PDA

View Full Version : Clark Judge: Denver Is the Winner



topscribe
11-05-2009, 11:25 AM
Rating big trade winners, losers at midseason

Nov. 4, 2009
By Clark Judge
CBSSports.com Senior Writer

You win some, you lose some and sometimes you're just better off without Jay
Cutler.

Eight weeks into the season is not too soon to start dissecting some of the
year's biggest trades, and I'm interested in five of them -- starting with the
Cutler deal to Chicago.

That trade was supposed to make the Bears, but last time I checked they
were drifting in the middle of the NFC North. Maybe the second half of the
season is different, but I can't wait that long. I want to re-examine these
deals now. So let's get started.


Jay Cutler deal

Kyle Orton has helped make Josh McDaniels look like a smart trader. This was
the blockbuster, with the Broncos giving up on Cutler after he whined his way
into Josh McDaniels' doghouse. Clubs rarely surrender franchise quarterbacks,
which means the Broncos' move set off alarms. The question people asked
was: Why in the world a rookie head coach would act so quickly to banish a
Pro Bowl quarterback?

The move was supposed to say more about McDaniels than Cutler, and maybe
it did. Maybe it said he knew what he was doing. All I know is that Denver is
6-1, where it was never close with Cutler. In fact, it was 17-20 in three
seasons with Cutler and never better than 8-8 in any year, including last
season when it lost its last three to blow the playoffs.

Cutler honks contend their quarterback didn't have a chance because
Denver's defense stunk, but you're talking to the wrong guy. I covered the
San Diego Chargers when their defense had holes larger than Mission Bay. Yet
Dan Fouts overcame them. Cutler did not, and, come to think of it, maybe
that says something about him.

Getting Kyle Orton in return was supposed to be a laugh, with critics so
outraged they all but suggested that Harry Frazee was calling the shots in
Denver. They said McDaniels was in over his head, that Orton was a stiff and
that the Broncos were dead meat. They forgot to throw in JaMarcus Russell is
the next Peyton Manning, too.

Anyway, they were wrong. The Broncos are in first; Chicago is not. Orton has
nine touchdown passes and one interception; Cutler has 11 TD passes and 11
interceptions. Orton has six wins; Cutler has four. McDaniels is a Coach of the
Year candidate; Chicago's Lovie Smith is not. I think you get the picture.

Denver threw in a fifth-round draft pick that Chicago turned into wide receiver
Johnny Knox, and that was smart. He looks like he could be a player. Chicago,
meanwhile, threw in three draft picks, including a first-rounder Denver turned
into Robert Ayers. I'm not so sure about that one. He hasn't made much of a
contribution to this point. But Orton has, and that's what matters.

The Winner: Denver. The Broncos may not have the more talented
quarterback, but they have a quarterback who wins. Tell me which you'd
rather have.

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/story/12473255/rating-big-trade-winners-losers-at-midseason

-----

Dortoh
11-05-2009, 11:29 AM
Ayers makes me wanna cry just alittle

topscribe
11-05-2009, 11:40 AM
Ayers makes me wanna cry just alittle

Actually, according to what I have read and heard, the coaches are pretty
pleased with Ayers. Nolan said a couple of Dumervil's sacks were largely the
result of Ayers' work on the other side. They seem to think he's coming along
fine . . .

-----

Dortoh
11-05-2009, 11:45 AM
Actually, according to what I have read and heard, the coaches are pretty
pleased with Ayers. Nolan said a couple of Dumervil's sacks were largely the
result of Ayers' work on the other side. They seem to think he's coming along
fine . . .

-----

I hope so Top I just keep thinking Crowder v.2.0

Ravage!!!
11-05-2009, 11:47 AM
I'd liek to see the 'rating' a couple years down the road when looking back. I'm betting its not 'judged' the same.

Northman
11-05-2009, 01:09 PM
I covered the San Diego Chargers when their defense had holes larger than Mission Bay. Yet Dan Fouts overcame them. Cutler did not, and, come to think of it, maybe that says something about him.

Interesting take.

GEM
11-05-2009, 01:10 PM
I'd liek to see the 'rating' a couple years down the road when looking back. I'm betting its not 'judged' the same.

That's the problem right now though Rav, you are basing all opinions on predictions and what could be's instead of the fact that is happening right now. Perhaps a couple years down the road it might, but it might also be more padding in Denver's favor. We just don't know. And being a Broncos fan, I'm much happier with wins than stats. :shrugs:

Dortoh
11-05-2009, 01:11 PM
Interesting take.

