutler sure as hell hasn't done enough for this team to not have to give Bowlen his due respect.

and how does one get classified a "franchise" QB with a 0-0 playoff record? or an 0-3 record in games to clinch a playoff spot. seems to me the standard used to be more than just a rocket arm to be considered a "franchise" qb.

but it's all moot now anyway. short of drugging Cutler's drink, hypnotizing him, and sending him to a secret CIA prison to have a microchip implanted in his brain, there is nothing McDaniels could have done to convince Cutler to WANT to be a Bronco. so with that *very important* fact in mind, it's time to move on from Jay Cutler as a Bronco.

Kyle Orton is our QB now, for better or worse. It's time to start finding out what kind of QB he can become.

[Dean]

As NameUsedBefore alluded to, the organization who was present for everyone of Orton's plays and had an indepth evaluation of each one of those plays chose Cutler as the better player. In fact, they believed Jay to be 2 furst round draft picks, a third round pick, and a swap better.

They seem to see an obscene amount of difference between the two players. But then, maybe they don't rely solely on win/loss records to evaluate a position.

[frenchfan]

As NameUsedBefore alluded to, the organization who was present for everyone of Orton's plays and had an indepth evaluation of each one of those plays chose Cutler as the better player. In fact, they believed Jay to be 2 furst round draft picks, a third round pick, and a swap better.

They seem to see an obscene amount of difference between the two players. But then, maybe they don't rely solely on win/loss records to evaluate a position.Indeed... Very true... IMO Jay has more talent than Orton. That should be a no brainer.
Now, I don't think Orton is that bad. He can be a very decent QB in the system.

IMO the real questions should be : how well could Orton do here?
Or will the Broncos be better with Orton and some extra draft picks than with a more talented QB who didn't want to play for the team/the coach?
We'll have the answer by the end of the season.

Honestly, I'll be happy to have Trent Dilfer as QB if he leads us to the SB... ;) :D

[Den21vsBal19]

Statistics aside, he's gone. Time to jump on the Broncosbandwagon...I guess...

Corrected for accuracy ;)

[Nomad]

Cutler OR Orton was never a choice the Broncos had. Cutler demanded a trade, not once but TWICE. Cutler is no longer a Bronco simply because of choices CUTLER made. bitch and moan all you want about letting a "franchise" QB "slip through our fingers" but that so-called franchise QB wanted nothing to do with being a Bronco.

Kyle Orton is our QB now, for better or worse. It's time to start finding out what kind of QB he can become.

Well said! Cutler got what he wanted, so when will fans move on....hmmm.....they still dream of the fountain of youth for John Elway and will NEVER except another QB. Some fans will never live down the mirage they seen of him in Jay Cutler and when Cutler finds himself a TD then he'll win a couple superbowls;).

As far as the comparison between Orton and Cutler, it's a moot point unless they played under center for the same teams. In other words, you could probably compare the two QBs after next season but now it's reaching to say Cutler is god and Orton is just some average QB.

[TXBRONC]

So, it's not really clarifying anything?

He's still 21-12, yes?

Yes with a good defense, it makes a world of difference friend.

[In-com-plete]

I don't know if this has been covered, considering the number of Cutler threads, but I did some research on the win/loss records of Kyle Orton (since there are those who think that's the ONLY measurement of a QBs abilities) and it was very interesting.

Basically, Kyle had the benefit of not only playing when the opponent was held to 21 points or less, but he got to play when the opponent was held to 10 points or less.

___________________________________

In 2005, Orton's record was 10-3 when the defense held the opponent to 21 points or less. However, that is a slightly misleading stat....

In 8 of those games, the defense held the opponent to 10 points or less, something our defense only managed ONE TIME in Cutler's 37 starts. His record in those games was 7-1. Jay won his game for a 1-0 record.

In 2007, Orton's record was 1-1 when the defense held the opponent to 21 points of less. In the win, the defense again held the opponent to 10 points or less.

In 2008, Orton's record was 6-1 when the defense held the opponent to 21 points or less. Once again, a misleading stat, because in three of those games, the defense held the opponent to 10 points or less.

So to summarize....

Orton is 17-5 (.772) in games where the defense held the opponent to 21 points or less, which is worse than Jay's 12-1 record (.923). However, when you consider that 12 of Orton's starts were games where the defense held the opponent to 10 points or less (heck - Plummer or Griese can win a game if the opponent doesn't score any more than that) and Orton's record was 11-1 (.916) in those games, which means that Jay's record as a starter is better when the opponent scores 21 or less than Kyle's record is when the opponent scores 10 or less.

But hey, the defense doesn't matter, does it?

:coffee:

I believe this is the first "CP" or "High Five" I've ever given to mtnman. :eek:

[Bronco Bible]

Well since Orton is an offensive player how bout we look at what his offense did. What's it matter if the defense held them to less than 10 points if he is scoring over 21? If the other team did score over 21 they would of lost anyways. Let's see the games last year that the bears won when they held opponents to 21 points or less.

CHI 29 @ IND 13
PHI 20 @ CHI 24
CHI 34 @ DET 7
CHI 27 @ STL 3
JAC 10 @ CHI 23
GB 17 @ CHI 20

Looks like kyle's offense did more than enough to win most of these games whether the teams scored 21 points or not.

Now since we are looking at how the offense performed let's see how many games denver's offense scored 21 points or less.

DEN 19 @ KC 33
TB 13 @ DEN 16
JAC 24 @ DEN 17
DEN 7 @ NE 41
MIA 26 @ DEN 17
OAK 31 @ DEN 10
DEN 10 @ CAR 30
DEN 21 @ SD 52

That is 8 games. 3 of them we scored 10 points or less. Now here is the list of chicago's games when they scored 21 points or less.

CHI 17 @ CAR 20
CHI 20 @ ATL 22
TEN 21 @ CHI 14
CHI 3 @ GB 37
CHI 14 @ MIN 34
GB 17 @ CHI 20

that is only 6 games and only 1 game with 10 points or less.

So by using your argument of the 21 point and 10 point thing and applying it to the offense (which is what really matters when you talk about a quarterback) instead of the defense. Kyle orton wins with less weapons than Jay.

Wait a minute!!!!! did I read the last time Orton played against the Lions he won how did Cutler do against them.....hmmm I can't recollect that game... perhaps I conveniantly put that game out of my memory.

[broncophan]

I don't know if this has been covered, considering the number of Cutler threads, but I did some research on the win/loss records of Kyle Orton (since there are those who think that's the ONLY measurement of a QBs abilities) and it was very interesting.

Basically, Kyle had the benefit of not only playing when the opponent was held to 21 points or less, but he got to play when the opponent was held to 10 points or less.

___________________________________

In 2005, Orton's record was 10-3 when the defense held the opponent to 21 points or less. However, that is a slightly misleading stat....

In 8 of those games, the defense held the opponent to 10 points or less, something our defense only managed ONE TIME in Cutler's 37 starts. His record in those games was 7-1. Jay won his game for a 1-0 record.

In 2007, Orton's record was 1-1 when the defense held the opponent to 21 points of less. In the win, the defense again held the opponent to 10 points or less.

In 2008, Orton's record was 6-1 when the defense held the opponent to 21 points or less. Once again, a misleading stat, because in three of those games, the defense held the opponent to 10 points or less.

So to summarize....

Orton is 17-5 (.772) in games where the defense held the opponent to 21 points or less, which is worse than Jay's 12-1 record (.923). However, when you consider that 12 of Orton's starts were games where the defense held the opponent to 10 points or less (heck - Plummer or Griese can win a game if the opponent doesn't score any more than that) and Orton's record was 11-1 (.916) in those games, which means that Jay's record as a starter is better when the opponent scores 21 or less than Kyle's record is when the opponent scores 10 or less.

But hey, the defense doesn't matter, does it?

:coffee:

Hopefully we will now have a "leader" as our qb............and all this nonsense about comparing stats and all these "waste of time threads" past qb's, past defenses...etc. will go away.

W's and L's is what matters and we lost more than we won the past 3 years.....who cares if it's crybaby Cutler's fault, Shanahan's fault. the defenses fault, or if it is the cheerleader's fault.

Cutler didn't want to be here........and I know I don't want a qb on my team who doesn't want to be here.......at least the kid had the guts to admit he didn't want to be a bronco......I will give him that.

[TXBRONC]

Wait a minute!!!!! did I read the last time Orton played against the Lions he won how did Cutler do against them.....hmmm I can't recollect that game... perhaps I conveniantly put that game out of my memory.

B.B. he didn't play most of that game due to injury.

[In-com-plete]

Jay... in his last 36 starts has had to play against teams that put up 30+ points on us 15 times. FIFTEEN out of 36. Thats nearly 50% of the time, he's playing against a team that scored 30+ times.

Just this last season.. out of 16 games... the Broncos had 9 (NINE) games in which we gave up 30+ points. Jay went 3-6

Orton last year.. had 4 games that the defense gave up 30+ points.... he was 1-3.

In 2005 (the last time he started bfore 2007)... he didn't start a game where the team gave up 30+ points.

I realize taht Jay is no longer here.. and Orton is our hope. But if you are going to throw around his "win-loss" record... you MUST be prepared to accept those that can see the REASONS behind those records. The w-l record is not an individual stat.

And I'd like to add that Tom Brady's D has allowed 30+ points like 13 times his entire career. That's in 110 games.

[NightTrainLayne]

The key to this whole trade is looking to the future. We have to wrap our heads around the fact that this trade is not about how good the team is April 1, 2009, but how good the team is in January 2011 and going forward.

No-one is arguing that Orton is a better QB than Cutler. No-one. But we didn't trade Cutler straight-across for Orton. No, we traded Cutler for some great draft picks and Orton is a nice add-in who can win games for a TEAM.

What got Shanny fired is trying to win games with 1/3 of a TEAM. I love Shanny. If you would have asked me if we should fire him after we lost at SD I would have said no. I would have argued until my face turned blue that he should be our coach. But, the reason Bowlen fired him is that he understands that you can't win in the NFL with 1/3 of a TEAM. You've got to have a whole TEAM that works together.

So, then McDaniels task is to build up the other 2/3 of the TEAM (special teams and defense). Initially, he intended to do this with Cutler remaining as part of the team, but last week Bowlen forced his hand because Bowlen was tired of Cutler's behavior.

I hate losing Cutler, but we gained the firepower to improve the other 2/3 of the TEAM with this trade. We lose some at the QB position, but if we make that up on the other 2/3 of the team over the next couple of years we will have a TEAM that is positioned to compete at a high level for many years.

Had Bowlen not fired Shanny, we'd still have Cutler. But we'd still have Slowik and that horrid defense. .. and I doubt our special teams would change much either. .. they haven't over the past 8-9 years under Shanny.

The argument that Cutler couldn't win because of poor defense holds a lot of weight with me. But without accumulating some picks, how long would it take to build up that defense?

This trade is not about today. It's about the team 18 months from now. It's about positioning the team to be a winner over the next 5-7 years, consistently in the playoffs and competing for the title.

Don't be so short-sighted Broncos fans. Shanny's been short-sighted ("we're just a couple players away") for 10 years. He was good enough to keep us from having a terrible season with sub-par talent, but he wasn't good enough to build a Champion with only 1/3 of a team. You've got to take a long-view on this, and surprise, surprise, that's what McDaniels has been preaching since he arrived here.

[frenchfan]

NTL... Your post is brilliant... That really sums up what I think and how I feel right now...

Am I happy to see Cutler out? No way...
But, the deal wasn't bad and Orton could be a very decent QB for us. And it is clear IMO that Cutler wouldn't have played for McD (and so for the Broncos).

The plan is to build a D and improve at ST for sure.

High five well deserved. :beer:

[BroncoJoe]

Well since Orton is an offensive player how bout we look at what his offense did. What's it matter if the defense held them to less than 10 points if he is scoring over 21? If the other team did score over 21 they would of lost anyways. Let's see the games last year that the bears won when they held opponents to 21 points or less.

CHI 29 @ IND 13
PHI 20 @ CHI 24
CHI 34 @ DET 7
CHI 27 @ STL 3
JAC 10 @ CHI 23
GB 17 @ CHI 20

Looks like kyle's offense did more than enough to win most of these games whether the teams scored 21 points or not.

Now since we are looking at how the offense performed let's see how many games denver's offense scored 21 points or less.

DEN 19 @ KC 33
TB 13 @ DEN 16
JAC 24 @ DEN 17
DEN 7 @ NE 41
MIA 26 @ DEN 17
OAK 31 @ DEN 10
DEN 10 @ CAR 30
DEN 21 @ SD 52

That is 8 games. 3 of them we scored 10 points or less. Now here is the list of chicago's games when they scored 21 points or less.

CHI 17 @ CAR 20
CHI 20 @ ATL 22
TEN 21 @ CHI 14
CHI 3 @ GB 37
CHI 14 @ MIN 34
GB 17 @ CHI 20

that is only 6 games and only 1 game with 10 points or less.

So by using your argument of the 21 point and 10 point thing and applying it to the offense (which is what really matters when you talk about a quarterback) instead of the defense. Kyle orton wins with less weapons than Jay.

/thread

[Buff]

I can't wait until www.bearsforums.com opens so we can begin to cull the herd.

[TXBRONC]

I can't wait until www.bearsforums.com opens so we can begin to cull the herd.

I think this www.bearsforums.com will always bring a smile to my face like all of the Geico caveman commercials.

[getlynched47]

it's amazing how such a simple, yet important, fact like Cutler didn't want to be here gets left out of the argument by one side.

Cutler OR Orton was never a choice the Broncos had. Cutler demanded a trade, not once but TWICE. Cutler is no longer a Bronco simply because of choices CUTLER made. bitch and moan all you want about letting a "franchise" QB "slip through our fingers" but that so-called franchise QB wanted nothing to do with being a Bronco.

the kid went as far as to show zero respect for the owner of the franchise. say what you want about how the situation played out, but Cutler sure as hell hasn't done enough for this team to not have to give Bowlen his due respect.

and how does one get classified a "franchise" QB with a 0-0 playoff record? or an 0-3 record in games to clinch a playoff spot. seems to me the standard used to be more than just a rocket arm to be considered a "franchise" qb.

but it's all moot now anyway. short of drugging Cutler's drink, hypnotizing him, and sending him to a secret CIA prison to have a microchip implanted in his brain, there is nothing McDaniels could have done to convince Cutler to WANT to be a Bronco. so with that *very important* fact in mind, it's time to move on from Jay Cutler as a Bronco.

Kyle Orton is our QB now, for better or worse. It's time to start finding out what kind of QB he can become.

Chad Johnson didn't want to be a Bengal last year...he stuck it out :rolleyes:

Anquan Boldin wanted to be traded, but he stayed as a Cardinal :rolleyes:

Just because somebody demands a trade doesn't mean that you should give it to him. What's McDaniels going to do with the next disgruntled player that asks to be traded? Is he going to accomodate each and every single player just because they're upset with him and want a trade?

