Cutler -A creation of Shannahan's genius?

[ktrain]

There has been a great deal made of Jay Cutler's record and the distortions that have been created by Denver's terrible defense during the past two years. And while it is undisputable that Jay has a very impressive 12-1 record when the defense gives up 21 points or fewer, I wonder how much of that success (when the defense plays respectable) was a function of Shannahan's brilliance as an offensive coach, and how much was due to Jay specifically?

I did a similar analysis of the other three QB's that have been the Bronco's primary QB during the Shannahan era, and found that, for the most part, Elway, Griese and Plummer have fairly similar W-L records

Defense gives up more than 21 points
Wins Losses Win %
Elway 12 11 52%
Griese 12 17 41%
Plummer 2 10 17%
Cutler 5 19 21%


When the defense gives up more than 21 points, both Cutler and Plummer have horrible records, where as surprisingly, Griese, like Elway, was able to put up a respectable record. Perhaps this is due to the better running game during the Elway/Griese era, but overall the fact is that Griese did a much better job of winning the "shoot-outs" than Cutler did.

Defense gives up 21 points or less
Wins Losses Win %
Elway 35 6 85%
Griese 19 7 73%
Plummer 36 5 88%
Cutler 12 1 92%

Obviously, it is hard to argue against Cutler' performance in this scenario, but I find it interesting that Plummer's winning percentage is only a few percentage below Cutler's and is actually HIGHER than Elway's. While Griese's record is more than 10% below everyone else's, it is still pretty good.

To attempt to isolate the "Shannahan factor" I compared Griese's post Shannahan performance and Plummer's pre-Shannahan performance:

Defense gives up more than 21 points
Wins Losses Win %
Griese - Shanny 12 17 41%
Griese - After 2 9 18%
Plummer - Shanny 2 10 17%
Plummer - before 8 38 17%

Notice Plummer was just as bad with Shanny as before at winning shootouts, but BG has done much worse since leaving Shanny

Defense gives up 21 points or less
Wins Losses Win %
Griese - Shanny 19 7 73%
Griese - After 15 6 71%
Plummer - Shanny 36 5 88%
Plummer - before 23 14 62%

Griese has not really changed his winning percentage (when given defensive help) since leaving Shanny's coaching, but look how much WORSE Jake was when during his stint with Arizona


It is hard to say how much of Jay's performance can be directly attributed to Mike Shannahan. The W/L suggests two things to me:

1. Cutler's Win loss percentage, when adjusted for defensive performance, is not out of line with Elway's, Griese's and Plummer's under Shannahan

2. Shannahan seems to improve a QB's W/L performance when adjusted for defensive performance

I think it is safe to assume that Cutler has a real risk in seeing a drop off in performance after losing Shannahan. Don't be surprised if we find out the "franchise QB" we traded ain't so franchise after-all

[silkamilkamonico]

Cutler = successful in the same offense that turned Brian Griese and Jake Plunger into Pro Bowlers.

Shanahan is an offensive genius. It's too bad he didn't accept being just that.

[Gamechanger]

not if Shanny is hired as OC of Da Bears :pound:

[ktrain]

not if Shanny is hired as OC of Da Bears :pound:

Shannahan will only accept a head coaching gig and he wants complete control of personnel. I find it highly unlikely that he goes to chicago unless Lovie is fired.........and so we get to see Jeff George, errrr ....Jay Cutler without his electric blanket for at least one season

[LoyalSoldier]

Try breaking up 21 and above into different ranges. 0 to 21 is a small range, but 21 to infinity is rather large. Especially when we had our defense give up 52 points in a game last season.

[frenchfan]

I can't understand all those analysis... Far too tough for my brain ;) :D

What I know is that the best way to win a SB is to have a D.
After all, Trent Dilfer is not half the QB Jay is and he has won a SB !
Our pb wasn't Jay... It's our D.
If we don't improve there, we'll go nowhere, with or without Jay.

I have to say I'd prefer to have a great D and (healthy) Kyle Orton as our QB than Jay and last's year D... Period.
I think Orton could run the McD's system pretty well and we'll still have a decent O (of course, this O could have been terrific with Jay, but we'll never know)... Now, we'd better to focus on D... I hope we'll use our draft picks very smartly...