While I think everyone sees where he is going there I am not a big fan of mixing eras in football. To much has changed in the game since fouts was airing it out 500 times a game.

silkamilkamonico
11-05-2009, 01:22 PM
While I think everyone sees where he is going there I am not a big fan of mixing eras in football. To much has changed in the game since fouts was airing it out 500 times a game.

He was also airing it out in an era where DB's were allowed to hold and push and contact. Where pass interference calls was a gift instead of a normality.

I go with the better off without Cutler" sentiment. The guy can single handidly win games for you and lose games for you. Football isn't played like that nowadays and it isn't going to produce championships. Still not sure if I like the idea of Orton being our long term solution, but I'm comforted in the fact that we have a coach who knows how to work QB's. That alone is better than any franchise QB not named Peyton manning.

Dortoh
11-05-2009, 01:30 PM
He was also airing it out in an era where DB's were allowed to hold and push and contact. Where pass interference calls was a gift instead of a normality.

I go with the better off without Cutler" sentiment. The guy can single handidly win games for you and lose games for you. Football isn't played like that nowadays and it isn't going to produce championships. Still not sure if I like the idea of Orton being our long term solution, but I'm comforted in the fact that we have a coach who knows how to work QB's. That alone is better than any franchise QB not named Peyton manning.

Meh, still apples and oranges IMO

D1g1tal j1m
11-05-2009, 02:16 PM
I'd liek to see the 'rating' a couple years down the road when looking back. I'm betting its not 'judged' the same.

It's all about what you have done for me lately. Injuries, coaching changes, rule changes, organizational changes are all unknowns. Better to enjoy the present than to think about what might be 2 years from now. TD looked like a sure fire HOF and a bust in Canton was all but a given and on one play it all changed.
Cutler is a Bear and Orton is the QB for the Broncos now.

Ravage!!!
11-05-2009, 02:26 PM
That's the problem right now though Rav, you are basing all opinions on predictions and what could be's instead of the fact that is happening right now. Perhaps a couple years down the road it might, but it might also be more padding in Denver's favor. We just don't know. And being a Broncos fan, I'm much happier with wins than stats. :shrugs:

I'm not doing anything more with THIS trade as I did with the trade with Portis. What is best in the LONG run.. not the short run. Of course no one knows what the future holds, thats obvious.

But if I were to lay my money down on who came away with the best trade, in the LONG run (which is SOOOO much more important than the short run)... I still feel that trading away better talent is not how you make a team better.

You think I'm just happy with 'stats' (that always irritates the crap out of me when people say that)....but the fact is I'm more interested in having superior talent on the team. ALways. Players win games. The teams with the better players, will win 99% of the time over the upsets (thats why they are called upsets). So its not the 'stats' that mean anything to me. Its the team having the best talent on the field at EVERY position.

we have hashed the Cutler thing over and over again. Cutler was what... 12-3 when the other team scored less than 3 TDs (I honestly can't rmember the stats, so forgive if I'm off on that). So you can't convince me that our team is BETTER, simply based on the win total. Kerry Collins helped lead a team to 13-3 last season and looked good. What happened when their defense wasn't stopping everyone?

I'm THRILLED with these wins. But the thread was about the trade. My take on the TRADE.. is that I'm not going to make a judgement based on 6-7 games.. not when we got rid of Superior talent at a PRIME position. Trades can't based on the present.... nor can they be judged in only the present..... imo.

Dortoh
11-05-2009, 02:28 PM
I'm not doing anything more with THIS trade as I did with the trade with Portis. What is best in the LONG run.. not the short run. Of course no one knows what the future holds, thats obvious.

But if I were to lay my money down on who came away with the best trade, in the LONG run (which is SOOOO much more important than the short run)... I still feel that trading away better talent is not how you make a team better.

You think I'm just happy with 'stats' (that always irritates the crap out of me when people say that)....but the fact is I'm more interested in having superior talent on the team. ALways. Players win games. The teams with the better players, will win 99% of the time over the upsets (thats why they are called upsets). So its not the 'stats' that mean anything to me. Its the team having the best talent on the field at EVERY position.

we have hashed the Cutler thing over and over again. Cutler was what... 12-3 when the other team scored less than 3 TDs (I honestly can't rmember the stats, so forgive if I'm off on that). So you can't convince me that our team is BETTER, simply based on the win total. Kerry Collins helped lead a team to 13-3 last season and looked good. What happened when their defense wasn't stopping everyone?