He needed to grow some balls and resolve the Cutler situation. Being a hard ass on cry baby Cutler wasn't going to fix the issue...and McDanniels should've known that.

But I understand. It's time to move on. Cutler's gone and there's nothing we can do about it. I just hope McDaniels can get the most out of Orton.

[Tempus Fugit]

I don't know if this has been covered, considering the number of Cutler threads, but I did some research on the win/loss records of Kyle Orton (since there are those who think that's the ONLY measurement of a QBs abilities) and it was very interesting.

Basically, Kyle had the benefit of not only playing when the opponent was held to 21 points or less, but he got to play when the opponent was held to 10 points or less.

___________________________________

In 2005, Orton's record was 10-3 when the defense held the opponent to 21 points or less. However, that is a slightly misleading stat....

In 8 of those games, the defense held the opponent to 10 points or less, something our defense only managed ONE TIME in Cutler's 37 starts. His record in those games was 7-1. Jay won his game for a 1-0 record.

In 2007, Orton's record was 1-1 when the defense held the opponent to 21 points of less. In the win, the defense again held the opponent to 10 points or less.

In 2008, Orton's record was 6-1 when the defense held the opponent to 21 points or less. Once again, a misleading stat, because in three of those games, the defense held the opponent to 10 points or less.

So to summarize....

Orton is 17-5 (.772) in games where the defense held the opponent to 21 points or less, which is worse than Jay's 12-1 record (.923). However, when you consider that 12 of Orton's starts were games where the defense held the opponent to 10 points or less (heck - Plummer or Griese can win a game if the opponent doesn't score any more than that) and Orton's record was 11-1 (.916) in those games, which means that Jay's record as a starter is better when the opponent scores 21 or less than Kyle's record is when the opponent scores 10 or less.

But hey, the defense doesn't matter, does it?

:coffee:

The number of factors ignored in posts like this reaches near astronomical heights. How were the coaching philosophies defined, and how did they impact the import of points scored? One could simply start right there and end this thread.

I could cite to any number of other examples comparisons or arguments, but I won't. I'll just compare two seasons and ignore everything else to make a point:

New England scored 410 points last season.

New England scored 385 points in 2006.


Using the logic of your post, where points are basically looked at in a vacuum, Matt Cassel > Tom Brady.

[CoachChaz]

Chad Johnson didn't want to be a Bengal last year...he stuck it out :rolleyes:

Anquan Boldin wanted to be traded, but he stayed as a Cardinal :rolleyes:

Just because somebody demands a trade doesn't mean that you should give it to him. What's McDaniels going to do with the next disgruntled player that asks to be traded? Is he going to accomodate each and every single player just because they're upset with him and want a trade?

He needed to grow some balls and resolve the Cutler situation. Being a hard ass on cry baby Cutler wasn't going to fix the issue...and McDanniels should've known that.

But I understand. It's time to move on. Cutler's gone and there's nothing we can do about it. I just hope McDaniels can get the most out of Orton.



What part of "no conversation could take place without his agent present" is so hard to understand? Or how about, "we tried to contact him and he never called us or the owner back"?

Please explain to me how you are suppose to resolve a situation with someone that isnt capable of having a conversation without his agent present and refuses to talk to all of his bosses. I'm curious how that's suppose to happen.

I'm sure he would have played if they didnt trade him...just like Boldin and Johnson. but to be quite honest...i personally dont want anyone on my team that doesnt want to be here. obviously the FO feels the same way.

[Buff]

The number of factors ignored in posts like this reaches near astronomical heights. How were the coaching philosophies defined, and how did they impact the import of points scored? One could simply start right there and end this thread.

I could cite to any number of other examples comparisons or arguments, but I won't. I'll just compare two seasons and ignore everything else to make a point:

New England scored 410 points last season.

New England scored 385 points in 2006.


Using the logic of your post, where points are basically looked at in a vacuum, Matt Cassel > Tom Brady.

Orrr, better yet, we could just not start a futile thread trying to undercut our incoming QB's record before he's ever played a game for us.

[bcbronc]

Chad Johnson didn't want to be a Bengal last year...he stuck it out :rolleyes:

Anquan Boldin wanted to be traded, but he stayed as a Cardinal :rolleyes:

Just because somebody demands a trade doesn't mean that you should give it to him. What's McDaniels going to do with the next disgruntled player that asks to be traded? Is he going to accomodate each and every single player just because they're upset with him and want a trade?

He needed to grow some balls and resolve the Cutler situation. Being a hard ass on cry baby Cutler wasn't going to fix the issue...and McDanniels should've known that.

But I understand. It's time to move on. Cutler's gone and there's nothing we can do about it. I just hope McDaniels can get the most out of Orton.


ummm.....he did.


:coffee:

[BroncoJoe]

What part of "no conversation could take place without his agent present" is so hard to understand? Or how about, "we tried to contact him and he never called us or the owner back"?

Please explain to me how you are suppose to resolve a situation with someone that isnt capable of having a conversation without his agent present and refuses to talk to all of his bosses. I'm curious how that's suppose to happen.

I'm sure he would have played if they didnt trade him...just like Boldin and Johnson. but to be quite honest...i personally dont want anyone on my team that doesnt want to be here. obviously the FO feels the same way.

Cutler seems, to me anyway, to be the type of dude who would have shown up, but not entertained any extensions to his contract. He'd hold this grudge until the day his contract expired, left as a free agent and we'd have nothing to show for it.

[Tempus Fugit]

Seeing as how people have countered with empty, wasteful posts, I think you've done a good job here Mtn.


"It's different. And that's not taking anything away from a defensive head coach," Orton said. "There were a lot of game situations where we played it pretty safe and let your special teams and defense win it. Sometimes that works and sometimes it doesn't."

http://www.broncosforums.com/forums/showpost.php?p=620264&postcount=1

Coaching philosophy: just one of the many reasons that numbers in a vacuum can be worse than no information at all.

[CoachChaz]

Cutler seems, to me anyway, to be the type of dude who would have shown up, but not entertained any extensions to his contract. He'd hold this grudge until the day his contract expired, left as a free agent and we'd have nothing to show for it.

...and in the process devaluing any trade possibilities.

[gregbroncs]

I don't know if this has been covered, considering the number of Cutler threads, but I did some research on the win/loss records of Kyle Orton (since there are those who think that's the ONLY measurement of a QBs abilities) and it was very interesting.

Basically, Kyle had the benefit of not only playing when the opponent was held to 21 points or less, but he got to play when the opponent was held to 10 points or less.

___________________________________

In 2005, Orton's record was 10-3 when the defense held the opponent to 21 points or less. However, that is a slightly misleading stat....

In 8 of those games, the defense held the opponent to 10 points or less, something our defense only managed ONE TIME in Cutler's 37 starts. His record in those games was 7-1. Jay won his game for a 1-0 record.

In 2007, Orton's record was 1-1 when the defense held the opponent to 21 points of less. In the win, the defense again held the opponent to 10 points or less.

In 2008, Orton's record was 6-1 when the defense held the opponent to 21 points or less. Once again, a misleading stat, because in three of those games, the defense held the opponent to 10 points or less.

So to summarize....

Orton is 17-5 (.772) in games where the defense held the opponent to 21 points or less, which is worse than Jay's 12-1 record (.923). However, when you consider that 12 of Orton's starts were games where the defense held the opponent to 10 points or less (heck - Plummer or Griese can win a game if the opponent doesn't score any more than that) and Orton's record was 11-1 (.916) in those games, which means that Jay's record as a starter is better when the opponent scores 21 or less than Kyle's record is when the opponent scores 10 or less.

But hey, the defense doesn't matter, does it?

:coffee:You know the reverse of this is they had a terrible offense in which he had limited options to go to and they still won those games.

But hey, defense is all that matters, right?

Cutler on the other had had one of the best offenses with a great offensive line and tons of options yet they were 16th in scoring (or thereabouts) while being near the top in yards. The Broncos would have won more games if Jay would not have made so many stupid passes in the red zone.

Basically it's hard to compare the 2 because they played under different philosophies. So while Orton had a good defense and a bad offense Cutler had a great offense and a bad defense.

[Northman]

it's amazing how such a simple, yet important, fact like Cutler didn't want to be here gets left out of the argument by one side.

Cutler OR Orton was never a choice the Broncos had. Cutler demanded a trade, not once but TWICE. Cutler is no longer a Bronco simply because of choices CUTLER made. bitch and moan all you want about letting a "franchise" QB "slip through our fingers" but that so-called franchise QB wanted nothing to do with being a Bronco.

the kid went as far as to show zero respect for the owner of the franchise. say what you want about how the situation played out, but Cutler sure as hell hasn't done enough for this team to not have to give Bowlen his due respect.

and how does one get classified a "franchise" QB with a 0-0 playoff record? or an 0-3 record in games to clinch a playoff spot. seems to me the standard used to be more than just a rocket arm to be considered a "franchise" qb.

but it's all moot now anyway. short of drugging Cutler's drink, hypnotizing him, and sending him to a secret CIA prison to have a microchip implanted in his brain, there is nothing McDaniels could have done to convince Cutler to WANT to be a Bronco. so with that *very important* fact in mind, it's time to move on from Jay Cutler as a Bronco.

Kyle Orton is our QB now, for better or worse. It's time to start finding out what kind of QB he can become.


End thread.

[Northman]

He needed to grow some balls and resolve the Cutler situation.




WTF? He tried to call the dipshit a number of times. Give me a ******* break already.

[Medford Bronco]

Orton is 1-3 when his team gives up more than 30 points. I think Cutler is like 3-13 or something? Not sure of the exact numbers, but their winning %'s are pretty much the same in those situations. Look, Cutler is a better talent than Orton no doubt, but the dude was clearly looking for a way out. He didn't want to be our QB. What's done is done, and we now have a QB that went 9-7 with an average defense and an offense that scored more than ours did last year.

Great post Honz:beer:

[Medford Bronco]

See, the problem with Cutler is that for as many games that the defense lost...and Cutler won...(see San Diego...yes, even sans the bad call)...Cutler lost a lot of games with bad decisions.

The two GLARING games are Oakland at home and Kansas City on the road. That was BAD. Really bad. And the turnover margin is almost strictly on Cutler. And that's not good.

Either way...dude's gone. Time some people get over that fact, or go root for the Bears.

Dont forget the Buffalo game. 541 yards and only 23 pts. A pick at the one yard line and not getting the job done in the dying seconds vs a team that nothing to play for and basically sucked the 2nd half of 2008

[turftoad]

it's amazing how such a simple, yet important, fact like Cutler didn't want to be here gets left out of the argument by one side.

Cutler OR Orton was never a choice the Broncos had. Cutler demanded a trade, not once but TWICE. Cutler is no longer a Bronco simply because of choices CUTLER made. bitch and moan all you want about letting a "franchise" QB "slip through our fingers" but that so-called franchise QB wanted nothing to do with being a Bronco.

the kid went as far as to show zero respect for the owner of the franchise. say what you want about how the situation played out, but Cutler sure as hell hasn't done enough for this team to not have to give Bowlen his due respect.

and how does one get classified a "franchise" QB with a 0-0 playoff record? or an 0-3 record in games to clinch a playoff spot. seems to me the standard used to be more than just a rocket arm to be considered a "franchise" qb.

but it's all moot now anyway. short of drugging Cutler's drink, hypnotizing him, and sending him to a secret CIA prison to have a microchip implanted in his brain, there is nothing McDaniels could have done to convince Cutler to WANT to be a Bronco. so with that *very important* fact in mind, it's time to move on from Jay Cutler as a Bronco.

Kyle Orton is our QB now, for better or worse. It's time to start finding out what kind of QB he can become.

Maybe not.

I found this article in the one of the main Cleveland newspapers about this topic from April 3rd .

Cleveland Browns could still trade Brady Quinn
by Tony Grossi/Plain Dealer Reporter
Friday April 03, 2009, 4:59 PM

Associated Press
Just because Jay Cutler has been traded to the Bears doesn't mean Brady Quinn couldn't wind up in Denver.

CLEVELAND -- Brady Quinn fans shouldn't relax just yet. The possibility of a trade to Denver still exists.
Kyle Orton, the quarterback the Broncos received in Thursday's trade of Jay Cutler to the Bears, is not the answer. Josh McDaniels, Denver's coach, has got to know that.

Neither is Chris Simms, whom the Broncos signed before this brouhaha with Cutler became a daily story.

As soon as the dust settled after the trade of Cutler to Chicago, the question became: So who's Denver's next quarterback?

Speculation in Denver and elsewhere is that the Broncos might use their two first-round draft picks -- No. 12 and No. 18 -- to move up high enough to select Mark Sanchez of Southern California. Seattle, sitting at No. 4, already is giving signals it suddenly loves Sanchez, perhaps to sway a deal with Denver.

The reality of the NFL is that nobody wants to be in the top five on draft day. And that includes Denver.

So there's Quinn, still not endorsed by the Browns as their starting quarterback as he enters his third season. And there's McDaniels in Denver, filled with positive feedback about Quinn from Notre Dame coach Charlie Weis, whom McDaniels adores as an offensive football coach. If McDaniels can't trust Weis, then who can he trust?

Trading the No. 18 pick to the Browns for Quinn (who was taken 22nd in 2007) makes so much sense for the Broncos, I can't believe it hasn't happened yet. They get a young quarterback schooled in McDaniels' system whom the new coach can develop and appoint as the face of his team going forward. Denver also saves its No. 12 pick for much-needed defensive help.

The Browns then would own picks No. 5 and No. 18 and could use them accordingly to address their many needs.

This may be the Browns' best bailout of their quarterback quandary. If they can't decide on their starter now, they probably won't be able to decide after a camp competition.

At the recent NFL owners meetings, I asked coach Eric Mangini if he intended to toss a coin to decide which quarterback gets to start the first preseason game.

He didn't say no.

I was joking. He wasn't.

[Rick]

As far as wins-losses go I really do think people are playing too much into the Orton is a winner Cutler is a loser thing.

Football is a team sport and you win and lose by team effort.

That being said I still think Losing Cutler is not as big a deal as people are making it to be. Orton is a game manager, thats all he is but maybe thats all he needs to be.

Just get the ball in the hands of the many Bronco weapons, dont try and force the issue, let the players you are throwing to do the work. They are very gifted and can handle it.

Mean while lets rebuild that damn defense.

But again, people really need to stop weighing in on Cutler being 17-20 Orton being 21-12.

The Bears and Broncos had the records, not Cutler and Orton. They just happened to be one piece.

[Tempus Fugit]

Maybe not.

I found this article in the one of the main Cleveland newspapers about this topic from April 3rd ....

Quick question:

Do you really think the Broncos would give up a 1st round pick for Brady Quinn at this time, given the fallout that would inevitably result?

[turftoad]

Quick question:

Do you really think the Broncos would give up a 1st round pick for Brady Quinn at this time, given the fallout that would inevitably result?

I just thought the article was interesting so I posted it.

As to your question: Who the hell knows.