Last, Jay Cutler is no more a Bronco and even though I find it sad, I accepted that. No need to think about that anymore...
I just expect our coach to do the job... He has put a lot of pressure on himself, but I'll judge him during the season, not before ;)

Anyway... Good job (I have a headache now :laugh: )
:beer:

[Gamechanger]

Shannahan will only accept a head coaching gig and he wants complete control of personnel. I find it highly unlikely that he goes to chicago unless Lovie is fired.........and so we get to see Jeff George, errrr ....Jay Cutler without his electric blanket for at least one season

:doh:

you fail at the art of arcasm

[claymore]

Shannahan will only accept a head coaching gig and he wants complete control of personnel. I find it highly unlikely that he goes to chicago unless Lovie is fired.........and so we get to see Jeff George, errrr ....Jay Cutler without his electric blanket for at least one season
If Cutler flops this season, they will spare no expense at getting Shanahan. He is an illinois boy to....

[In-com-plete]

I just want to say that all those stats, don't reflect the lack of playmakers and talent we had on the offensive side of the ball when Plummer was the QB.

We had a lot of pro-bowlers on offense when Elway and Griese played under Shanny. And our O-line and recievers were a lot better in '07 & '08 than they were in '03-'05.

[MadMax]

Great post ktrain, I've wondered the same thing. I do not have the football acumen to break down how a system suits a qb, but it was always said of Shanahan that he changed his systems to complement his quarterbacks' strengths and the man is an offensive genius. Now JC is with the bears under Lovie Smith if he fails the experts will just say its because he doesn't have the weapons denver has but I wonder if anyone will give Shanahan the props he deserves.

[G_Money]

Elway was the best under Shanahan he'd ever been.

Ditto Griese and Plummer.

It's always possible Cutler regresses in Chicago instead of improving. Fewer weapons, worse offensive system...maybe he'll turn out to just be merely average.

Elway could have gone anywhere with an even adequate offense and been Elway, though.

So is Cutler greatness in the making, or merely a product of Shanahan's system that makes all quarterbacks look their best?

We're about to find out.

~G

[turftoad]

Of course Cutlers numbers are going to drop. It won't be because he's not a good QB though.

The Bears "D" isn't what it used to be but it's still not bad either.

The Bears commit to the run more and run a more balanced offense. Cutler will not get as many attempts as he did as a Bronco.

[CoachChaz]

Of course Cutlers numbers are going to drop. It won't be because he's not a good QB though.

The Bears "D" isn't what it used to be but it's still not bad either.

The Bears commit to the run more and run a more balanced offense. Cutler will not get as many attempts as he did as a Bronco.

if you had an aging defense, a patchwork line and no viable receiving threats...would you trade away your best opportunity at getting better and younger (high draft picks) for a "franchise" QB and NOT utilize him as much as possible?

If that's the case the Bears should be under major scrutiny. If they made this deal for the reasons they claim...I expect to see Cutler used quite a bit.

[turftoad]

if you had an aging defense, a patchwork line and no viable receiving threats...would you trade away your best opportunity at getting better and younger (high draft picks) for a "franchise" QB and NOT utilize him as much as possible?

If that's the case the Bears should be under major scrutiny. If they made this deal for the reasons they claim...I expect to see Cutler used quite a bit.

I agree the Bears "D" is aging. They are still a better "D" than we had/have.

The Bears won't be forced to play keep up/catch up as much as we did last year.
Those situations make better passing numbers/passing mistakes.

[BroncoJoe]

I agree the Bears "D" is aging. They are still a better "D" than we had/have.

The Bears won't be forced to play keep up/catch up as much as we did last year.
Those situations make better passing numbers/passing mistakes.

God, I hate it when that's brought up. We were only "out" of three games in our eight losses by the end of the third.

[G_Money]

The Bears have half of a really nice team now, including a better QB. It's just split up on both sides of the ball.

They'd better hope Marinelli can get that DL to produce and Lovie can run a better D than his "new" LB coach, or they're gonna be hurting still.