I'm THRILLED with these wins. But the thread was about the trade. My take on the TRADE.. is that I'm not going to make a judgement based on 6-7 games.. not when we got rid of Superior talent at a PRIME position. Trades can't based on the present.... nor can they be judged in only the present..... imo.

I'll give you this much Ravage you get your moneys worth with each post :)

Ravage!!!
11-05-2009, 02:29 PM
It's all about what you have done for me lately. Injuries, coaching changes, rule changes, organizational changes are all unknowns. Better to enjoy the present than to think about what might be 2 years from now. TD looked like a sure fire HOF and a bust in Canton was all but a given and on one play it all changed.

Cutler is a Bear and Orton is the QB for the Broncos now.

RIght... but the article and the thread was about judging the trade (or what this guy graded the trade). Has nothing to do with 'wishing' or wanting... or whatever. Has to do with grading the trade. I'm saying that I can't /won't say the bears got the better trade based on 7 games of a single season.

If we traded away TD when just hitting his prime..... I think people would be wondering if hat was best for the team in the long run. Just as they did with Portis.

Ravage!!!
11-05-2009, 02:30 PM
I'll give you this much Ravage you get your moneys worth with each post :)

Man.. I step away when at work here... and don't realize how much I've typed until I hit the send button. :tsk:

Tned-Mobile
11-05-2009, 02:31 PM
It will be a few years before we will have an idea who came out the winner. We haven't used the second pick from Chicago, although I personally don't think we would have traded a first for Alphonso Smith without having Chicago's pick, so I consider that the player from Chicago.

If Orton is gone next season, and Cutler goes on to be a perrenial pro-bowler, then Ayers and Smith (or whoever we pick next year if you want to base it on who was actually picked with the Chicago pick) will need to be very productive for it to be considered a win for Denver.

On the flip side, if Cutler is as bad as many on this forum claim, then the bar for production out of Ayers and the other player is much lower, and if Denver can keep Orton and make several deep playoff runs with him, then Denver would be considered the winner.

Trying to evaluate it today, after seven games, is simply too early.

GEM
11-05-2009, 03:37 PM
You think I'm just happy with 'stats' (that always irritates the crap out of me when people say that)....but the fact is I'm more interested in having superior talent on the team. ALways. Players win games. The teams with the better players, will win 99% of the time over the upsets (thats why they are called upsets). So its not the 'stats' that mean anything to me. Its the team having the best talent on the field at EVERY position.

we have hashed the Cutler thing over and over again. Cutler was what... 12-3 when the other team scored less than 3 TDs (I honestly can't rmember the stats, so forgive if I'm off on that). So you can't convince me that our team is BETTER, simply based on the win total. Kerry Collins helped lead a team to 13-3 last season and looked good. What happened when their defense wasn't stopping everyone?

I'm THRILLED with these wins. But the thread was about the trade. My take on the TRADE.. is that I'm not going to make a judgement based on 6-7 games.. not when we got rid of Superior talent at a PRIME position. Trades can't based on the present.... nor can they be judged in only the present..... imo.


Settle down, beavis. Good lord, you say I nag you like I'm your mother, but your so friggen defensive that anytime I say anything to you you're ready to fight.

I simply said that right now, we really can't judge the trade. Right now, as of today, this minute, by winning standards, Denver has the edge. That's it. Quit trying to read more into my post than what was there.

GEM
11-05-2009, 03:38 PM
It will be a few years before we will have an idea who came out the winner. We haven't used the second pick from Chicago, although I personally don't think we would have traded a first for Alphonso Smith without having Chicago's pick, so I consider that the player from Chicago.

If Orton is gone next season, and Cutler goes on to be a perrenial pro-bowler, then Ayers and Smith (or whoever we pick next year if you want to base it on who was actually picked with the Chicago pick) will need to be very productive for it to be considered a win for Denver.

On the flip side, if Cutler is as bad as many on this forum claim, then the bar for production out of Ayers and the other player is much lower, and if Denver can keep Orton and make several deep playoff runs with him, then Denver would be considered the winner.

Trying to evaluate it today, after seven games, is simply too early.

Thank you.

broncophan
11-05-2009, 04:13 PM
I'd liek to see the 'rating' a couple years down the road when looking back. I'm betting its not 'judged' the same.

Well......we know where we were the last 2 1/2 seasons with Cutler......and how many wins the team had.Like others.....as a bronco fan.....it is hard not to like the changes that have been made.It has already been proven....Orton is a winner.......alot of people are still waiting to say the same about Cutler.

Not sure what makes you think a couple years down the road will be any different..:confused:.....at least from the Cutler, and his team's side of things...