McD and the FO isn't to worried about any fallout and inevitably result anyway. If they were, they would have worked out the Cutler sitch.

[Tempus Fugit]

I just thought the article was interesting so I posted it.

As to your question: Who the hell knows.

McD and the FO isn't to worried about any fallout and inevitably result anyway. If they were, they would have worked out the Cutler sitch.

They did work out the Cutler 'sitch'.

[turftoad]

They did work out the Cutler 'sitch'.

Yep, they did but they weren't worried about any fallout because of it.

If McD thinks it can make the team better, he's proven he's not worried about any fallout.

[Tempus Fugit]

Yep, they did but they weren't worried about any fallout because of it.

If McD thinks it can make the team better, he's proven he's not worried about any fallout.

??????

[slim]

21-12

[weazel]

21-12

nice avatar slim. "I can do this with my eyes closed"

[LRtagger]

Seeing as how people have countered with empty, wasteful posts, I think you've done a good job here Mtn.

By this logic, Repubs must be doing a damn good job with their posts in the political forum.

[LoyalSoldier]

So, it's not really clarifying anything?

He's still 21-12, yes?

The bears are 21-12 with him as a starter. He isn't 21-12. Enough with the damn records because we know very well that it is a team game.

Besides, I fail to see how he was "winning games" with passer ratings in the 70s or even 40s. His average passer rating per game 74.2 for the season. Not to be confused with total passer rating which was 79.6. That was below average.

Honestly I will give Orton a chance, but I am expecting him to be a failure. It's his job to prove me wrong.

[bcbronc]

The bears are 21-12 with him as a starter. He isn't 21-12. Enough with the damn records because we know very well that

Besides, I fail to see how he was "winning games" with passer ratings in the 70s or even 40s. His average passer rating per game 74.2 for the season. Not to be confused with total passer rating which was 79.6. That was below average.

Honestly I will give Orton a chance, but I am expecting him to be a failure. It's his job to prove me wrong.

next you're going to be telling us Elway didn't "win games" because his passing rating was in the 70s.

I'll take a W beside a QB rating of 40 every time over a L with a QB rating of 140.

[Dean]

Indeed... Very true... IMO Jay has more talent than Orton. That should be a no brainer.
Now, I don't think Orton is that bad. He can be a very decent QB in the system.

IMO the real questions should be : how well could Orton do here?
Or will the Broncos be better with Orton and some extra draft picks than with a more talented QB who didn't want to play for the team/the coach?
We'll have the answer by the end of the season.

Honestly, I'll be happy to have Trent Dilfer as QB if he leads us to the SB... ;) :D


If!

[Broncos Mtnman]

Orrr, better yet, we could just not start a futile thread trying to undercut our incoming QB's record before he's ever played a game for us.

Orrr, better yet, we could look at his record for what it is instead of implying that he's something he's not before he plays a game for us.

:coffee:

[LoyalSoldier]

next you're going to be telling us Elway didn't "win games" because his passing rating was in the 70s.

To take a page from the Cutler basher's book, Elway and Orton are apples and oranges.

First of all Elway played in an era where QB ratings were lower on average. It was rare to see more than one QB with a rating of 100 for a season. Heck some seasons the highest rating was a 92. Compared to today where we always have one in the 100s and some years we have as many as 4 in the 100s

In 1986 John Elway's rating of 79.0 was enough to be 11th on the list of passer ratings. In 2008 Orton's rating of 79.9 was enough to be 25th on the list. Just look at the last 5 years and compare it to 20 years ago. On average a rating of 79 would get you 10th-13th on the rating list where today it gets you closer to the upper teens to mid 20s.

So back then a rating in the 70s wasn't the same as it is today. If Orton was playing 20 years ago then maybe his 79 rating would actually be good. In today's NFL it means he is average at best.




I'll take a W beside a QB rating of 40 every time over a L with a QB rating of 140.

Yes, but to do that it requires you to actually have a defense. Something we don't have. If Orton wants to win here then he can't expect the defense to carry him.

[Thnikkaman]

Orrr, better yet, we could look at his record for what it is instead of implying that he's something he's not before he plays a game for us.

:coffee:

Or even better, we can make educated opinions of our team after we see them take the field in the fall.

:coffee:

[broncohead]

Since it's just the QB position that wins games we should draft all QBs. We have to hit 1.

[LoyalSoldier]

Or even better, we can make educated opinions of our team after we see them take the field in the fall.

:coffee:

Like I have said I give him a chance, but going by history I don't expect him to do much of anything.

[Thnikkaman]

Like I have said I give him a chance, but going by history I don't expect him to do much of anything.

That is all I ask.

[weazel]

Since it's just the QB position that wins games we should draft all QBs. We have to hit 1.

isn't that what Shanny did with DL's in one draft, then CB's the next?

I dont think McDaniels would be that foolish, but we will see.

[bullis26]

« AFL versus NFL: the Super Bowls
Lots of new data added to the site »
Adjusting quarterback win-loss records, part I
Posted by Doug on Wednesday, March 25, 2009

Last summer I wrote a post that rated field goal kickers according to their accuracy compared to league average. And I also adjusted each kicker’s field goal percentage to account for the distance of his attempts. If one kicker attempted a bunch of chippies while another was kicking a lot more long ones, then we should take that into account when comparing their percentages.

This is highly non-controversial. Obvious even.

So we’re going to do it again. But instead of kickers, we’ll look at quarterbacks. Instead of field goal percentage, we’ll look at winning percentage. And as our measure of difficulty, we won’t use distance but points allowed by the quarterback’s team. Just as kicking a 45-yarder is more difficult than kicking a 23-yarder, it’s harder for a quarterback to win a game if his defense gives up 30 than if they give up 10.

Highly non-controversial, right?

So here’s the plan, which mirrors the kicker plan exactly:

STEP 1: compute each quarterback’s winning percentage in each of six categories: (1) defense allows 0–10 points, (2) defense allows 11–15 points, (3) defense allows 16–20 points, (4) defense allows 21–25 points, (5) defense allows 26–33 points, and (6) defense allows 34+ points.

STEP 2: in each category, compute how many games that quarterback won compared to how many an average QB would have been expected to win.

STEP 3: sum up the QB’s wins above or below average, across all six categories.

Let’s run through Joe Namath as an example:

defense allows 0–10 points: Joe was the beneficiary of this kind of defensive performance 17 times. An average QB would be expected to win 15.9 of 17 games. Joe went 17-0. So he’s +1.1 wins.

defense allows 11–15 points: 18 games. Joe is 16-2. An average QB would win 13.7. So Joe is +2.3 here.

defense allows 16–20 points: 23 games. Joe is 13-10. An average QB would win 12.1. So Joe is +0.9.

defense allows 21–25 points: 25 games. Joe is 10-15. An average QB would win 9.7. So Joe is +0.3.

defense allows 26–33 points: 24 games. Joe is 6-18. An average QB would win 4.1. So Joe is +1.9.

defense allows 34+ points: 25 games. Joe is 2-23. An average QB would win 0.9. So Joe is +1.1.

Add it all up (and ignore the rounding error) and Namath comes out at +7.6. Do that for every quarterback who has started 50 or more games since 1950 and you get the following list. Lots of commentary and fine print below:

G W ExpW Diff
=========================================
Peyton Manning 191 124 92.8 +31.2
John Elway 252 162 134.5 +27.5
Tom Brady 128 101 73.9 +27.1
Brett Favre 291 181 154.7 +26.3
Dan Marino 258 155 129.8 +25.2
Joe Montana 187 133 109.1 +23.9
Ken Stabler 158 103 80.7 +22.3
Johnny Unitas 194 124 106.7 +17.3
Daryle Lamonica 97 70 53.1 +16.9
Jim Kelly 177 110 93.2 +16.8
Steve Young 157 102 85.8 +16.2
Roger Staubach 131 96 79.9 +16.1
Norm Van Brocklin 105 63 47.7 +15.3
Terry Bradshaw 177 121 106.3 +14.7
Dan Fouts 178 89 76.4 +12.6
Randall Cunningham 144 85 72.8 +12.2
Danny White 102 67 55.5 +11.5
Bobby Layne 139 83 71.6 +11.4
Kurt Warner 112 65 53.6 +11.4
Y.A. Tittle 139 78 66.8 +11.2
Frank Ryan 90 58 47.8 +10.2
Bill Nelsen 79 42 32.1 +9.9
Fran Tarkenton 250 130 120.1 +9.9
Otto Graham 78 61 51.3 +9.7
Stan Humphries 87 53 43.7 +9.3
Joe Theismann 132 83 74.3 +8.7
Jeff Hostetler 88 55 46.6 +8.4
Steve McNair 163 96 87.7 +8.3
Ben Roethlisberger 81 59 51.0 +8.0
Rich Gannon 139 80 72.3 +7.7
Steve Grogan 138 75 67.4 +7.6
Joe Namath 132 64 56.4 +7.6
Dave Krieg 184 101 93.6 +7.4
Drew Brees 109 56 48.7 +7.3
Matt Hasselbeck 112 62 54.8 +7.2
Bert Jones 99 47 40.1 +6.9
Jim Hart 182 87 80.1 +6.9
Trent Green 115 56 49.1 +6.9
Philip Rivers 54 36 29.2 +6.8
Jake Delhomme 89 55 48.2 +6.8
Marc Bulger 90 41 34.2 +6.8
Jay Schroeder 104 64 57.6 +6.4
Mark Rypien 85 52 45.6 +6.4
Eli Manning 78 46 39.8 +6.2
Ed Brown 98 55 49.1 +5.9
Charley Johnson 124 59 53.2 +5.8
Billy Kilmer 121 63 57.3 +5.7
John Brodie 164 76 70.6 +5.4
Don Meredith 89 49 43.7 +5.3
Warren Moon 213 105 100.2 +4.8
Brian Sipe 113 57 52.2 +4.8
Jack Kemp 111 67 62.4 +4.6
Jim Plunkett 154 80 75.4 +4.6
George Blanda 108 55 50.5 +4.5
Dan Pastorini 122 59 54.6 +4.4
Tony Eason 56 31 26.9 +4.1
Daunte Culpepper 99 43 38.9 +4.1
Bob Griese 162 98 94.1 +3.9
Sonny Jurgensen 149 69 65.1 +3.9
Troy Aikman 180 105 101.3 +3.7
Phil Simms 169 101 97.3 +3.7
Len Dawson 167 99 95.6 +3.4
Earl Morrall 108 67 63.6 +3.4
Neil Lomax 102 47 43.7 +3.3
Bart Starr 167 103 99.7 +3.3
David Woodley 58 37 33.8 +3.2
Boomer Esiason 178 83 79.8 +3.2
Jim Zorn 106 44 40.9 +3.1
Jim McMahon 103 70 66.9 +3.1
Michael Vick 71 40 36.9 +3.1
Jake Plummer 142 71 68.1 +2.9
Donovan McNabb 143 91 88.5 +2.5
Jeff Garcia 122 60 57.6 +2.4
Wade Wilson 74 38 35.6 +2.4
Charlie Conerly 92 58 55.7 +2.3
Marc Wilson 61 32 29.7 +2.3
Neil O'Donnell 107 58 55.7 +2.3
Brad Johnson 132 76 74.1 +1.9
Bobby Hebert 103 56 54.1 +1.9
Rodney Peete 89 46 44.2 +1.8
Brian Griese 83 45 43.3 +1.7
Mike Phipps 73 38 36.3 +1.7
Pat Haden 60 37 35.5 +1.5
Mike Tomczak 78 45 43.5 +1.5
Roman Gabriel 159 86 84.8 +1.2
Vince Ferragamo 59 30 28.8 +1.2
Babe Parilli 104 50 48.9 +1.1
Tom Flores 67 31 30.1 +0.9
Kordell Stewart 86 50 49.1 +0.9
Gus Frerotte 95 45 44.2 +0.8
Tobin Rote 119 51 50.2 +0.8
Elvis Grbac 73 41 40.2 +0.8
Carson Palmer 66 32 31.4 +0.6
Aaron Brooks 92 39 38.5 +0.5
Billy Wade 86 41 40.7 +0.3
Ken Anderson 178 93 92.7 +0.3
Craig Morton 154 86 85.8 +0.2
Doug Flutie 68 38 37.9 +0.1
John Hadl 169 82 82.0 +0.0
Jeff Blake 100 39 39.0 -0.0
Tommy Kramer 114 56 56.0 -0.0
Mark Brunell 160 83 83.1 -0.1
Erik Kramer 70 32 32.4 -0.4
Jay Fiedler 63 38 38.4 -0.4
Scott Mitchell 73 32 32.5 -0.5
Bernie Kosar 115 56 56.6 -0.6
Chad Pennington 83 45 45.8 -0.8
Don Majkowski 57 26 26.8 -0.8
Steve Bartkowski 131 60 60.9 -0.9
Bubby Brister 77 38 39.4 -1.4
Jon Kitna 116 46 47.5 -1.5
Richard Todd 112 50 51.5 -1.5
Milt Plum 103 56 57.9 -1.9
Chris Chandler 155 69 71.0 -2.0
Bob Avellini 51 23 25.8 -2.8
Gary Danielson 61 28 31.0 -3.0
Eric Hipple 58 28 31.1 -3.1
Ken O'Brien 112 50 53.2 -3.2
Jim Everett 158 66 69.3 -3.3
Bill Kenney 77 34 37.7 -3.7
Joe Kapp 52 26 29.8 -3.8
Jeff George 127 47 51.0 -4.0
Mark Malone 55 24 28.0 -4.0
Joe Ferguson 175 80 84.3 -4.3
Dave M. Brown 60 26 30.8 -4.8
Chris Miller 94 35 39.8 -4.8
Kerry Collins 171 82 86.9 -4.9
Mike Livingston 75 31 36.0 -5.0
Drew Bledsoe 199 101 106.1 -5.1
Greg Landry 99 44 49.1 -5.1
Eddie LeBaron 81 26 31.3 -5.3
Tim Couch 59 22 27.5 -5.5
Steve Beuerlein 104 48 53.6 -5.6
Cotton Davidson 54 20 25.7 -5.7
Lynn Dickey 113 46 51.7 -5.7
Rick Mirer 68 24 29.8 -5.8
Bob Berry 52 20 25.8 -5.8
Doug Williams 88 42 47.8 -5.8
Bill Munson 66 27 33.2 -6.2
Jim Harbaugh 145 68 74.7 -6.7
Bobby Douglass 53 16 22.8 -6.8
Trent Dilfer 119 63 69.8 -6.8
Mike Pagel 54 17 23.8 -6.8
Tony Banks 78 35 41.9 -6.9
Lamar McHan 73 24 31.0 -7.0
Steve DeBerg 144 54 61.2 -7.2
Ron Jaworski 151 77 86.4 -9.4
Norm Snead 158 52 61.6 -9.6
Joey Harrington 76 26 36.2 -10.2
David Carr 79 23 34.1 -11.1
Vinny Testaverde 219 92 103.4 -11.4
Archie Manning 139 35 52.4 -17.4

copied from a different thread

EXCUSES

[LoyalSoldier]

copied from a different thread

EXCUSES

And if you bothered to look I proved that the system was flawed and had to be adjusted for how many games the QBs played. When you adjust it for the number of games played you get different results. The funny thing is after the adjustment Cutler was above several HOF quarterbacks.