Of course, luckily for them the Vikings have in no way fixed their own QB issue. If the VIKINGS had added Cutler, that would be a really good team. As it is, the Norse should be up for grabs, as always.

The Bears still have a few pieces to find to be legit. They've got what remains of their draft this year and the offseason next year to do it, though.

~G

[BroncoJoe]

The Bears have half of a really nice team now, including a better QB. It's just split up on both sides of the ball.

They'd better hope Marinelli can get that DL to produce and Lovie can run a better D than his "new" LB coach, or they're gonna be hurting still.

Of course, luckily for them the Vikings have in no way fixed their own QB issue. If the VIKINGS had added Cutler, that would be a really good team. As it is, the Norse should be up for grabs, as always.

The Bears still have a few pieces to find to be legit. They've got what remains of their draft this year and the offseason next year to do it, though.

~G
Is Jackson really that bad? Serious question, as I didn't get to watch the Vikings much last year. His numbers don't look all that bad...

[MadMax]

Is Jackson really that bad? Serious question, as I didn't get to watch the Vikings much last year. His numbers don't look all that bad...

Yes with a but.

He was clearly out of his element at many times early last season, scrambling around and just looked like he had no idea what he was doing. But the experts say he has all the potential of being a good to very good qb. I think he's a case of a lot of natural talent without the brains or experience currently to use it.

Edit: Just realized thats not really what you were asking, I don't know what his numbers were but he lost them many games last year, there was one game I recall where the Vikings "D" got a ton of turnovers but the offense would give the ball to Adrian Peterson and then when they absolutely had to they would throw a pass and T Jackson would immediately throw a pick. It ended in a tie i think with the Vikings losing coin toss and game.

[Buff]

Is Jackson really that bad? Serious question, as I didn't get to watch the Vikings much last year. His numbers don't look all that bad...

He's awful. He can't make some of the most basic reads, and when he does, he airmails his receivers half of the time...

The fact that 38 a year old Gus Frerotte was the better option should tell you all you need to know.

[BroncoJoe]

Interesting comments - thanks. I was curious because according to http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/J/JackTa00.htm, he only threw 2 interceptions against 9 TDs, and had a 95.4 rating. He was 2-3 as a starter though.

[turftoad]

God, I hate it when that's brought up. We were only "out" of three games in our eight losses by the end of the third.

Use keep up then Joe. How could it not be with the worst "D" in the league?

[BroncoJoe]

Use keep up then Joe. How could it not be with the worst "D" in the league?

30 turnovers, missed long-range field goals and crappy special teams played a part as well. I simply don't place ALL the blame on the defense.

[turftoad]

30 turnovers, missed long-range field goals and crappy special teams played a part as well. I simply don't place ALL the blame on the defense.

I agree, however, we did have the WORST "D" in the league last year. That has to take a very, very large part of the blame.

[MadMax]

Interesting comments - thanks. I was curious because according to http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/J/JackTa00.htm, he only threw 2 interceptions against 9 TDs, and had a 95.4 rating. He was 2-3 as a starter though.

I swear I saw him throw more than that but maybe I misremembered that game, maybe they were really bad incompletions instead of interceptions but I remember thinking "god this is awful." Oh well, Bus makes the best point, if you get beat out for your job by a 38 year old who was middle of the road in his prime, you got issues.

[BroncoJoe]

I agree, however, we did have the WORST "D" in the league last year. That has to take a very, very large part of the blame.

Maybe a very large part, but not a very, very large part. :D

Imagine how demoralizing it must have been having to head back onto the field after a turnover or a missed FG that gave the other team good field position.

We sucked on D last year, but it certainly wasn't the only problem.

[G_Money]

Childress is betting his head coaching spot that Tavaris is the QB of the few games he saw at the end of last year, and not the young kid of the previous year and early in the 2008 season who made all the wrong decisions.

Tavaris holds the ball too long and doesn't really understand what to do from inside a pocket. He makes bad reads and has VERY dodgy accuracy - perfect one throw, 10 yards past the receiver the next. He's very mobile but was taking a lot of sacks last year. He has confidence issues - you can watch him deflate on the field when he makes a mistake.