D1g1tal j1m
11-05-2009, 04:14 PM
RIght... but the article and the thread was about judging the trade (or what this guy graded the trade). Has nothing to do with 'wishing' or wanting... or whatever. Has to do with grading the trade. I'm saying that I can't /won't say the bears got the better trade based on 7 games of a single season.

If we traded away TD when just hitting his prime..... I think people would be wondering if hat was best for the team in the long run. Just as they did with Portis.

So are you "betting" that the grade will be in favor of the Bears because of what Cutler may do with the Bears.

Ok, judge the trade down the road but keep in mind that the Broncos gave up Cutler and a 5th (which was Knox) for Orton, Ayers & Smith plus next year pick (which right now is looking to be higher than the Broncos own). So yes, in a few years the trade may even be even more one sided towards the Broncos end. But, 7 weeks into the season this trade is clearly in favor of the Broncos based on the standings and the stats of the two QB's.

topscribe
11-05-2009, 04:19 PM
Well......we know where we were the last 2 1/2 seasons with Cutler......and how many wins the team had.Like others.....as a bronco fan.....it is hard not to like the changes that have been made.It has already been proven....Orton is a winner.......alot of people are still waiting to say the same about Cutler.

Not sure what makes you think a couple years down the road will be any different..:confused:.....at least from the Cutler, and his team's side of things...

I kind of agree, except in the opposite. I don't know how Orton is going to take
a dump in the future, barring injury. He has progressively improved in his 2½
years on the field, and if anything I expect him to get better.

I honestly don't expect things to be the same for Cutler. I believe he will also
improve with experience and maturation. Although I posted the article that
proclaimed Denver as the winner so far, I personally expect it ultimately to be
a win-win situation between the two teams.

-----

D1g1tal j1m
11-05-2009, 04:26 PM
I'm not doing anything more with THIS trade as I did with the trade with Portis. What is best in the LONG run.. not the short run. Of course no one knows what the future holds, thats obvious.

But if I were to lay my money down on who came away with the best trade, in the LONG run (which is SOOOO much more important than the short run)... I still feel that trading away better talent is not how you make a team better.

You think I'm just happy with 'stats' (that always irritates the crap out of me when people say that)....but the fact is I'm more interested in having superior talent on the team. ALways. Players win games. The teams with the better players, will win 99% of the time over the upsets (thats why they are called upsets). So its not the 'stats' that mean anything to me. Its the team having the best talent on the field at EVERY position.

we have hashed the Cutler thing over and over again. Cutler was what... 12-3 when the other team scored less than 3 TDs (I honestly can't rmember the stats, so forgive if I'm off on that). So you can't convince me that our team is BETTER, simply based on the win total. Kerry Collins helped lead a team to 13-3 last season and looked good. What happened when their defense wasn't stopping everyone?

I'm THRILLED with these wins. But the thread was about the trade. My take on the TRADE.. is that I'm not going to make a judgement based on 6-7 games.. not when we got rid of Superior talent at a PRIME position. Trades can't based on the present.... nor can they be judged in only the present..... imo.

The article was on grading the trade after 7 weeks of this season.

In the long run, we got 3 solid players for Cutler and Knox and currently a higher pick next year if the standings hold as current. Better talent does win games but also having guys that execute the game plan and not make costly mistakes that hurt the team. To say Cutler has Superior physical talent to Orton is obvious, but talent doesn't always translate into wins. Just look at each QB's win and loss records throughout their careers. That is something that cannot be denied or dismissed. Plus, Orton has physical talent otherwise he would never have survived this long as a Starting QB in the NFL.
Trades can be judged in the present because that is what we have to go by. We can't predict the future so therefore how can you hold off on grading the trade until 1 or 2 years from now. The grade will change based on what the players involve do in there next game but for now the grade will have to be sided towards the Broncos side of the ledger.

broncophan
11-05-2009, 04:29 PM
I kind of agree, except in the opposite. I don't know how Orton is going to take
a dump in the future, barring injury. He has progressively improved in his 2½
years on the field, and if anything I expect him to get better.

I honestly don't expect things to be the same for Cutler. I believe he will also
improve with experience and maturation. Although I posted the article that
proclaimed Denver as the winner so far, I personally expect it ultimately to be
a win-win situation between the two teams.

-----

Yea......but I feel that "it is what it is".
Cutler is a gun slinger......he will always get his td's......but you will have to take his int's as well.

Orton is a "be careful, and don't make any high risk mistakes" qb......he won't get as many td's......or int's.