[bullis26]

Like I have said I give him a chance, but going by history I don't expect him to do much of anything.

Cutler had better weapons than orton did

Cutlers line, cutlers WR are better and even the broncos running game was better than the bears, now thats pathetic

Lets see how cutler does behind that poor 0-line, throwing to those bad receivers, with a RB core that rushed for fewer yards than ours did

Yes he'll have a better defense but its still not an elite or even great defense

[LoyalSoldier]

Cutler had better weapons than orton did

Cutlers line, cutlers WR are better and even the broncos running game was better than the bears, now thats pathetic

First I wasn't even talking about Cutler in that post so why the hell are you dragging Cutler into it?

Screw stats, the Broncos running game was inconsistent as hell with all of the RBs getting hurt. We did not have constant production from start to finish and for that matter our running backs were also inconsistent when they were healthy. Pittman was good before he got injured and Hillis was the same. Everyone else didn't do much.


Lets see how cutler does behind that poor 0-line, throwing to those bad receivers, with a RB core that rushed for fewer yards than ours did

Let me ask you something. How much more could have their rushing attack rushed for if they actually had a QB who would strike fear into the heart of a defense? They got the same as ours without Cutler throwing the way he was.

If you bothered to watch the Bears games the other team stacked the box because they didn't fear Orton. They feared the running game.


Yes he'll have a better defense but its still not an elite or even great defense

I'll take a defense that can keep foes in the 20s instead of the 40s.

[Ravage!!!]

isn't that what Shanny did with DL's in one draft, then CB's the next?

I dont think McDaniels would be that foolish, but we will see.

I'm pretty sure the poster you were quoting... about drafting all QBs... was being EXTREMELY sarcastic. :beer:

[Ravage!!!]

LoyalSoldier has completely owned this thread.... :salute: Nice job Loyal... excellent posts

[MOtorboat]

LoyalSoldier has completely owned this thread.... :salute: Nice job Loyal... excellent posts

Yes, I agree. It's clear that the stats show that Cutler is much better than Orton. That's why Orton has gone 21-12 and Cutler has gone 17-20.

WORST COLLAPSE EVER!

LMAO!

[MOtorboat]

I'll take a defense that can keep foes in the 20s instead of the 40s.

Actually, the stats show that all quarterbacks aren't very good when their defense gives up more than 30 points.

I think that's a glaring statement that the "franchise" quarterback doesn't exist.

I'll take the four first-round picks, the better offensive line and ACTUAL weapons on offense, and take my chances.

[Ravage!!!]

Yes, I agree. It's clear that the stats show that Cutler is much better than Orton. That's why Orton has gone 21-12 and Cutler has gone 17-20.

WORST COLLAPSE EVER!

LMAO!

And yet, you stilll can't comprehend the obvious reasons that explain that. Doesn't matter if its these two QBs or ones from the past... you expected Cutler to perform better than ANY other QB has EVER done given the same circumstances. No wonder you are disappointed.

You obviously don't want to look past the stat sheet, and probably don't actually watch any of the games. After all, the only thing that shows how a game/player/team played is the final stat on the sheet... right?

Why watch the games and learn when all you have to do is see the paper the next morning. :coffee:

[LoyalSoldier]

Yes, I agree. It's clear that the stats show that Cutler is much better than Orton. That's why Orton has gone 21-12 and Cutler has gone 17-20.

WORST COLLAPSE EVER!

LMAO!
One again you can't see the forest through the trees.

And if Orton was doing so well "Winning" why was he benched in 2005? Oh yea.....BECAUSE HE SUCKED IN 2005! I guess that amazing winning QB was just leaching off of his amazing defense that year. :coffee:

[MOtorboat]

And yet, you stilll can't comprehend the obvious reasons that explain that. Doesn't matter if its these two QBs or ones from the past... you expected Cutler to perform better than ANY other QB has EVER done given the same circumstances. No wonder you are disappointed.

You obviously don't want to look past the stat sheet, and probably don't actually watch any of the games. After all, the only thing that shows how a game/player/team played is the final stat on the sheet... right?

Why watch the games and learn when all you have to do is see the paper the next morning. :coffee:

OK, explain away...

We were 8-8, no?

Which games did Cutler win? The San Diego game? The Cleveland game? OK...you got me on the Cleveland game.

What about the Kansas City and Oakland games? PLEASE tell me it was the defense in those two games. Please?

I don't have to see the paper, I watched those games, and Jay Cutler lost those games. If you can't see that, then you, are clearly ignorant.

And...if you can't understand how this makes the idea of a 21-12 record better than a 17-20 record, then you just don't get it, and I really can't help you.

The FACT remains that Jay Cutler was the quarterback for the WORST COLLAPSE IN NFL HISTORY.

[MOtorboat]

One again you can't see the forest through the trees.

And if Orton was doing so well "Winning" why was he benched in 2005? Oh yea.....BECAUSE HE SUCKED IN 2005! I guess that amazing winning QB was just leaching off of his amazing defense that year. :coffee:

Unlike you, I'm not going to make excuses for Orton. He sucked ass in his rookie year.

[DenBronx]

You know the reverse of this is they had a terrible offense in which he had limited options to go to and they still won those games.

But hey, defense is all that matters, right?

Cutler on the other had had one of the best offenses with a great offensive line and tons of options yet they were 16th in scoring (or thereabouts) while being near the top in yards. The Broncos would have won more games if Jay would not have made so many stupid passes in the red zone.

Basically it's hard to compare the 2 because they played under different philosophies. So while Orton had a good defense and a bad offense Cutler had a great offense and a bad defense.


without cutler our offense wouldnt have been near as good as it was last year. cutler made everyone else look good. they ALL were looking good because of cutler...even hillis. it wasnt the other way around.

[MOtorboat]

without cutler our offense wouldnt have been near as good as it was last year. cutler made everyone else look good. they ALL were looking good because of cutler...even hillis. it wasnt the other way around.

Thanks for the gross assumption.

I hear the Bears are looking for fans.

It's funny that as a TEAM, we were better in 2005 without Cutler...I dunno...just a funny thought...

[getlynched47]

Actually, the stats show that all quarterbacks aren't very good when their defense gives up more than 30 points.

I think that's a glaring statement that the "franchise" quarterback doesn't exist.

I'll take the four first-round picks, the better offensive line and ACTUAL weapons on offense, and take my chances.

The term "franchise" Quarterback is being thrown around too loosely nowadays. I believe Cutler is a franchise Quarterback, but in the "loose" sense that has been created. In the literal sense, there are only two franchise Quarterbacks in this league: Peyton Manning, Tom Brady. Period.

[MOtorboat]

The term "franchise" Quarterback is being thrown around too loosely nowadays. I believe Cutler is a franchise Quarterback, but in the "loose" sense that has been created. In the literal sense, there are only two franchise Quarterbacks in this league: Peyton Manning, Tom Brady. Period.

Just remember that Cutler orchestrated the worst collapse in NFL history.

[DenBronx]

Thanks for the gross assumption.

I hear the Bears are looking for fans.

It's funny that as a TEAM, we were better in 2005 without Cutler...I dunno...just a funny thought...

better go join them because you clearly dont know shit about the broncos.

[MOtorboat]

better go join them because you clearly dont know shit about the broncos.

Really?

So, you're really going to argue that in an AFC Championship year in 2005, we were worse than the year we orchestrated the worst collapse in NFL history?

Are you really going to argue that?

[LoyalSoldier]

Unlike you, I'm not going to make excuses for Orton. He sucked ass in his rookie year.

And yet you use the record that includes that year as if it is some gospel. Anyone see the problem here?

I am going to place 75% of the blame on the defense from last year because there was no excuse to be that bad. None at all. The offense had a turnover problem at times, but at least they put the ball in the endzone often enough.

Our offense could have played better, but our defense couldn't play any worse! If the offense was struggling while the defense was playing well then I would be more inclined to bash the offense. The fact of the matter is the defense failed just about every game except the Tampa game. The offense failed less than half the games. So 9 to 1 is heavily in the favor of the offense.

I am also getting very tired of any information that might explain what happened last year getting brushed off as "excuses".

[slim]

The term "franchise" Quarterback is being thrown around too loosely nowadays. I believe Cutler is a franchise Quarterback, but in the "loose" sense that has been created. In the literal sense, there are only two franchise Quarterbacks in this league: Peyton Manning, Tom Brady. Period.

Agreed, there are only two. Peyton and Tom, period.

[getlynched47]

Just remember that Cutler orchestrated the worst collapse in NFL history.

Cutler didn't "orchestrate" the worst collapse in NFL history, the entire 2008 Denver Broncos squad did.

[MOtorboat]

And yet you use the record that includes that year as if it is some gospel. Anyone see the problem here?

LMAO!

He sucked his rookie year, and he STILL was 21-12.

:noidea:

Yes, I do use that record, and include that year. It happened.

Honestly...your above statement is just hilarious. If we DON'T include that year what was his record?

Just out of curiousity.

[DenBronx]

Really?

So, you're really going to argue that in an AFC Championship year in 2005, we were worse than the year we orchestrated the worst collapse in NFL history?

Are you really going to argue that?

i'll argue that we had one of the worst bronco defenses ive seen.

whats the defense have to do with cutler?

[NightTrainLayne]

Cutler didn't "orchestrate" the worst collapse in NFL history, the entire 2008 Denver Broncos squad did.

:D Oh. . .right. .. Cutler only orchestrated the good things that happened right? :D

[getlynched47]

:D Oh. . .right. .. Cutler only orchestrated the good things that happened right? :D

The entire team played bad those last 3 games. Blame does not fall soley on Cutler's shoulders, but he does carry blame just like the rest of the 53 guys in that locker room.

[MOtorboat]

i'll argue that we had one of the worst bronco defenses ive seen.

whats the defense have to do with cutler?

Nothing.

Cutler single-handedly lost games against a 2-win team, and a 5-win team.

So for every game he won, he clearly lost.

[MOtorboat]

The entire team played bad those last 3 games. Blame does not fall soley on Cutler's shoulders, but he does carry blame just like the rest of the 53 guys in that locker room.

Unfortunately for quarterbacks, it does.

Period.

[LoyalSoldier]

LMAO!

He sucked his rookie year, and he STILL was 21-12.

:noidea:

Yes, I do use that record, and include that year. It happened.

Honestly...your above statement is just hilarious. If we DON'T include that year what was his record?

Just out of curiousity.

It is not the fact the record exists, but the fact that you use the record as a way of saying Orton was better. The record is a big lie because Orton was not the reason the team went 11-5 that year. In fact he was practically doing everything he could to lose games that year.

[DenBronx]

Nothing.

Cutler single-handedly lost games against a 2-win team, and a 5-win team.

So for every game he won, he clearly lost.



and ill argue there were games we wouldnt have won without him. i think we were a much worse football team then people realize. we could have easily went 5-11. how many times did the defense switch things up last year because they just couldnt get it right?

[getlynched47]

Unfortunately for quarterbacks, it does.

Period.

I wonder what would've happened if Selvin Young wouldn't have fumbled in the game vs. Panthers.

I wonder what would've happened if Brandon Stokley would have caught that game-winning touchdown that he dropped in the endzone vs. Buffalo.

I wonder what would've happened if the Denver defense would have help San Diego under 50 points in the finale.

I wonder what would've happened if Kawika Mitchell wouldn't have intercepted Cutler in the endzone.

I wonder what would've happened if the defense wouldn't have allowed Deangelo Williams to score that huge Touchdown run.

I wonder what would've happened if Brandon Marshall caught a Touchdown in one of the last 3 games.

The point is...i can do this all day long.

The blame falls on ALL 53 guys on the 2008 roster, and NOT on Cutler soley. Period.

[LoyalSoldier]

Nothing.

Cutler single-handedly lost games against a 2-win team, and a 5-win team.

So for every game he won, he clearly lost.

Oh because I didn't know that Cutler's name was Eddie Royal, Brandon Marshall, or Bob Slowvik. Yep Cutler was the one who wanted to go to a 3-4 defense and let Larry Johnson run for nearly 200 yards.

Cutler played a terrible game, but honestly SINGLE HANDEDLY?! Your crazy!

[MOtorboat]

I wonder what would've happened if Selvin Young wouldn't have fumbled in the game vs. Panthers.

I wonder what would've happened if Brandon Stokley would have caught that game-winning touchdown that he dropped in the endzone vs. Buffalo.

I wonder what would've happened if the Denver defense would have help San Diego under 50 points in the finale.

I wonder what would've happened if Kawika Mitchell wouldn't have intercepted Cutler in the endzone.

I wonder what would've happened if the defense wouldn't have allowed Deangelo Williams to score that huge Touchdown run.

I wonder what would've happened if Brandon Marshall caught a Touchdown in one of the last 3 games.

The point is...i can do this all day long.

The blame falls on ALL 53 guys on the 2008 roster, and NOT on Cutler soley. Period.

You certainly could.

It doesn't change the fact that Jay Cutler is responsible for the worst collapse ever.

Now, this is where you tell me Cutler's performance doesn't matter, because we all know that it was the defense, and yet getting rid of Cutler is a mistake because he's a great quarterback, even though the great quarterback couldn't win those games.

[Tempus Fugit]

I wonder what would've happened if Selvin Young wouldn't have fumbled in the game vs. Panthers.

I wonder what would've happened if Brandon Stokley would have caught that game-winning touchdown that he dropped in the endzone vs. Buffalo.

I wonder what would've happened if the Denver defense would have help San Diego under 50 points in the finale.

I wonder what would've happened if Kawika Mitchell wouldn't have intercepted Cutler in the endzone.

I wonder what would've happened if the defense wouldn't have allowed Deangelo Williams to score that huge Touchdown run.

I wonder what would've happened if Brandon Marshall caught a Touchdown in one of the last 3 games.

The point is...i can do this all day long.

The blame falls on ALL 53 guys on the 2008 roster, and NOT on Cutler soley. Period.

It's amazing that it's CUTLER that wins when the team defense allows only a certain number of points in a game, but it's ALL 53 GUYS who lose games.

[MOtorboat]

Oh because I didn't know that Cutler's name was Eddie Royal, Brandon Marshall, or Bob Slowvik. Yep Cutler was the one who wanted to go to a 3-4 defense.

Cutler played a terrible game, but honestly SINGLE HANDEDLY?! Your crazy!

So, Cutler's decision making didn't cost us those two games, but it did help us win games?

Which one is it. Next, you're going to tell me that the defense won or lost games and Cutler's performance had nothing to do with it.

[DenBronx]

why arent these nimwits putting champ bailey and dj on trial? i mean....why not just blame the idiot kicker? whats next the cotton candy salesman?