It's exceedingly strange to have a guy with a tremendous arm and great wheels that you want to convince to be a ball-control QB who game manages (when he throws the ball a lot, they lose. When he doesn't, they win).

In some ways the plan with Tavaris is the same one the Steelers executed with Big Ben his first few years - just don't LOSE us the game. Now he's allowed to win some.

Tavaris is not yet at that point. They're trying to convert him into Shanahan's version of Jake the Snake, or the older version of Randall Cunningham, I guess. McNabb might be a decent comp, but McNabb doesn't have the arm that Jackson has and Jackson in no way has responsibility for the offense. That's Peterson's job, and with a back who's a fumbler they need a QB who doesn't turn the ball over.

He might be the guy. But by bringing in QB competition, Childress acknowledged that he might not be. Tavaris was benched in September last year, and didn't get his job back until Frerotte went down. The last month of the season he looked like maybe the light went on.

Or maybe he was playing as the backup, with less pressure, and it made things easier. Pressure + lack of confidence is a killer. Until he gets over that (killing drives in the end zone, wilting under the bright lights, throwing third down passes to the sticks guys instead of his receivers, etc) he can't really take the Vikings anywhere. Maybe this is his year. If so, he and Jay should have some memorable matchups over the next few years.

~G

[BroncoJoe]

Thanks, ~G. I knew I could count on you and your perspective.

[Northman]

if you had an aging defense, a patchwork line and no viable receiving threats...would you trade away your best opportunity at getting better and younger (high draft picks) for a "franchise" QB and NOT utilize him as much as possible?

If that's the case the Bears should be under major scrutiny. If they made this deal for the reasons they claim...I expect to see Cutler used quite a bit.


Yea, although i do expect Jay's numbers to drop i do believe that the Bears traded for Jay because they EXPECT him to come do the things he did in Denver. If Jay turns the ball over too much or isnt quite like he was they will start to doubt him there. When you make the kind of deal you did for Jay you expect immediate and outstanding results.

[Northman]

Is Jackson really that bad? Serious question, as I didn't get to watch the Vikings much last year. His numbers don't look all that bad...

I think he has the same problems that Young and Vick have. Good physical talent but not much accuracy which hurts them as Qb's. One reason why Frerotte came in and did a much better job than Jackson last year is he can make the reads and mostly get the passes there.

[weazel]

Jay is a damn good QB, can't say it was Shanahan.

[turftoad]

Maybe a very large part, but not a very, very large part. :D

Imagine how demoralizing it must have been having to head back onto the field after a turnover or a missed FG that gave the other team good field position.

We sucked on D last year, but it certainly wasn't the only problem.

Yes our "D" did suck last year. We were embarassed. However, Cutler (and his offensive teammates) kept us from being a total embarrassment.

[MOtorboat]

Yes our "D" did suck last year. We were embarassed. However, Cutler (and his offensive teammates) kept us from being a total embarrassment.

I, personally, think the goalline meltdowns were more embarrassing than anything our defense did.

[Tempus Fugit]

Yes our "D" did suck last year. We were embarassed. However, Cutler (and his offensive teammates) kept us from being a total embarrassment.


Denver became the first team in NFL history to blow a three-game divisional lead with three weeks left

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3826234

Cutler's QB ratings during those 3 games:
74.3
72.4
74.9

2 TDS, 4 INTs

You might want to re-think your position on this.

[turftoad]

I, personally, think the goalline meltdowns were more embarrassing than anything our defense did.

We were 16th in points for.
We were 30th in points against.

We gave up an even 5 yards per rush.

I remember sititng there watching teams run 7, 8, 9 yards per carry towards the end of out games. Games that we were in. We could not stop the run or end opponents drives.
I've never been so frustrated or embarressed.

[getlynched47]

interesting.

Maybe the system allowed Cutler to put up all those stats. But I still believe that Cutler is a good Quarterback that can become great :salute:

[turftoad]

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3826234

Cutler's QB ratings during those 3 games:
74.3
72.4
74.9

2 TDS, 4 INTs

You might want to re-think your position on this.

I know Cutler had his problems. I'm not defending that. However, what did our "D" do in those three games?
Yep, they played like shit and pretty much played like shit all year.