In both cases.......you better have them surrounded by a good solid team........and good coaches......to make up for their "weaknesses".

topscribe
11-05-2009, 04:38 PM
Yea......but I feel that "it is what it is".
Cutler is a gun slinger......he will always get his td's......but you will have to take his int's as well.

Orton is a "be careful, and don't make any high risk mistakes" qb......he won't get as many td's......or int's.

In both cases.......you better have them surrounded by a good solid team........and good coaches......to make up for their "weaknesses".

You know, this may sound nuts, but I don't believe either has many
"weaknesses" for what he is, respectively.

Cutler can do anything any other QB can do on the field and more. His
"weaknesses" may be immaturity and impatience. That can be overcome with
experience, age, and (as you implied) good coaching.

Orton has neither Cutler's arm nor his mobility. But he is smarter ("football"
smarts). I believe Orton is better and reading defenses and checking down.
The fact he does not have Cutler's physical talents does not necessarily mean
he can't be as good a QB. After all, neither Peyton nor Brady have all of
Cutler's talents, either.

Of course, we don't know absolutely for sure at this point, but I expect both
to be very good QBs in the future.

-----

Lonestar
11-05-2009, 04:57 PM
While I think everyone sees where he is going there I am not a big fan of mixing eras in football. To much has changed in the game since fouts was airing it out 500 times a game.


IIRC jay had something like 460 plus passes himself.. so 40 passes is not a huge diff..

Superchop 7
11-06-2009, 03:33 AM
The number 1 reason we are winning is the defense.

The best acquisition was Nolan.

Period.

rcsodak
11-06-2009, 11:20 PM
I'd liek to see the 'rating' a couple years down the road when looking back. I'm betting its not 'judged' the same.

Hmmmm........still betting against the team, I see..... :coffee:


Sure did miss your "optimistic" posts, rav....... :rolleyes:

rcsodak
11-06-2009, 11:25 PM
Interesting take.

It's the truth, and a point I've tried to make till blue in the face.

How about Peyton Manning? Anybody want to tell me he's had a good defense during his NFL career? *save the playoffs during his SB run* And yet, he just wins games.

Elway didn't have defenses.

Northman
11-06-2009, 11:53 PM
Cutler was what... 12-3 when the other team scored less than 3 TDs (I honestly can't rmember the stats, so forgive if I'm off on that). So you can't convince me that our team is BETTER, simply based on the win total.

Although i know where your going with that quote i bet i could say the same for just about ANY Qb in the NFL when their defense actually plays defense including our very own Kyle Orton. Point is, a great QB is not defined by the defense he plays with. He's defined by his individual performance when the time counts. Jay had a moment like that vs Cleveland last year. But then he also had another chance vs Buffalo. Although having a good/great defense will generally get you a championship they also have their breakdowns and thats when the Qb (if he indeed is a franchise QB) needs to step up his game and carry the team if need be. Jay has been inconsistent in that department thus far in his career. The Chicago Bears defense is ranked 11th in the league now yet Jay still has the same problems as he did when he had the 29th ranked defense. If your point is that no Qb can overcome a defensive collapse than the QB position according to your logic would be obsolete and we would have no need to improve that position. The major difference between a guy like Peyton Manning and Jay Cutler is simple. Both have had bad defenses in their careers yet Manning was still able to win more frequently and often than Jay has. Now Jay has a much better defense but is still having problems winning games. Your arguement all offseason up until now is based on how the defense plays. If that truly is the case than Jay is no more special than Kyle Orton or Trent Dilfer. Because all 3 need to have good defenses to help them win games and none have shown the ability to take over games and win them on their own.

gobroncsnv
11-08-2009, 11:08 AM
The number 1 reason we are winning is the defense.

The best acquisition was Nolan.

Period.

I'm not gonna chalk up 2 90+ yard drives against the Pats to the defense. I'm not gonna chalk up the 14 points we got out of Royal against the Chargers to the defense. No question, the D is the biggest thing, with Nolan at the forefront, so I'm not disagreeing with you here, but I'm not going to discount the way Denver is playing as a much more complete TEAM this year.

Just an aside, if you count the interceptions (and pick 6's) as part of Cutler's QB rating, I think you'd find he's having the better year... and has accounted for more victories, just not necessarily for his own team.

Dean
11-08-2009, 12:28 PM
Rating big trade winners, losers at midseason

Cutler honks contend their quarterback didn't have a chance because
Denver's defense stunk, but you're talking to the wrong guy. I covered the
San Diego Chargers when their defense had holes larger than Mission Bay. Yet
Dan Fouts overcame them. Cutler did not, and, come to think of it, maybe
that says something about him.