[MOtorboat]

why arent these nimwits putting champ bailey and dj on trial? i mean....why not just blame the idiot kicker? whats next the cotton candy salesman?

Because nimwits actually think Jay Cutler isn't responsible for anything.

[getlynched47]

You certainly could.

It doesn't change the fact that Jay Cutler is responsible for the worst collapse ever.

Now, this is where you tell me Cutler's performance doesn't matter, because we all know that it was the defense, and yet getting rid of Cutler is a mistake because he's a great quarterback, even though the great quarterback couldn't win those games.

No, this is the part where I tell you to stop being so asinine.

So you're saying that Cutler's the entire reason why we lost those last three games because he was our Quarterback? That's fine, that's your opinion.

I'm sure those loses had nothing to do with a defense who made Jake Delhomme look like Peyton Manning, allow a 4th quarter touchdown to some nobody wide receiver named Steve Johnson, and allow the Chargers to score 53 points :rolleyes:

I never said Cutler doesn't carry any blame, it's just stupid to put that epic collapse entirely on him.

[BeefStew25]

Mo, go tell someone to be a bears fan.

[Ravage!!!]

Mo, go tell someone to be a bears fan.

Give him a second... he will. Its his 'best retort'....

[MOtorboat]

No, this is the part where I tell you to stop being so asinine.

So you're saying that Cutler's the entire reason why we lost those last three games because he was our Quarterback? That's fine, that's your opinion.

I'm sure those loses had nothing to do with a defense who made Jake Delhomme look like Peyton Manning, allow a 4th quarter touchdown to some nobody wide receiver named Steve Johnson, and allow the Chargers to score 53 points :rolleyes:

I never said Cutler doesn't carry any blame, it's just stupid to put that epic collapse entirely on him.

No, it's not stupid. It happened. If we're going to give quarterbacks credit for winning games, then they also get credit for losing games.

Blaming the defense is just a cop out.

It's not asinine to believe that quarterbacks are responsible for wins and losses.

[slim]

Mo, go tell someone to be a bears fan.

Hi beefy.

How are things over at the bears forum?

[getlynched47]

It's amazing that it's CUTLER that wins when the team defense allows only a certain number of points in a game, but it's ALL 53 GUYS who lose games.

I dont think I ever said that :rolleyes:

Cutler is the reason we lost against Kansas City. Cutler is the reason we lost against Oakland. Cutler is the reason we lost against Miami. But Cutler is the reason we won against Cleveland and Atlanta. The defense won us the game vs. Tampa Bay.

[MOtorboat]

Hi beefy.

How are things over at the bears forum?

I wonder if he follows around posters there without making valid points?

[getlynched47]

No, it's not stupid. It happened. If we're going to give quarterbacks credit for winning games, then they also get credit for losing games.

Blaming the defense is just a cop out.

It's not asinine to believe that quarterbacks are responsible for wins and losses.

Kyle Orton is not the reason the Bears went 11-5 his rookie season. Blaming the defense is not a cop out, saying that Kyle Orton is 21-12 and Cutler is 17-20 is a cop out.

If it's a team game, then the entire team gets credit for the loss or a win with some players obviously playing better than others.

[LoyalSoldier]

So, Cutler's decision making didn't cost us those two games, but it did help us win games?

Which one is it. Next, you're going to tell me that the defense won or lost games and Cutler's performance had nothing to do with it.

Once again the Cutler bashers have to make a straw man. I could have sworn I said

"Cutler played a terrible game, but honestly SINGLE HANDEDLY?! Your crazy!"


Saying it was all Cutler just shows massive ignorance about the game of football. Cutler threw 2 untimely interceptions that hurt and hurt us a lot. Yet Eddie Royal and Brandon Marshall started the turnover fest long before Cutler threw his first interception of the game. Not to mention what was the second play of the game?

2-7-KC 14 (14:13) 27-L.Johnson up the middle to DEN 21 for 65 yards (32-D.Bly, 24-C.Bailey).

Yep Cutler must have lost it single handedly, let's just ignore that the rest of the team gave the ball away just as many times as Cutler did.....:coffee:

[MOtorboat]

Kyle Orton is not the reason the Bears went 11-5 his rookie season. Blaming the defense is not a cop out, saying that Kyle Orton is 21-12 and Cutler is 17-20 is a cop out.

If it's a team game, then the entire team gets credit for the loss or a win with some players obviously playing better than others.

Then Jay Cutler also has a hand in the worst divisional collapse ever, no?

[MOtorboat]

Cutler threw 2 untimely interceptions that hurt and hurt us a lot.

Turnover margin is one of the biggest factors in a loss.

If Cutler does not throw into double coverage several times agains the Chiefs, a team that won two games, Denver is not sitting home in the playoffs. Period.

[getlynched47]

Then Jay Cutler also has a hand in the worst divisional collapse ever, no?

Yes. I never said Cutler was clean of any blame. :rolleyes:

[LoyalSoldier]

Then Jay Cutler also has a hand in the worst divisional collapse ever, no?

He played like crap in the Carolina game and the San Diego game he was off on a couple of throws that would have changed his role in the game. The Buffalo game he had a bad 4th quater, but performed in the first 3.

[LoyalSoldier]

Turnover margin is one of the biggest factors in a loss.

If Cutler does not throw into double coverage several times agains the Chiefs, a team that won two games, Denver is not sitting home in the playoffs. Period.

If Brandon Marshall and Eddie Royal would hang onto the ball then maybe we could have been playing with a lead and not from behind. Those fumbles led directly to 10 points. Neither of the Cutler interceptions actually led to points.

See once again you are putting it completely on Cutler which is just ignorant.

[getlynched47]

If Brandon Marshall and Eddie Royal would hang onto the ball then maybe we could have been playing with a lead and not from behind.

See once again you are putting it completely on Cutler which is just ignorant.

He doesn't understand that.

Since Cutler isn't a Denver Bronco anymore, he automatically hates him. How mature :rolleyes:

[MOtorboat]

If Brandon Marshall and Eddie Royal would hang onto the ball then maybe we could have been playing with a lead and not from behind.

See once again you are putting it completely on Cutler which is just ignorant.

So, once again, there's an excuse. It was Brandon Marshall and Eddie Royal's fault?

Seriously?

So those interceptions against KC and Oakland were the receivers fault?

[MOtorboat]

He doesn't understand that.

Since Cutler isn't a Denver Bronco anymore, he automatically hates him. How mature :rolleyes:

I didn't say that either.

:rolleyes:

[getlynched47]

I didn't say that either.

:rolleyes:

Since you like to throw words in other peoples mouths, I took the initiative to give you a taste of your own medicine.

MissouriBronc hates Jay Cutler simply because he's not a Denver Bronco anymore. That's why he blames our last two seasons (7-9,8-8) on Jay Cutler entirely. He says Jay Cutler is the reason we lost all those games :rolleyes:

[LoyalSoldier]

So, once again, there's an excuse. It was Brandon Marshall and Eddie Royal's fault?

Seriously?

So those interceptions against KC and Oakland were the receivers fault?


Normally I try to refrain from internet memes, but the end of this post deserves it.

EPIC FAILURE!
http://i269.photobucket.com/albums/jj51/crys77/polar-bear-face-palm_thumbnail1.jpg


READING COMPREHENSION FTW!


Yet Eddie Royal and Brandon Marshall started the turnover fest long before Cutler threw his first interception of the game. Those fumbles led directly to 10 points.
If Brandon Marshall and Eddie Royal would hang onto the ball Or in other words Marshall and Royal fumbled the ball and it led to 10 points!

# of Cutler turnovers = # of receiver turnovers

# of Cutler turnovers + # of receiver turnovers = 4

Therefore our offense as a whole was a turnover machine and our defense was letting LJ walk right past them.

[MOtorboat]

Normally I try to refrain from internet memes, but the end of this post deserves it.

EPIC FAILURE!
http://i269.photobucket.com/albums/jj51/crys77/polar-bear-face-palm_thumbnail1.jpg


READING COMPREHENSION FTW!

Or in other words Marshall and Royal fumbled the ball and it led to 10 points!

# of Cutler turnovers = # of receiver turnovers

# of Cutler turnovers + # of receiver turnovers = 4

Therefore our offense as a whole was a turnover machine and our defense was letting LJ walk right past them.

So, once again...it's everyone else's fault.

Good thing Cutler is a Bear now.

Nevermind throwing repeatedly into double coverage, it was Royal and Marshall's fault.

[MOtorboat]

# of Cutler turnovers = # of receiver turnovers

# of Cutler turnovers + # of receiver turnovers = 4

So, let me get this straight...Cutler's interceptions against Kansas City were Marshall's fault?

[silkamilkamonico]

All you guys are funny! Jay Cutler has a stronger arm that John Elway! It could never be his fault.

[LoyalSoldier]

So, once again...it's everyone else's fault.

Good thing Cutler is a Bear now.

Nevermind throwing repeatedly into double coverage, it was Royal and Marshall's fault.

You are a master at the straw man. You really are. Because half the time you are pulling words out of the air and throwing it in my mouth.

I could have sworn I said Cutler's Ints hurt us....OH WAIT I DID!


Cutler threw 2 untimely interceptions that hurt and hurt us a lot.Well dang it I guess there goes your straw man. I never exemplified Cutler from blame, I only was showing how stupid your argument was. "Cutler single handedly lost the game", what a joke. The internet never ceases to amaze me.

I would love to stay and listen to your logical fallacies, but I have Quantum Chemistry homework to do. So I won't be replying for a while.

[LoyalSoldier]

So, let me get this straight...Cutler's interceptions against Kansas City were Marshall's fault?

Wow great logic chain. Your batting .100 there.....

Honestly just stop. You are looking down right stupid right now.

[getlynched47]

Wow great logic chain. Your batting .100 there.....

Honestly just stop. You are looking down right stupid right now.

Owned :werd:

[horsepig]

Fine print:

1. This includes all regular- and post-season games.

2. You might be wondering about era/league effects. It’s easier to win if your defense allows 20 points in the 1961 AFL than it is to win if you defense allows 20 points in the 1974 NFL. Though I didn’t mention it above, I actually did attempt to account for this. What I did was to compute the “average quarterback’s expected wins” for a given category by looking at all games in that category in the same league within two years. For example, if I’m examining Joe Namath’s 1966 season, the expected winning percentage for category (1) games, e.g., is computed by looking at all category (1) AFL games from 1964 to 1968.

Thoughts:

1. Don’t forget that the line labeled “Peyton Manning” is really Peyton Manning, Marvin Harrison, Edgerrin James, Jeff Saturday, Tony Dungy/Jim Mora/Tom Moore, Mike Vanderjagt, and a cast of thousands. What it isn’t, though, is the Colts’ defense. Or at least not as much as Manning’s raw record is. More on this later.

I’ve said before that quarterbacks don’t win games (teams do), and I still believe that. But if people are going to talk about QB wins — and it looks like it’s unfortunately too late to put the lid back on that can of snakes — they may as well try to put them into context. This post is is an effort to do that. To oversimplify things a little (or maybe more), Peyton Manning’s record is the product of the efforts of 22 guys. This exercise attempts to narrow that down to 11.

2. I think this exercise has provided me with a new all-time favorite example of Simpson’s Paradox. Check out Daunte Culpepper and Trent Dilfer:

+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Points allowed |
+------------------+-------------+-----------+------------+------------+------------+
| QB | 10 or under | 11--15 | 16--20 | 21--25 | 26 or more |
+------------------+-------------+-----------+------------+------------+------------+
| Daunte Culpepper | 5-0 1.000 | 7-4 0.636 | 17-6 0.739 | 6-7 0.462 | 8-39 0.170 |
| Trent Dilfer | 30-5 0.857 | 9-7 0.563 | 13-8 0.619 | 9-12 0.429 | 2-24 0.077 |
+------------------+-------------+-----------+------------+------------+------------+

Culpepper has him in every category, but Dilfer (63-46) has a better overall record (Culpepper’s is 43-56) because their distribution of opportunities has been so different. Matt Hasselbeck and Bob Griese are another example:

+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Points allowed |
+-----------------+-------------+------------+-------------+------------+------------+
| QB | 10 or under | 11--15 | 16--20 | 21--25 | 26 or more |
+-----------------+-------------+------------+-------------+------------+------------+
| Bob Griese | 53-1 0.981 | 20-7 0.741 | 14-11 0.560 | 7-11 0.389 | 4-31 0.114 |
| Matt Hasselbeck | 25-0 1.000 | 6-2 0.750 | 12-5 0.706 | 11-8 0.579 | 8-35 0.186 |
+-----------------+-------------+------------+-------------+------------+------------+

And you can pair Marc Bulger with just about anyone. Bart Starr, for instance:

+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Points allowed |
+-------------+-------------+------------+-------------+-------------+------------+
| QB | 10 or under | 11--15 | 16--20 | 21--25 | 26 or more |
+-------------+-------------+------------+-------------+-------------+------------+
| Marc Bulger | 8-0 1.000 | 8-1 0.889 | 8-4 0.667 | 9-6 0.600 | 8-38 0.174 |
| Bart Starr | 51-3 0.944 | 17-5 0.773 | 20-10 0.667 | 10-15 0.400 | 5-25 0.167 |
+-------------+-------------+------------+-------------+-------------+------------+

3. Starr is barely above average in this analysis. In Part II, where we make a few more adjustments, he’ll actually come out as below average. What are we to make of this? Those hoping for a Starr-is-a-fraud rant at this point will be disappointed. Maybe it’s just because of the soft spot I have for Troy Aikman, who finds himself ranked similarly. Or maybe it’s because I know that points scored and points allowed are correlated. Bart Starr wasn’t playing defense, but he and the rest of his offensive teammates could have, and probably did have, an indirect impact on the number of points the defense allowed. How much of an impact? That’s tough to say, but that’s the case you have to make if you think Starr is an all-time great, or even, frankly, an all-time good. What this does, in my mind, is eliminate the argument that Starr was good at doing just enough for his team to win. He wasn’t any better at that than Marc Bulger or Tony Eason or Randall Cunningham.

Lest you think this is a canned stat-head rant, let me also call attention to Ken Anderson. If there’s one thing that all historical football stat nerds seem to agree on, it’s that Ken Anderson is underrated. But this analysis says otherwise, ranking him dead average.

This is all way too complex. Give your QB a +5 if the offense makes a 3rd and 15. If they get 14, -3, not +anything for a meaningless 14 yard gain. Subjectivity must come into play if the 14 yard game is significant to fieldposition/time/score.

12 yards on 3rd and 8 is worth a hell of alot more than a beautiful 42 yard run on 3rd and 43. To be more relevant, a 1 yard gain on 3rd or especially 4th ande a foot is worth +10, a 6 yard run on 3rd and 7 is meaningless.

[Broncolingus]

I hope Orton continues his winning ways for the next several years...

...and stay's healthy.

[Thnikkaman]

One again you can't see the forest through the trees.