Our "O was pretty damn good. Can't really say that Cutler and his offensive teammates didn't win some games that we probably should have lost durring the rest of the season.

[Tempus Fugit]

I know Cutler had his problems. I'm not defending that. However, what did our "D" do in those three games?
Yep, they played like shit and pretty much played like shit all year.

Our "O was pretty damn good. Can't really say that Cutler and his offensive teammates didn't win some games that we probably should have lost durring the rest of the season.

The Broncos "O" was not "pretty damn good". Cutler was #2 in the NFL in pass attempts per game and had the lowest sack % in the league, yet he could only lead his team to the #16 overall scoring offense. This is the big problem with the Cutler people: they mistake sizzle for steak. The Broncos' "O" was mediocre and a disappointment when you look at #2 in yards and #16 in points.

[turftoad]

The Broncos "O" was not "pretty damn good". Cutler was #2 in the NFL in pass attempts per game and had the lowest sack % in the league, yet he could only lead his team to the #16 overall scoring offense. This is the big problem with the Cutler people: they mistake sizzle for steak. The Broncos' "O" was mediocre and a disappointment when you look at #2 in yards and #16 in points.

Thats be brought to the forefront many, many times. Does it, did it need to be addressed? Hell yeah it did. That wasn't our biggest problem.

Our "D" was/is the worst of the problem. That's what needs to be fixed first and foremost.

[bcbronc]

The Broncos "O" was not "pretty damn good". Cutler was #2 in the NFL in pass attempts per game and had the lowest sack % in the league, yet he could only lead his team to the #16 overall scoring offense. This is the big problem with the Cutler people: they mistake sizzle for steak. The Broncos' "O" was mediocre and a disappointment when you look at #2 in yards and #16 in points.

24th over our final 13 games. :tsk:

[Lonestar]

Thats be brought to the forefront many, many times. Does it, did it need to be addressed? Hell yeah it did. That wasn't our biggest problem.

Our "D" was/is the worst of the problem. That's what needs to be fixed first and foremost.



And Josh has addressed D almost exclusively in FA so far, as well as firing the entire coaching staff and bringing in quality top notch coaches to deal with that side of the "problem"..

He did not purposely blow up the QB issue.. He has brought in the best available RB's to take care of that issue..

Other than bringing in a top notch LS and then cutting Leach because he requested to be released frankly I think everything he has done so far has been moving forward..

He was going to keep jays maid of honor jeremy.. but he did not want to stay because he would not be calling the plays into jay.. He left on his own volition..

Goodman deal? Who knows for sure what happened there but if they were so wronged why have we not heard from them they certainly have had time to do so..

Everything he is/has done directed towards making this a TEAM again.. not the offense vs. the defense.. Nothing to good for the offense and the defensive players feeling like they have to ride in the back of the bus..

I fail to see why Josh is such a bad guy..

[MadMax]

interesting.

Maybe the system allowed Cutler to put up all those stats. But I still believe that Cutler is a good Quarterback that can become great :salute:

I can agree with this. The middle ground we should all be able to accept is that at the very least Cutler is currently as good as the average NFL QB. I think we can all agree that he shows he has huge potential if he can fix his red zone performance and decrease the int's. But now he plays for the bears so I hope that it remains potential only and that he fails miserably and rues the day he ever spurned the Broncos :D.

[broncohead]

And Josh has addressed D almost exclusively in FA so far, as well as firing the entire coaching staff and bringing in quality top notch coaches to deal with that side of the "problem"..

He did not purposely blow up the QB issue.. He has brought in the best available RB's to take care of that issue..

Other than bringing in a top notch LS and then cutting Leach because he requested to be released frankly I think everything he has done so far has been moving forward..

He was going to keep jays maid of honor jeremy.. but he did not want to stay because he would not be calling the plays into jay.. He left on his own volition..

Goodman deal? Who knows for sure what happened there but if they were so wronged why have we not heard from them they certainly have had time to do so..

Everything he is/has done directed towards making this a TEAM again.. not the offense vs. the defense.. Nothing to good for the offense and the defensive players feeling like they have to ride in the back of the bus..