-----


I remember the Chargers as having a weak defense when Fouts put them in the play-offs in the early eighties but not that bad so I checked databasefootball.com to see. Here are the results:

1981 defense rank 26th 6136 yards 48 TDs 23 INT and 38 fumbles
1982 defense rank 24th 3253 yards 25 TDs 13 INT and 19 fumbles
1983 defense rank lowest 5955 yards 57 TDs 16 INT and 26 fumbles
1984 defense rank 25th 5936 yards 24 TDs 19 INT and 34 fumbles.

The Broncos defensive stats were as follows:
2007 defense rank 28th 5376 yards 39 TDs 14 INT and 21 fumbles
2008 defense rank 30th 5993 yards 50 TDs 6 INT and 9 fumbles.

My post is not to say that Cutler is all that. I would like to see what he could add to the team but he obviously has his flaws. My point is that the writer in my opinion used either faulty memory or distortion to make his point. Draw your own conclusions.

Slick
11-08-2009, 01:26 PM
All I know is we're playing more like a team then we ever did when Cutler was here. However, there will always be a small part of me who will wonder how we could have done with Cutler had he stayed and bought in with the rest of the team.

NightTrainLayne
11-08-2009, 02:11 PM
All I know is we're playing more like a team then we ever did when Cutler was here. However, there will always be a small part of me who will wonder how we could have done with Cutler had he stayed and bought in with the rest of the team.

Had he stayed AND bought in with the rest of the team? :unstoppable:

But "If ifs and buts were candy and nuts, we'd all have a Merry Christmas."

Tned
11-08-2009, 03:41 PM
All I know is we're playing more like a team then we ever did when Cutler was here. However, there will always be a small part of me who will wonder how we could have done with Cutler had he stayed and bought in with the rest of the team.

It's hard to argue with the results of this season, but there will always be a part of me that will wonder how powerhouse this team might have been if McDaniels wasn't so enamored by the chance of getting another Ex-Pat, his QB Cassel, which ended in Cutler being sent packing.

SmilinAssasSin27
11-08-2009, 05:02 PM
I don't get why folks think Cutler would have made this team better than what it is doing now. He turns it over a lot. We're probably 4-3 w/ him at the helm. I'll never dismiss his taklent, but the WAY he play would have hurt us this year in some of ourt closer games.

Northman
11-08-2009, 05:04 PM
All I know is we're playing more like a team then we ever did when Cutler was here. However, there will always be a small part of me who will wonder how we could have done with Cutler had he stayed and bought in with the rest of the team.


Yep. Get rid of the selfish players and good things can happen. Jay could of flourished here but his pride got in the way. Tragic.

slim
11-08-2009, 05:05 PM
Had he stayed AND bought in with the rest of the team? :unstoppable:

But "If ifs and buts were candy and nuts, we'd all have a Merry Christmas."

Uh, no.

You can't win with a turnover machine at QB. You just can't.

Tned
11-08-2009, 05:06 PM
I don't get why folks think Cutler would have made this team better than what it is doing now. He turns it over a lot. We're probably 4-3 w/ him at the helm. I'll never dismiss his taklent, but the WAY he play would have hurt us this year in some of ourt closer games.

First, considering the Broncos are 6-1, it's hard to see how we would have been much better with Cutler.

However, playing devil's advocate, it's possible that some of those 'close games' wouldn't have been as close with Cutler being able to stretch the field.

The reality is that it is impossible to know if the Broncos would be 7-0 or 2-5 if Cutler was here. There is simply no way to know what 'would have been'.

Nickademus
11-08-2009, 05:06 PM
every time I read something like this that questions the trade i want to scream. first of all it is way to early to evaluate this trade but cutler has proven himself more geoff george than peyton manning. and every time george was traded you were trading away the superior talent. some guys jsut win. it isnt flashy it isnt pretty but it ends in a w. everything about orton screams winner and since the last three weeks of last season cutler just screams whiner.

slim
11-08-2009, 05:09 PM
First, considering the Broncos are 6-1, it's hard to see how we would have been much better with Cutler.

However, playing devil's advocate, it's possible that some of those 'close games' wouldn't have been as close with Cutler being able to stretch the field.

The reality is that it is impossible to know if the Broncos would be 7-0 or 2-5 if Cutler was here. There is simply no way to know what 'would have been'.

Yes, it is "possible".