And if Orton was doing so well "Winning" why was he benched in 2005? Oh yea.....BECAUSE HE SUCKED IN 2005! I guess that amazing winning QB was just leaching off of his amazing defense that year. :coffee:

Orton was benched in 2005 because Rex was always the starter, and was injured. Rex was supposed to be the franchise QB for Chicago. The arm, the athleticism, what they think Cutler is going to be. You forget that Rex was injured most of that season after he got hurt in a preseason game if I remember correctly.

I also posted those stats to show that QBs aren't supposed to win games where the defense gives up more than 30 points. You may also see that metric is for QBs with more than 50 starts. Have you ever taken a stat class? If so, you would know that we haven't seen enough of Cutlers starts to project what kind of QB he is going to be.

I agree with you that unlike old baseball, stats don't tell the story of a game. Football is not that simple.

Finally, I leave you with this, and its starting to become my Mantra:

Do you know what to do to make the changes to this football team that you want? No? Than why are you arguing for a player that is no longer on our team. I'm not asking you to become a Homer (even though there is nothing wrong with that), just that you realize what a waste of effort it is to argue over something that you have no power to change.

That is of course it makes you feel like a man to win an argument with a stranger on the internet.

[Thnikkaman]

But I have Quantum Chemistry homework to do. So I won't be replying for a while.

Let me know when you fix that funny flux problem with quantum processors.

[LoyalSoldier]

Orton was benched in 2005 because Rex was always the starter, and was injured. Rex was supposed to be the franchise QB for Chicago. The arm, the athleticism, what they think Cutler is going to be. You forget that Rex was injured most of that season after he got hurt in a preseason game if I remember correctly.

Though simply put if Orton was lighting things up he wouldn't have been benched. Grossman was put in mid game during the Atlanta game.


I also posted those stats to show that QBs aren't supposed to win games where the defense gives up more than 30 points. You may also see that metric is for QBs with more than 50 starts. Have you ever taken a stat class? If so, you would know that we haven't seen enough of Cutlers starts to project what kind of QB he is going to be.

I agree with you that unlike old baseball, stats don't tell the story of a game. Football is not that simple.

Finally, I leave you with this, and its starting to become my Mantra:

Do you know what to do to make the changes to this football team that you want? No? Than why are you arguing for a player that is no longer on our team. I'm not asking you to become a Homer (even though there is nothing wrong with that), just that you realize what a waste of effort it is to argue over something that you have no power to change.

That is of course it makes you feel like a man to win an argument with a stranger on the internet.

I do know what changes I would want, but the thing is I don't have say in how they are performed.

What I am getting tired of though is people telling me how great Orton is. Like I said before he has a shot, but I am not expecting much out of him. I feel the team has been set back for the mean time and the only way we are going to be remotely competitive is if the defense has a huge turn around.

So I am hoping that our rookie head coach and our rookie GM turn out to be drafting prodigies or our we just wasted our trade. It is all dependent on their drafting.

[LoyalSoldier]

Let me know when you fix that funny flux problem with quantum processors.

Nah we don't get into that kind of stuff. We just worry about electrons and such.

[topscribe]

Though simply put if Orton was lighting things up he wouldn't have been benched. Grossman was put in mid game during the Atlanta game.

Simply put, Orton was a rookie in 2005. It is not reasonable to expect a rookie to light it up.

-----

[LoyalSoldier]

Simply put, Orton was a rookie in 2005. It is not reasonable to expect a rookie to light it up.

-----

EXACTLY! Thank you.

So I wish people would quit acting like Orton was the reason the Bears won 11 games that year.

[topscribe]

EXACTLY! Thank you.

So I wish people would quit acting like Orton was the reason the Bears won 11 games that year.

That's why I don't place much stock in a W-L record as a major, standalone
factor. Take Cutler's 17-20, for instance. People hold that against him. I have
asked several times whether anyone thought he would have been 17-20 and
never to the postseason had he played for NE or Pittsburgh. I have had no
takers.

Same with Orton's W-L. A QB has somethng to do with it (win or lose), yes.
But he also benefits by, or is at the mercy of, his supporting cast.

I prefer to go by individual stats, and that is only in light of his experience and,
again, his supporting cast. The biggest factor in my judgment is watching him
play. Elway, for instance, did not have the greatest stats I have ever seen,
yet anyone who saw him in games can attest to his greatness.

That's all I ask regarding Orton. Let's see how he does on the field for the
Broncos, then laud his excellence or throw him under the bus. After all, the
guy has only two years actually on the field. He has a lot of physical tools
at his disposal. Let's see how he puts them together in his third year on the
field.

-----

[Thnikkaman]

Nah we don't get into that kind of stuff. We just worry about electrons and such.

Quantum processors deal with spin packets. I only know since one of my friends is finishing his PhD thesis in Quantum Physics.

[Thnikkaman]

Though simply put if Orton was lighting things up he wouldn't have been benched. Grossman was put in mid game during the Atlanta game.



I do know what changes I would want, but the thing is I don't have say in how they are performed.

What I am getting tired of though is people telling me how great Orton is. Like I said before he has a shot, but I am not expecting much out of him. I feel the team has been set back for the mean time and the only way we are going to be remotely competitive is if the defense has a huge turn around.

So I am hoping that our rookie head coach and our rookie GM turn out to be drafting prodigies or our we just wasted our trade. It is all dependent on their drafting.

I think anyone that is bringing up Orton's record is not saying that he is a great QB, but a Servicable QB. Really a stop gap until we get the chance to draft someone who has a chance to be great. Maybe we flop next year and get a top 10 pick, or the Bears do.

Anything else I say on the subject is just going to be a rehash of 100 other threads from the past 5 days.

[Lonestar]

I seem to remember all those on this forum automatically believed mikey when he gave the starters job to jay when he said he gives us the best chance to win.. Most thought we were gong to the super bowl with that statement..

now he is 17-20 does anyone really believe the mikey was correct?

while over the past 3 years the offense was designed for him it did not work because mikey forgot about the other 52 players on the broncos..

it was said that mikey could not win a playoff game without John so he decided to get another John forsaking the defense to do it..

but I digress.. so lets get :focus:

I have not read any post on here that has said Orton is the best QB of the two.. Just that jay could not win with the players dealt to him.. and the O was stacked in his favor.. make now doubt about that..

Now we have a HC, GM and Owner that are getting back to the basics building a TEAM via the draft.. and because jay failed at being a TEAM MATE
we have extra choice to build via the draft..

Now it is Orton or Simms time in DEN and frankly I hope that win it all.. I do not think they will but I can hope they will..

[bullis26]

He doesn't understand that.

Since Cutler isn't a Denver Bronco anymore, he automatically hates him. How mature :rolleyes:

its immature to not like an NFL player? wow everybody that watches football must be immature then......... i hate cutler, not because he's a bronco, but because of how we handled himself, yes mcdaniels did him wrong, but cutler should've acted in a mature way, he's the immature one, not a guy that doesnt like him

[TXBRONC]

Just remember that Cutler orchestrated the worst collapse in NFL history.

Just remember he had one of worst defenses in Broncos history.

[TXBRONC]

That's why I don't place much stock in a W-L record as a major, standalone
factor. Take Cutler's 17-20, for instance. People hold that against him. I have
asked several times whether anyone thought he would have been 17-20 and
never to the postseason had he played for NE or Pittsburgh. I have had no
takers.

Same with Orton's W-L. A QB has somethng to do with it (win or lose), yes.
But he also benefits by, or is at the mercy of, his supporting cast.

I prefer to go by individual stats, and that is only in light of his experience and,
again, his supporting cast. The biggest factor in my judgment is watching him
play. Elway, for instance, did not have the greatest stats I have ever seen,
yet anyone who saw him in games can attest to his greatness.

That's all I ask regarding Orton. Let's see how he does on the field for the
Broncos, then laud his excellence or throw him under the bus. After all, the
guy has only two years actually on the field. He has a lot of physical tools
at his disposal. Let's see how he puts them together in his third year on the
field.

-----

I have doubts about Orton, but that doesn't really matter because he's going to get a chance to prove himself. We'll get to see soon enough if it was the offense that hindered Orton or a lack of ability. My hope is that he will succeed.

[LRtagger]

I just did this today...pretty interesting.

If you take Orton's career passing yards and divide them by today's date and time, you get this:

5319/4909+930 = 931.08352006518639234059889997963

Now I'm at work, so I decided to plug that number into an equation that I am working with right now.

I = W/(E x PF x 1.73)

We can say that Ortons yards/date and time would be wattage because thats like energy. Also I would say that since Orton's arm is weaker than Cutler's, I would rate his arm strength at the median household voltage of 120V while Jay's would be like 208V or 240V. Also 0.8 is the NFL standard for power factor and I am using 1.73 for three phase because there are three phases to a football team (Offense, defense, special teams).

Anyways:

I = 931/(120 x .8 x 1.73)
I = 5.60573

If you do the same thing for Jay but take into account his arm strength is probably like 240V, you get:

I = 2.80588

So you see Kyle's arm amperage is more than Jay's so he has more current flowing through his arm. Should mean that his arm is more electric than Jay's so I think we should be better off now.

Thanks for listening.

[Thnikkaman]

I just did this today...pretty interesting.

If you take Orton's career passing yards and divide them by today's date and time, you get this:

5319/4909+930 = 931.08352006518639234059889997963

Now I'm at work, so I decided to plug that number into an equation that I am working with right now.

I = W/(E x PF x 1.73)

We can say that Ortons yards/date and time would be wattage because thats like energy. Also I would say that since Orton's arm is weaker than Cutler's, I would rate his arm strength at the median household voltage of 120V while Jay's would be like 208V or 240V. Also 0.8 is the NFL standard for power factor and I am using 1.73 for three phase because there are three phases to a football team (Offense, defense, special teams).

Anyways:

I = 931/(120 x .8 x 1.73)
I = 5.60573

If you do the same thing for Jay but take into account his arm strength is probably like 240V, you get:

I = 2.80588

So you see Kyle's arm amperage is more than Jay's so he has more current flowing through his arm. Should mean that his arm is more electric than Jay's so I think we should be better off now.

Thanks for listening.

Are you taking in part that Jay's mental frequency is a bit slower than most. More like 50Hz rather than the standard 60Hz.

And is that peak to peak current, or rms current?

[Shazam!]

This is absolute garbage and a waste of time.

Cutler didn't want to be here. Who gives a ?!@# about him then? He's gone.

If he didn't want to be here, I don't want him here.

Coach messed up on the debacle but Jay did everything to help this thing reach critical mass.

Give McD a chance and let's see what he can do before we crucify him.

The guy is just as credible as an offensive genius as Shanahan was when he arrived here to rebuild the worst defense in the NFL too.

He knows QBs. He can help make Orton (or whomever) better as Shanahan did with Jake Plummer.

Let's see if he can do it.

[LRtagger]

Are you taking in part that Jay's mental frequency is a bit slower than most. More like 50Hz rather than the standard 60Hz.

And is that peak to peak current, or rms current?

You're right, I should have adjusted Jay's power factor because he stares down receivers and makes bad decisions at times....but really I think it is more fair to use the industry standard for both. Otherwise I would have to hook both of them up to a machine to determine power factor and I just don't have the time for that.

Standard is also 60Hz for this application.

Also keep in mind this is for perfect throwing conditions...if we factored in resistance for the wind Kyle threw in as a Bear, the difference in numbers would probably be even more drastic.

[Thnikkaman]

You're right, I should have adjusted Jay's power factor because he stares down receivers and makes bad decisions at times....but really I think it is more fair to use the industry standard for both. Otherwise I would have to hook both of them up to a machine to determine power factor and I just don't have the time for that.

Standard is also 60Hz for this application.

Also keep in mind this is for perfect throwing conditions...if we factored in resistance for the wind Kyle threw in as a Bear, the difference in numbers would probably be even more drastic.

I would also want to take in to consideration line noise and inducted flux caused by other players that may have caused a boost in current for Cutler. (I believe that Royal and Marshal were culprits of this)

[LRtagger]

I would also want to take in to consideration line noise and inducted flux caused by other players that may have caused a boost in current for Cutler. (I believe that Royal and Marshal were culprits of this)

Good point. This would be the equivalent of Cutler having pure gold conductors and terminal lugs and Kyle's being copper or aluminum. This would alter noise and impedence and change the results once again.


Hmmmm...do you think it's safe to conclude that no matter what equation is used there is no way to compare the QBs based on stats; whether they are W-L, yardage, passer rating, etc. therefor making this entire thread and several others on this board completely irrelevant?

[Thnikkaman]

Good point. This would be the equivalent of Cutler having pure gold conductors and terminal lugs and Kyle's being copper or aluminum. This would alter noise and impedence and change the results once again.


Hmmmm...do you think it's safe to conclude that no matter what equation is used there is no way to compare the QBs based on stats; whether they are W-L, yardage, passer rating, etc. therefor making this entire thread and several others on this board completely irrelevant?

Wholly. In order for there to be an accurate comparison, there needs to be a benchmark offense and defense primarily played by robots that will run the same conditions consistently, yet the qbs have no previous knowledge of what will be thrown at them other than the plays they are supposed to run.

Of course, they would have to play in a vacuum.

[LRtagger]

Wholly. In order for there to be an accurate comparison, there needs to be a benchmark offense and defense primarily played by robots that will run the same conditions consistently, yet the qbs have no previous knowledge of what will be thrown at them other than the plays they are supposed to run.

Of course, they would have to play in a vacuum.

/thread

[BroncoJoe]

LMAO you two!

[getlynched47]

its immature to not like an NFL player? wow everybody that watches football must be immature then......... i hate cutler, not because he's a bronco, but because of how we handled himself, yes mcdaniels did him wrong, but cutler should've acted in a mature way, he's the immature one, not a guy that doesnt like him

Immature to not like other NFL players simply because they aren't on the team. I like Jay Cutler (the player). I like Calvin Johnson. I'm a big fan of Braylon Edwards and LaDainian Tomlinson. I don't like their teams, but I like those players.

You're exactly right, Cutler was an immature little bitch but I don't hate Cutler for the way he acted.

[BigDaddyBronco]

Are you taking in part that Jay's mental frequency is a bit slower than most. More like 50Hz rather than the standard 60Hz.

And is that peak to peak current, or rms current?
Are you saying that Jay is a dim bulb...

[bullis26]

Immature to not like other NFL players simply because they aren't on the team. I like Jay Cutler (the player). I like Calvin Johnson. I'm a big fan of Braylon Edwards and LaDainian Tomlinson. I don't like their teams, but I like those players.

You're exactly right, Cutler was an immature little bitch but I don't hate Cutler for the way he acted.

Maturity is nothing to do with what football players you like though i get exactly what your trying to say, but we really don't know him.... if we met him he could turn out to be the most mature person we've ever met, so it's really not fair to judge a persons maturity on football

My favorite player doesnt play for the broncos, Ed Reed, Bob Sanders my two favorite players not denver broncos

[Lonestar]

Are you saying that Jay is a dim bulb...


when making great decisions, way to many volts got stuck in the cook capacitor.. until it discharged at the wrong times.. :salute:

[Shazam!]