I fail to see why Josh is such a bad guy..

Yet you only seem to think it was all Jays fault

[Lonestar]

Yet you only seem to think it was all Jays fault



pray tell what did he do to show he wanted to stay?


jay supposedly stated when mikey was fired he wanted to be traded.
jay wanted to be heavily involved and consulted with concerning picking the next HC.
jay supposedly stated when bates left he wanted to be traded.
jay whined to the press instead of calling his coach to confirm..
jay refused to set down with Josh one on one..
Yet Josh said in his latest presser that once the talks took place HE contacted bus and jay personally and advised them what had happened..
jay was supposed to get back to Josh after thinking about things after the set down in DEN.
jay stated via bus he wanted to be traded..after the set down in DEN.
jay said he played for his teammates yet no showed the workouts everyone else but Scheffler attended.
jay stated via bus he wanted to be traded..
jay said he was going to attend mandatory camps and then said he may not a few days later.
jay did not return any phone call from coach Josh or the owner of the Broncs..
Oh yes here we go he said after being traded he did not think it would happen this fast and he really did not want to be traded..


Might have missed a few things in this but think it is pretty accurate..

Yet nothing Josh has been purported to have said has been proven true..

I think the Broncos organization has bent over backward to work this out.. and I have seen nothing from cook or cutler that remotely shows any thing but disdain.

SOrry but I thought jay was a real tool to start with and nothing has changed my mind on this..

[BigDaddyBronco]

God, I hate it when that's brought up. We were only "out" of three games in our eight losses by the end of the third.
I think people bring it up is because it felt that we were always behind. That is because the defense couldn't stop anyone. If we were down by a TD alarm bells would start ringing because of the fact that our defense might not make a defensive stop again in the game.

Even if we were tied it felt like we were behind.

[LoyalSoldier]

24th over our final 13 games. :tsk:

Wow that is a giant case of cherry picking.....

[broncohead]

pray tell what did he do to show he wanted to stay?


jay supposedly stated when mikey was fired he wanted to be traded.
jay wanted to be heavily involved and consulted with concerning picking the next HC.
jay supposedly stated when bates left he wanted to be traded.
jay whined to the press instead of calling his coach to confirm..
jay refused to set down with Josh one on one..
Yet Josh said in his latest presser that once the talks took place HE contacted bus and jay personally and advised them what had happened..
jay was supposed to get back to Josh after thinking about things after the set down in DEN.
jay stated via bus he wanted to be traded..after the set down in DEN.
jay said he played for his teammates yet no showed the workouts everyone else but Scheffler attended.
jay stated via bus he wanted to be traded..
jay said he was going to attend mandatory camps and then said he may not a few days later.
jay did not return any phone call from coach Josh or the owner of the Broncs..
Oh yes here we go he said after being traded he did not think it would happen this fast and he really did not want to be traded..


Might have missed a few things in this but think it is pretty accurate..

Yet nothing Josh has been purported to have said has been proven true..

I think the Broncos organization has bent over backward to work this out.. and I have seen nothing from cook or cutler that remotely shows any thing but disdain.

SOrry but I thought jay was a real tool to start with and nothing has changed my mind on this..

McD is the HC so he shouldn't have let it get out of hand. There is more then 1 way to look at it. Also it's not "poven" that all those things happened. Doubt the real story or truth got out.

[turftoad]

I think people bring it up is because it felt that we were always behind. That is because the defense couldn't stop anyone. If we were down by a TD alarm bells would start ringing because of the fact that our defense might not make a defensive stop again in the game.

Even if we were tied it felt like we were behind.

Indeed BDB, indeed.

[bcbronc]

Wow that is a giant case of cherry picking.....

how so?

[LoyalSoldier]

how so?

Remove 3 of the best games and then lump the rest together. We had very good and very bad offensive games in the span in question.

See if I were to start with the Cleveland game and work our way down to the second KC game our average was 25.2 which was one of the best during that month. That is 2 points higher than our season average. This part of the season even includes an awful game against Oakland.

The fact is if you cut it up the way you did you can get any result you want. Thus you were cherry picking.