Yet, it is more likely that his penchant for the turnover would have cost us those close games.

SmilinAssasSin27
11-08-2009, 05:10 PM
First, considering the Broncos are 6-1, it's hard to see how we would have been much better with Cutler.

However, playing devil's advocate, it's possible that some of those 'close games' wouldn't have been as close with Cutler being able to stretch the field.

The reality is that it is impossible to know if the Broncos would be 7-0 or 2-5 if Cutler was here. There is simply no way to know what 'would have been'.

I get that, but it's annoying to watch the talking heads say "just think if McD hadn't sent Cutler packing?" while we're 4-0, then 5-0 and then 6-0...althewhile Cutler is still fumbling snaps and tossing INTs.

Nomad
11-08-2009, 05:27 PM
I get that, but it's annoying to watch the talking heads say "just think if McD hadn't sent Cutler packing?" while we're 4-0, then 5-0 and then 6-0...althewhile Cutler is still fumbling snaps and tossing INTs.


Actually Bowlen did, so the talking heads need to get it right!;) From what we've seen of Jay and now what he's doing in Chicago, it's hard to say he would have been a benefit to this team!! But I wonder as well Slick, but it's his attitude that makes me dislike the guy!!

Tned
11-08-2009, 08:08 PM
It's all speculation, both in terms of whether Jay or McDaniels forced this, whether McDaniels or Bowlen 'traded' him, whether the Broncos offense would be better with Cutler or Orton.

We may never know the answer to the first two, and it is probably impossible to draw and accurate conclusions of whether we would be better or worse with Cutler.

NightTrainLayne
11-08-2009, 11:42 PM
It's hard to argue with the results of this season, but there will always be a part of me that will wonder how powerhouse this team might have been if McDaniels wasn't so enamored by the chance of getting another Ex-Pat, his QB Cassel, which ended in Cutler being sent packing.

Again, it's only speculation that causes you to make this statement. You could just as easily speculate that McD looked into the Cassel trade because he already saw serious cracks in the foundation of Cutler.


Uh, no.

You can't win with a turnover machine at QB. You just can't.

That's why I emphasized "AND" when I said "AND bought in" to the system. Buying in to the system to me means throwing the ball to the check-down or designed receiver. Not forcing it into small windows, and not turning it over. I totall agree that you can't win with a turnover machine at QB.

camdisco24
11-09-2009, 12:53 AM
What we have in Orton works for this offense, but thats already known to many of us. Beyond that, we have a LEADER in Orton. I personally, never saw Cutler as a strong leader or motivational guy. Take this quote for instance:


Quarterback Jay Cutler was asked if the Bears have a chemistry and leadership problem after their 41-21 loss to Arizona. Cutler response: “I don’t know. We’ll see.”

Uhhh. You dont know AND you cant see it? The bears looks like a lost high school team right now, and even a first time fan can see that. Cutler should have stood up for his team, and said something with substance, something that shows his team he has faith in them. NOT.. "duuhh I dont know."

And consider this quote from ESPN:


Cutler still forces the ball. He'll always do that. But now he's doing it as he runs for his life.

He was sacked four times Sunday to bring the season total to 19. That's after eight games. Last season, as a Denver Bronco, he was sacked 11 times. Ah, the good ol' days.

Just goes to show you, your QB is only as good as your offensive line. Cutler never was much good under pressure, and in the Windy city he gets chased around the entire game. Orton is the exact opposite under pressure, and I like that much more than a gunslinger. I dont miss Cutler and his "talent", and I def dont miss his poor leadership.

Tned
11-09-2009, 12:59 AM
Again, it's only speculation that causes you to make this statement. You could just as easily speculate that McD looked into the Cassel trade because he already saw serious cracks in the foundation of Cutler.


Yep, 100% true. In fact, what you describe is close to my own personal 'theory', but like with all of the "this is what happened this summer", mine is nothing more than a wild ass guess.

My 'guess/theory' is that the following points to McDaniels not seeing Cutler as the QB he wanted leading the offense:


The quote from the "source close to McDaniels" who said that McD was worried about Jay's heavy drinking with him being a diabetic, and that he was worried about his football intelligence.
McDaniels reportedly entertaining a trade for Cassell
McDaniels signing Simms, who had been out of football for two years, to a contract which made him one of the higher paid backups (true backups, not starters or high draft picks that lost their jobs) in the league.


However, the fact is that none of us know for sure, because the only people that really know what happened this summer aren't talking.