When the Plummer/Cutler wars between Broncos fans was going on, the Cutler crowd bitched at the Plummer crowd to 'stop whining, Jake is gone and not coming back.' Who's whining now?

[Thnikkaman]

When the Plummer/Cutler wars between Broncos fans was going on, the Cutler crowd bitched at the Plummer crowd to 'stop whining, Jake is gone and not coming back.' Who's whining now?

I was actually part of the Cutler crowd, or maybe I'm part of the "Just get the fsk over it" crowd.

[getlynched47]

Maturity is nothing to do with what football players you like though i get exactly what your trying to say, but we really don't know him.... if we met him he could turn out to be the most mature person we've ever met, so it's really not fair to judge a persons maturity on football

My favorite player doesnt play for the broncos, Ed Reed, Bob Sanders my two favorite players not denver broncos

Alright then, it's childish to say you hate another NFL player just because he's not a part of the Denver Broncos. My favorite player has been John Lynch for the past 12 years...when he was a Bucaneer, when he came to the Broncos (so happy when he was signed), and with his little stint as a Patriot.

[Simple Jaded]

So what the Broncos just traded an Elite QB talent, Franchise Player and MVP for a Dime-o-dozen QB and two very average 1st round picks? Get the fsk over it!

Whether the Broncos and their fans want to admit it, this is not over, this is an issue that will (And should be) discussed for years to come.......Get used to it!.......

[Shazam!]

Whether the Broncos and their fans want to admit it, this is not over, this is an issue that will (And should be) discussed for years to come.......Get used to it!.......

Not if Denver is turned around into a playoff team.

[Simple Jaded]

Not if Denver is turned around into a playoff team.

Really? A Kyle Orton playoff led team might be a SB team with Jay Cutler, no matter what, this would be a better team with Cutler at QB, anything short of a SB win leaves Doogie open for criticism.......

[Northman]

So what the Broncos just traded an Elite QB talent, Franchise Player and MVP for a Dime-o-dozen QB and two very average 1st round picks? Get the fsk over it!

Whether the Broncos and their fans want to admit it, this is not over, this is an issue that will (And should be) discussed for years to come.......Get used to it!.......


Quit whining.

[Northman]

Really? A Kyle Orton playoff led team might be a SB team with Jay Cutler, no matter what, this would be a better team with Cutler at QB, anything short of a SB win leaves Doogie open for criticism.......

Guess you could say the same for Jay Cutler.

[Lonestar]

Really? A Kyle Orton playoff led team might be a SB team with Jay Cutler, no matter what, this would be a better team with Cutler at QB, anything short of a SB win leaves Doogie open for criticism.......


Hey just think about it jay melted down with the team in the last 3-4 games last year lets not say he is or would have been able to take us to the SB instead of the playoffs..

Some talk from a certainty that just does not always work out the way we want them to..

jay is gone time to let it go.. or move to www.chicagobaresforums.com to follow your hero..

[Simple Jaded]

Hey just think about it jay melted down with the team in the last 3-4 games last year lets not say he is or would have been able to take us to the SB instead of the playoffs..

Some talk from a certainty that just does not always work out the way we want them to..

jay is gone time to let it go.. or move to www.chicagobaresforums.com to follow your hero..

Dude is not my hero, I'm just saying this is a better team with Jay Cutler, ya'll can pimp that Bearforum joke til you're blue in the face, it changes nothing.......this is, and will continue to be, an issue.......

[Simple Jaded]

Quit whining.

How is that whining? It is an issue, whether you like it or not.......

[Lonestar]

Dude is not my hero, I'm just saying this is a better team with Jay Cutler, ya'll can pimp that Bearforum joke til you're blue in the face, it changes nothing.......this is, and will continue to be, an issue.......

hey just calling it like I see it from the cheap seats.. cutler has not won anything since at least high school.. has a great arm, can throw on the run and can scramble. But when the chips are on the table he has not won he has not lead this or any team to the promised land..

Now some will say it is the defenses fault because jay can do no wrong..

But the cold hard facts are we do not know for sure IF he has it between the ears and in the GUT to win BIG games.. with or without a Defense..

Many times especially on the last three games he got into the redzone there was a meltdown on his part..

That can not be blamed on the Defense..

I will repeat my self we just do not know for sure he could have done it.. Just like with Jake many did not think he could do it either.. when the TEAM failed in 2005 playoffs he was not afforded another chance..

NOW I'm not trying to bring Jake vs jay.. But just like many said about Jake he could not win the big game..

Did anyone ever think to ask did Josh, Pat Xander and the other Offensive coaches see something that told them that jay did not have it either?

At least not enough to make them want to sign him to a gazillion dollar contract?

Things to ponder..

[MOtorboat]

Franchise Player and MVP

Prove it.

The MVP argument is a joke, because he isn't even close. The Franchise player is possible...but considering he couldn't even get to the playoffs with a three game lead and three to play, it's highly debatable.

[Ravage!!!]

Doesn't make me ponder anything other than just "how stupid can they be?"

Of course we "don't know for sure." What in life do we know 'for sure.' I know we are better off with Cutler than without him... despite the detractors. That " he hasn't won anything" bash is old an worn out... doesn't even make sense.

Seems a LOT of people were bouncing on Manning's jock once he finally won the Super Bowl..because before then "he couldn't win the big game." People here want to brag and brag about how 'great Rivers' is compared to Cutler.. WHAT has Rivers won?? A division title? Big deal..seriously. Thats a losers title.

SOOO many people wanted to claim that Dungy was a great coach after winning his Super Bowl. Up until that point, he proved to be nothing but a loser with teh best teams in the NFL. Funny how jit just took TEN years to wear off that title.

Yet Cutler got a Whopping THREE (3) years to "win" for all the skeptics, and that was with the worst defense I've ever seen in Denver.

[MOtorboat]

What in life do we know 'for sure.' I know we are better off with Cutler than without him...

:pound:

[MOtorboat]

Doesn't make me ponder anything other than just "how stupid can they be?"

Of course we "don't know for sure." What in life do we know 'for sure.' I know we are better off with Cutler than without him... despite the detractors. That " he hasn't won anything" bash is old an worn out... doesn't even make sense.

Seems a LOT of people were bouncing on Manning's jock once he finally won the Super Bowl..because before then "he couldn't win the big game." People here want to brag and brag about how 'great Rivers' is compared to Cutler.. WHAT has Rivers won?? A division title? Big deal..seriously. Thats a losers title.

SOOO many people wanted to claim that Dungy was a great coach after winning his Super Bowl. Up until that point, he proved to be nothing but a loser with teh best teams in the NFL. Funny how jit just took TEN years to wear off that title.

Yet Cutler got a Whopping THREE (3) years to "win" for all the skeptics, and that was with the worst defense I've ever seen in Denver.

under Shanahan:
Elway: Super Bowl.
Plummer: AFC Championship.
Jay Cutler: Worst collapse in NFL history.

:noidea:

[getlynched47]

under Shanahan:
Elway: Super Bowl.
Plummer: AFC Championship.
Jay Cutler: Worst collapse in NFL history.

:noidea:

under Shanahan:
Elway: Terrell Davis
Plummer: Clinton Portis, Reuben Droughns, Mike Anderson, solid defense
Jay Cutler: Defense that gives up 400+ points in back to back seasons

:noidea:

[MOtorboat]

under Shanahan:
Elway: Terrell Davis
Plummer: Clinton Portis, Reuben Droughns, Mike Anderson, solid defense
Jay Cutler: Defense that gives up 400+ points in back to back seasons

:noidea:

Thanks for the excuses.

It's like ********, everyone has one.

:noidea:

[getlynched47]

Thanks for the excuses.

It's like ********, everyone has one.

:noidea:

Nice cop out. You have nothing to say other than "excuses" or "Orton 21-12" when making your argument. You fail.

[Simple Jaded]

Prove it.

The MVP argument is a joke, because he isn't even close. The Franchise player is possible...but considering he couldn't even get to the playoffs with a three game lead and three to play, it's highly debatable.

Prove it?

Who was their MVP last season if not Jay Cutler? Is it one of the overrated fan favorites like Wesley Woodyard? Spencer Larsen? Ryan Torain?.......Or do you plan on trying to pin it on a more realistic option like Brandon Marshall? Wait, let me guess, the Offensive Line?

Jay Cutler was their MVP, he was their best player hands down, the player they could least afford to lose.......

[MOtorboat]

Nice cop out. You have nothing to say other than "excuses" or "Orton 21-12" when making your argument. You fail.

Really?

I've got nothing else?

We have a starting quarterback with a winning record 9 games over .500, and we have four first-round picks in the next two years, an extra third this year, and management doesn't have to put up with a child.

I've got plenty, but the people swinging from Cutler's nuts want to boil it down to Cutler vs. Orton. It's not Cutler vs. Orton. It's Cutler vs. Orton, two No. 1 draft picks and a third round pick.

The Cutler vs. Orton analogies are worthless, because it isn't about Cutler vs. Orton. Remember...as those keep bringing up, it's the TEAM. Well, now we've got a chance to improve the team.

:noidea:

[getlynched47]

Really?

I've got nothing else?

We have a starting quarterback with a winning record 9 games over .500, and we have four first-round picks in the next two years, an extra third this year, and management doesn't have to put up with a child.

I've got plenty, but the people swinging from Cutler's nuts want to boil it down to Cutler vs. Orton. It's not Cutler vs. Orton. It's Cutler vs. Orton, two No. 1 draft picks and a third round pick.

The Cutler vs. Orton analogies are worthless, because it isn't about Cutler vs. Orton. Remember...as those keep bringing up, it's the TEAM. Well, now we've got a chance to improve the team.

:noidea:

excuses :coffee:

Orton 21-12 :coffee:

[MOtorboat]

Prove it?

Who was their MVP last season if not Jay Cutler? Is it one of the overrated fan favorites like Wesley Woodyard? Spencer Larsen? Ryan Torain?.......Or do you plan on trying to pin it on a more realistic option like Brandon Marshall? Wait, let me guess, the Offensive Line?

Jay Cutler was their MVP, he was their best player hands down, the player they could least afford to lose.......

I'm sorry, you said the MVP. Not MVP of the Broncos.

Either way, now you're just playing damage control, because you made two gross assumptions.

[MOtorboat]

excuses :coffee:

Orton 21-12 :coffee:

Yup, you're right GL, it's all just excuses.

Cutler rules, Orton drools.

Good argument.

When, like I said, it isn't about that.

[getlynched47]

Yup, you're right GL, it's all just excuses.

Cutler rules, Orton drools.

Good argument.

When, like I said, it isn't about that.

Somebody has a hard time detecting sarcasm :rolleyes:

[BANJOPICKER1]

Whatever the stats, whatever you think about him, he is the 2009 DENVER BRONCO QB, so I say????:D
GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO BRONCOS!!!!!!:salute:

Oh and to all you bad, smart, very cool folks that think we will go 4 and whatever this year,,,,,,,,,, you can eat the peanuts out of my chit!!:eek:

[Northman]

How is that whining? It is an issue, whether you like it or not.......

Its only an issue if you make it an issue. The Dude is gone and we dont know yet how it will play out with the guys we have.

[bullis26]

excuses :coffee:

Orton 21-12 :coffee:

yeah that 21-12 is good isnt it
better than a 17-20
great post
i like it

[Lonestar]

yeah that 21-12 is good isnt it
better than a 17-20
great post
i like it

:listen: A 63% winning record vs better than 45% in most books..:salute:

Bueller, Bueller!!!:laugh:


Maybe there is a rocket arm factor I'm missing..:D

[bullis26]

:listen: A 63% winning record vs better than 45% in most books..:salute:

Bueller, Bueller!!!:laugh:


Maybe there is a rocket arm factor I'm missing..:D

never tried to say orton is better than cutler

But orton 2 1st round picks and a 3rd is better (or atleast should be)than cutler and a 5th

[BroncoJoe]

Didn't know where to post this, so in here it goes. Shows what Orton, and now Cutler, will have to deal with in Chicago.


There are some things in life that you can consistently count on to sit there lazy, lifeless and unproductive: a beached whale, for example. Or a socialist. Or, closer to home, a football fan after a Sunday of pitchers and wings.

The NFL has its own version of these consistently immobile organisms: the Chicago Bears offense.

In fact, the decades-long lifelessness of the Chicago offense is one of the great statistical curiosities in NFL history.

Year after year, for more than a half century since the end of the Sid Luckman Era, the offense of this proud pro football franchise, one of two original NFL teams still in existence, has consistently struggled to move the ball.

You would think that random chance, blind luck and the rule changes that launched the Live Ball Era in 1978 would have conspired somewhere along the way to give the Bears some consistently great offensive teams. But they haven't.

Even the glittering comets of individual success -- like Gale Sayers or Walter Payton -- have been woefully few and far between.

More typically, Bears fans scream at the television season after season, decade after decade, wondering why the hell their team can never seem to move the ball like a legitimate NFL offense.

This phenomenon, these decades of frustration among the Midway faithful, helps explain why the Bears brain trust made such a bold move to acquire Jay Cutler.

Chicago shipped off two first-round draft picks and last year's starting quarterback, Kyle Orton, to Denver in the hopes Cutler can inject life in the Chicago offense for the first time since Luckman and George Halas led the team through its 1940s glory years.

In the wake of this bold trade, we decided to take a detailed look at the history futility of the Bears offense. It's really a stunning story of generational offensive inadequacy that defies description.
Behind the ugly numbers

• The singular Cold, Hard Football Fact that really says it all about the organization is that Luckman last took a snap for the Bears in 1950. Yet he remains the organization's alltime passing leader with 14,686 yards -- about four good seasons of work for a modern quarterback.

No team has to go back so far to find its leading passer -- hell, 20 of the 32 teams in the NFL today didn't even exist back in 1950.

• Luckman threw 137 TD passes for the Bears -- an awe-inspiring number for his era yet a humble number by modern standards. In either case, it's easily the most in franchise history.

In fact, in the 58 seasons since, nobody in a Bears uniform has thrown even half has many TD passes as Luckman. The organization's No. 2 TD tosser is Billy Wade, who connected on 68 TD tosses in four seasons from 1961-64.

To put those miniscule numbers into perspective, consider the case of the 49ers. The San Francisco franchise joined the NFL in 1950 -- 30 years after the Bears. Yet they boast six guys who have thrown more than 100 TDs and three who have thrown more than 200 TDs (led by Joe Montana's 244).

Let's look at it another way: Tom Brady has thrown 100 TD passes in his past three seasons on the field. Peyton Manning threw 108 TD tosses in his three peak seasons (2004-06). In just three seasons those two passers out TD'd every quarterback in Bears history but its Hall of Famer Luckman.

• The last Bears quarterback to lead the NFL in passing yards or TD passes was Johnny Lujack, the 1947 Heisman Trophy winner out of Notre Dame, who passed for 2,658 yards and 23 TDs in 1949.

The amazing thing about those numbers from 60 years ago is that desperate Bears fans today would kill to find a quarterback who passed for 23 TDs: only one Chicago quarterback over the past six decades has surpassed Lujack's TD total (Erik Kramer, 29 in 1995).

• The Bears last led the league in scoring offense in 1956. That was more than a half century ago for those of you keeping score at home.

Conversely, the Bears have led the NFL in scoring defense six times since 1956, most recently in 2005.

There have been bursts of scoring success in Chicago, though.

The 2006 NFC champion Bears, believe it or not, finished second in the NFL in scoring. But the offense reached the end zone just 38 times -- it's scoring rate boosted by a historic nine touchdowns by the defense and special teams.

The Bears also ranked No. 2 in the NFL in scoring back in their legendary Super Bowl 1985 season. But those Bears fielded one of the most famous defenses in history -- and helped boost the scoring average with seven touchdowns by the defense and special teams.

• The last Bears quarterback to lead the NFL in passer rating was Billy Wade in 1961 (93.7).

• Great teams tend to have consistently great play at the quarterback position. Yet the Bears can barely get a warm body to play quarterback consistently, let alone get someone to play the position consistently well.

In the 31 seasons since the NFL went to a 16-game schedule, only four Bears quarterbacks have started every game in a seasoon: Vince Evans in 1981, Jim Harbaugh in 1991, Erik Kramer in 1995 and Rex Grossman in 2006. At that rate, we probably won't see Cutler play a full season until 2014.

If it's been extremely hard for the Bears to find a great passer over the past six decades, it's been just as difficult to uncover a game-breaking wide receiver.

Consider that Johnny Morris, who played for the Bears from 1958-67, is Chicago's alltime leader in receiving yards. He caught 356 passes for 5,059 yards and had just one 1,000-yard season (1,200 in 1964).

Morris's numbers are quite humble by modern standards of most NFL teams. But they're quite remarkable by the lowly offensive standards of the Bears.

Since stats have been kept in the early 1930s, only three Bears receivers have led the league in catches -- Jim Keane in 1947 (64), Johnny Morris in 1964 (93) and Dick Gordon in 1970 (71).

And, in the organization's 89 seasons of NFL football, just eight different Bears have produced a 1,000-yard season catching passes (11 seasons total).

How tough has it been for the Bears to get the ball downfield through the air?

Consider that the team's all-time leader in receptions isn't even a receiver. It's the late, great running back Walter Payton, who caught 492 passes during his 13 years with the Bears.
Why Cutler?

Six NFL teams produced a 4,000-yard passer in 2008.

The Bears have never produced a 4,000-yard passer.

In fact, only five Bears quarterbacks have surpassed 3,000 yards in a season, most recently Rex Grossman with 3,193 in 2006. That's a remarkably small number considering that more than half the teams in the NFL last year (18) produced a 3,000-yard passer.

The Bears have never had a passer throw for 30 TDs. In fact, only six Bears quarterbacks have thrown more than 20 TDs in a season. That's a remarkably small number considering that 11 teams boasted a passer with at least 20 TD tosses last year.

The production of Chicago's passers has been so paltry through the decades that Rex Grossman's 3,193 passing yards during Chicago's Super Bowl season of 2006 was the second most prolific passing season in Bears history (Erik Kramer, 3,838 yards in 1995).

Kyle Orton's fairly dismal 2,972 yards last year have been surpassed just five times in franchise history. His 18 TD passes, meanwhile, had been surpassed just seven times in franchise history.

All in all, Orton was pretty damn effective last year -- at least by Bears standards. Which means, not particularly effective at all.

No wonder the Bears organization salivated when it looked at Jay Cutler's numbers from last year (384 for 616, 62.3 percent, 4,526 yards, 25 TD, 18 INT, 86.0 passer rating).

It was an ordinary season by the standards of most NFL franchises. It would have been an extraordinary season by the sickly offensive standards of the Chicago franchise.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/football/nfl/04/08/chff/1.html

[Lonestar]

never tried to say orton is better than cutler

But orton 2 1st round picks and a 3rd is better (or atleast should be)than cutler and a 5th


Well Chicago being in the Black and Blue division with GB and MIN have IMHO much better in conference competition than DEN with SAN and KC and OAK AHAHAHAHAHAHA but then we lost to OAK who was slightly better than DET..

[bullis26]

Well Chicago being in the Black and Blue division with GB and MIN have IMHO much better in conference competition than DEN with SAN and KC and OAK AHAHAHAHAHAHA but then we lost to OAK who was slightly better than DET..

why did you quote me and say that

completely irrelevant to what i said

[Lonestar]

why did you quote me and say that

completely irrelevant to what i said

because I did. As I saw it relevant.. to your post..

[atwater27]

So funny, all of you were cheering for Cutler, and so happy that we had the guy just 5 months ago. What a bunch of featherweight, wishy washy characters.
Last season......
"OH man, Cutler is the man! He is gonna set so many records with his big arm and amazing talent. Wow, the sky's the limit dude, so good to be broncos fan!"

Now.....
"Man I am so glad we got Rex Grossman 2.0 off of our team. We were so held back with him throwing the ball, he sucks, he will be worse than Jeff George and will fail miserably with Chicago! SCORE! WE got Kyle MF'n Orton in the house now folks! Look out, Jay WHo? Jay WHO?"

What a bunch of clowns.

[Den21vsBal19]

So funny, all of you were cheering for Cutler, and so happy that we had the guy just 5 months ago. What a bunch of featherweight, wishy washy characters.
Last season......
"OH man, Cutler is the man! He is gonna set so many records with his big arm and amazing talent. Wow, the sky's the limit dude, so good to be broncos fan!"

Now.....
"Man I am so glad we got Rex Grossman 2.0 off of our team. We were so held back with him throwing the ball, he sucks, he will be worse than Jeff George and will fail miserably with Chicago! SCORE! WE got Kyle MF'n Orton in the house now folks! Look out, Jay WHo? Jay WHO?"

What a bunch of clowns.
I was cheering for him because he was the QB of the Denver Broncos, now he isn't, at least as much through his own efforts as the coach's.................hell, I've even be known to cheer for Bly & Webster a time of two


BECAUSE THEY WERE BRONCOS!!!!!

Now they aren't, I couldn't give a rat's ass about 'em...........................where's the difficulty in understanding that? :confused:

[atwater27]

I was cheering for him because he was the QB of the Denver Broncos, now he isn't, at least as much through his own efforts as the coach's.................hell, I've even be known to cheer for Bly & Webster a time of two


BECAUSE THEY WERE BRONCOS!!!!!

Now they aren't, I couldn't give a rat's ass about 'em...........................where's the difficulty in understanding that? :confused:

I can respect not cheering for him anymore, I am directing that more at people who are kicking him while he is already out the door and pretending to think it is no big loss, that he sucked anyways. There are alot of those folks here.

[Lonestar]

So funny, all of you were cheering for Cutler, and so happy that we had the guy just 5 months ago. What a bunch of featherweight, wishy washy characters.
Last season......
"OH man, Cutler is the man! He is gonna set so many records with his big arm and amazing talent. Wow, the sky's the limit dude, so good to be broncos fan!"

Now.....
"Man I am so glad we got Rex Grossman 2.0 off of our team. We were so held back with him throwing the ball, he sucks, he will be worse than Jeff George and will fail miserably with Chicago! SCORE! WE got Kyle MF'n Orton in the house now folks! Look out, Jay WHo? Jay WHO?"

What a bunch of clowns.


you have to remember not all of us were drooling over this kid..

there were folks that while he was our QB we saw flaws in his play, demeanor and questioned that having rocket arm was not the end all..

Is Orton the answer I do not know and will reserve judgment until he has play in the QB system that is being installed in DEN the one that turned a 6th round Draft choice into a clear consensus HOF guy and made a non starting since HS QB into a 11-5 winner last year..

We have a HC that while young seems to have the same touch with QB's that mikey had with RB's.. how about we give it a chance to work.. and allow jay to move out of the DEN limelight..

[Lonestar]

I can respect not cheering for him anymore, I am directing that more at people who are kicking him while he is already out the door and pretending to think it is no big loss, that he sucked anyways. There are alot of those folks here.


OK this is easy.. what did he do in DEN other than pad his stats?

[turftoad]

you have to remember not all of us were drooling over this kid..

there were folks that while he was our QB we saw flaws in his play, demeanor and questioned that having rocket arm was not the end all..

Is Orton the answer I do not know and will reserve judgment until he has play in the QB system that is being installed in DEN the one that turned a 6th round Draft choice into a clear consensus HOF guy and made a non starting since HS QB into a 11-5 winner last year..

We have a HC that while young seems to have the same touch with QB's that mikey had with RB's.. how about we give it a chance to work.. and allow jay to move out of the DEN limelight..

Brady was around and good before McD was even the OC there.

He gets credit for one, Cassel and Cassel is still unproven IMO. Lets see what he does with the Chefs.

[bullis26]

Brady was around and good before McD was even the OC there.

He gets credit for one, Cassel and Cassel is still unproven IMO. Lets see what he does with the Chefs.

ok before he was the offensive cordinator, but mcdaniels was employed by the patriots since 2001, thats when brady got his chance

nice try though

[atwater27]

OK this is easy.. what did he do in DEN other than pad his stats?

This is easy. Win more games than the Broncos should have won. Yeah, he has a losing record as a starting QB. Yeah, anybody else including Cassell and Orton would have done even worse. I guarantee it.

Padding his stats. :rolleyes:******* please.

[turftoad]

ok before he was the offensive cordinator, but mcdaniels was employed by the patriots since 2001, thats when brady got his chance

nice try though

McD was a water boy in 2001.He was 23yrs old. He had not to do with Brady except bring him his water bottle.

[atwater27]

ok before he was the offensive cordinator, but mcdaniels was employed by the patriots since 2001, thats when brady got his chance

nice try though

Yeah, and Cyron Brown has a super bowl ring with the Broncos. Employment does not mean he had a thing to do with it.
nice try though.

[Lonestar]

Brady was around and good before McD was even the OC there.

He gets credit for one, Cassel and Cassel is still unproven IMO. Lets see what he does with the Chefs.

OK let me then clarify it and SAW the QB system that Brady played in made him a future HOF QB.. that make it sound better..

Since it is the system he is bring to Den with much the same type talent around the new QB it stands to reason that it should be successful here correct?

Personally I think Cassell would have been great here in KC well the jury is certainly out there.. as they do not have the OLINE, or WRs we do..

maybe not even the quality at RB:laugh::laugh:

[Lonestar]

This is easy. Win more games than the Broncos should have won. Yeah, he has a losing record as a starting QB. Yeah, anybody else including Cassell and Orton would have done even worse. I guarantee it.

Padding his stats. :rolleyes:******* please.

should have won I think not the SAN game should have been a lose had it not been for two really bad REF calls in that one..

As for other QB's doing worse well that is a possibility but they did not fumble the division away like jaysus did either.. total collapse in the last three games. talk about lack of leadership skills..

he has been a loser since High School can he get that out of his head? time will tell go to CHI town whose fans make Dens look like kittens, he has a rude awakening coming after his first interception..

[bullis26]

Yeah, and Cyron Brown has a super bowl ring with the Broncos. Employment does not mean he had a thing to do with it.
nice try though.

well being a quarterback coach has more to do with the devolpment of a QB then the offensive cordinator

The QB coach works only with the QB

nice try, you really have no idea about mcdaniels do you? your just hating on him because shanny is gone, cutler is gone oh no get over it

its apparent to me your hating on him and you dont know anything about him

[bullis26]

McD was a water boy in 2001.He was 23yrs old. He had not to do with Brady except bring him his water bottle.

he wasnt a water boy nice try....he was a personal assistant

[atwater27]

well being a quarterback coach has more to do with the devolpment of a QB then the offensive cordinator

The QB coach works only with the QB

nice try, you really have no idea about mcdaniels do you? your just hating on him because shanny is gone, cutler is gone oh no get over it

its apparent to me your hating on him and you dont know anything about him

Look up the word apparent.

Hating on him? I am simply holding him accountable in my mind for losing the franchise signal caller. So he has given me a reason. I was excited as hell when he was picked up. I didn't know the damage his 32 year old ass was going to inflict on the club in such a small time period. WTF?

[turftoad]

should have won I think not the SAN game should have been a lose had it not been for two really bad REF calls in that one..

As for other QB's doing worse well that is a possibility but they did not fumble the division away like jaysus did either.. total collapse in the last three games. talk about lack of leadership skills..

he has been a loser since High School can he get that out of his head? time will tell go to CHI town whose fans make Dens look like kittens, he has a rude awakening coming after his first interception..

Yep, he's a loser. So much a loser that he was selected with the 11th pick in the first round. Such a loser that he made the Pro Bowl. Such a loser that the Bears gave up 2 first rounders a 3rd rounder and a Qb for him. Such a loser that half the league was looking to aquire him.
It's evident that no one out there thinks he's any good. :tsk:

[atwater27]

Yep, he's a loser. So much a loser that he was selected with the 11th pick in the first round. Such a loser that he made the Pro Bowl. Such a loser that the Bears gave up 2 first rounders a 3rd rounder and a Qb for him. Such a loser that half the league was looking to aquire him.
It's evident that no one out there thinks he's any good. :tsk:

Good stuff man! Yeah, the way the guys talk about Cutler here, we couldn't have gotten a used condom and a kick in the teeth for him. He'd be cut and washing windows at freeway exits by now. :beer:

[bullis26]

Look up the word apparent.

Hating on him? I am simply holding him accountable in my mind for losing the franchise signal caller. So he has given me a reason. I was excited as hell when he was picked up. I didn't know the damage his 32 year old ass was going to inflict on the club in such a small time period. WTF?

jay cutler had just as much to do with his departure as Mcdaniels did

[atwater27]

jay cutler had just as much to do with his departure as Mcdaniels did

Hey, I am willing to give you props for even admitting that much.. I know Jay had fault too.

[bullis26]

Yep, he's a loser. So much a loser that he was selected with the 11th pick in the first round. Such a loser that he made the Pro Bowl. Such a loser that the Bears gave up 2 first rounders a 3rd rounder and a Qb for him. Such a loser that half the league was looking to aquire him.
It's evident that no one out there thinks he's any good. :tsk:

Robert Gallery was pick 2nd in a draft does that make him good? bad argument..... Phillip Rivers didnt make the Pro Bowl, even though all of his stats were better then cutlers and his team actually went some where. Bad Argument...... and people have traded 1st rounders for people that dont work out, Deion Branch, bad argument...... and all that stuff still doesnt take anything away from his losing record(17-20) not one of those things gives him a win

[bullis26]

Good stuff man! Yeah, the way the guys talk about Cutler here, we couldn't have gotten a used condom and a kick in the teeth for him. He'd be cut and washing windows at freeway exits by now. :beer:

not one person said that, everybody wanted equal value for him, and i'd say we basically got it....... we were saying, trade him if he doesnt want to be here