So, every time someone posts their 'theory' as if it is a fact, I will mention the alternative theory(ies). ;)

Lonestar
11-09-2009, 03:00 PM
What we have in Orton works for this offense, but thats already known to many of us. Beyond that, we have a LEADER in Orton. I personally, never saw Cutler as a strong leader or motivational guy. Take this quote for instance:



Uhhh. You dont know AND you cant see it? The bears looks like a lost high school team right now, and even a first time fan can see that. Cutler should have stood up for his team, and said something with substance, something that shows his team he has faith in them. NOT.. "duuhh I dont know."

And consider this quote from ESPN:



Just goes to show you, your QB is only as good as your offensive line. Cutler never was much good under pressure, and in the Windy city he gets chased around the entire game. Orton is the exact opposite under pressure, and I like that much more than a gunslinger. I dont miss Cutler and his "talent", and I def dont miss his poor leadership.

You pay for what you get.

In CHI case $30 million guaranteed.

Glad we seemed to have the better of the deal.


Sent from my BlackBerry Smartphone provided by Alltel.

Northman
11-09-2009, 03:05 PM
You pay for what you get.

In CHI case $30 million guaranteed.

Glad we seemed to have the better of the deal.


Sent from my BlackBerry Smartphone provided by Alltel.


Sorry, had to do it. lol

http://www.bangcartoon.com/2009/special_delivery.htm

Lonestar
11-09-2009, 03:07 PM
Yep, 100% true. In fact, what you describe is close to my own personal 'theory', but like with all of the "this is what happened this summer", mine is nothing more than a wild ass guess.

My 'guess/theory' is that the following points to McDaniels not seeing Cutler as the QB he wanted leading the offense:


The quote from the "source close to McDaniels" who said that McD was worried about Jay's heavy drinking with him being a diabetic, and that he was worried about his football intelligence.
McDaniels reportedly entertaining a trade for Cassell
McDaniels signing Simms, who had been out of football for two years, to a contract which made him one of the higher paid backups (true backups, not starters or high draft picks that lost their jobs) in the league.


However, the fact is that none of us know for sure, because the only people that really know what happened this summer aren't talking.

So, every time someone posts their 'theory' as if it is a fact, I will mention the alternative theory(ies). ;)

I had not heard the Jay is drinking/diabetic one before. But it makes sense.

I tend to believe that after talikng with him and going over the playbooks. And watching game film on him from last year. That was his major concerns.

Needless to say he had the listen to offers for a swap for cassel that knew the playbook inside and out.

Everthing past that is indeed speculation.


Sent from my BlackBerry Smartphone provided by Alltel.

claymore
11-09-2009, 03:10 PM
Sorry, had to do it. lol

http://www.bangcartoon.com/2009/special_delivery.htm

Hahahaha!

Tned-Mobile
11-09-2009, 03:50 PM
I had not heard the Jay is drinking/diabetic one before. But it makes sense.

I tend to believe that after talikng with him and going over the playbooks. And watching game film on him from last year. That was his major concerns.

Needless to say he had the listen to offers for a swap for cassel that knew the playbook inside and out.

Everthing past that is indeed speculation.


Sent from my BlackBerry Smartphone provided by Alltel.

It was in an article by Josina Anderson (don't shoot the messenger guys), where she claimed a source close to McDaniels said that McDaniels was concerned about his heavy drinking while having diabetes and his football intelligence.

claymore
11-09-2009, 04:00 PM
It was in an article by Josina Anderson (don't shoot the messenger guys), where she claimed a source close to McDaniels said that McDaniels was concerned about his heavy drinking while having diabetes and his football intelligence.

Ive heard he was a very heavy drinker even on the nights before games. As one person eluded..... "Why do you think we lost at home so often?"

But..... Elway is/was a very heavy drinker as well. Oh well.

Northman
11-09-2009, 04:23 PM
Whether or not McDaniels ever got wind of Jay's drinking habits i cant say. I know Kaylore eluded to last year he knew someone who had seen Jay drinking before the 2nd matchup with Oakland at Invesco. In my time of knowing Kaylore and his reporting i wouldnt have any reason to doubt him. I do know earlier this year some of the maners were able to get into practice and around the team until someone made a comment about Bowlen being a drunk and then the members privelges got revoked. So if someone saw the comments about Bowlen its possible someone saw Kaylore's remarks as well. Either way, it was something that Jay couldnt get over as a person when it came to McDaniels listening for a trade offer.

SmilinAssasSin27
11-11-2009, 12:39 PM
Funny, I never heard of any stories of Cutler tripping over his dog.