2009 Chicago Bears offseason

[jersey cubs fan]

You also have to take into account that Denver may be willing to take less to get back at Cutler by trading him to a crappy team like the Lions.

 

I highly doubt they will take less just to get back at them. That organization is in disarray. They can't afford to screw around sending messages. If they perceive equal value between the Bears and Detroit, I could see sending him to Detroit as an added insult, or maybe giving Detroit the opportunity to match any other offer that's made. But I doubt they actually take less just to screw him.

 

I didn't mean drastically less. But if the packages are close, I think they'd take the Lions deal.

 

Maybe if it's Jets vs Detroit, where they don't want him staying in the AFC.

[Soul]

Yeah. I was thinking that a more important consideration might be getting him out of the AFC. Denver fans won't take kindly to watching Cutler win anywhere, but it would be worse if he's in the AFC, and doubly worse if he beats them in the playoffs.

 

Of course, I'm also biased because I want him in Chicago.

[Guest]

Detroit shouldn't be interested.

 

Isn't Cutler only signed through next year? There's no way he'd stay in Detroit. They're better off using all those picks to upgrade their team from completely miserable to just a hair better than completely miserable.

[David]

Zach Zaidman (sp?) is on the Score right now - he's the Score's Bears beat guy. Said that although a lot of people have been down on the idea that the Bears might be interested in Cutler, given their history, you can't really go by history because this is a pretty much unprecedented situation. 25 (soon to be 26) year old quarterbacks with 3 successful seasons under their belt (paraphrasing here) don't just come available like this. Says the Bears are definitely in the mix and very much interested. Thinks the Bears defense continues to take away the ball and put them in good field position and that a lot of those field goals Robbie Gould has been getting will turn into touchdowns (blah blah blah - no really?).

 

Just figured I'd pass on what I heard.

[jersey cubs fan]

Detroit shouldn't be interested.

 

Isn't Cutler only signed through next year? There's no way he'd stay in Detroit. They're better off using all those picks to upgrade their team from completely miserable to just a hair better than completely miserable.

 

He's signed through 2011. That gives a team three seasons to build around him, make their team more attractive, and sign him. There's no reason why any team should be worried about him up and leaving.

[Guest]

Detroit shouldn't be interested.

 

Isn't Cutler only signed through next year? There's no way he'd stay in Detroit. They're better off using all those picks to upgrade their team from completely miserable to just a hair better than completely miserable.

 

He's signed through 2011. That gives a team three seasons to build around him, make their team more attractive, and sign him. There's no reason why any team should be worried about him up and leaving.

 

Well yeah. Contract length changes everything.

[Banedon]

Cutler = Peavy?

[David]

Without the ownership transition excuses.

[jersey cubs fan]

Without the ownership transition excuses.

 

Management transition

[WrigleyField 22]

Cutler = Peavy?

I said it to someone when the Cutler to Chicago rumors first started to come out that I could see this becoming like Amare to the Bulls or Peavy to the Cubs.

 

It's obviously no where near that level yet, but I won't be surprised if it gets there within the next month.

[Guest]

Detroit shouldn't be interested.

 

Isn't Cutler only signed through next year? There's no way he'd stay in Detroit. They're better off using all those picks to upgrade their team from completely miserable to just a hair better than completely miserable.

 

He's signed through 2011. That gives a team three seasons to build around him, make their team more attractive, and sign him. There's no reason why any team should be worried about him up and leaving.

 

Well yeah. Contract length changes everything.

 

That's what she said.

[Soul]

Zach Zaidman (sp?) is on the Score right now - he's the Score's Bears beat guy. Said that although a lot of people have been down on the idea that the Bears might be interested in Cutler, given their history, you can't really go by history because this is a pretty much unprecedented situation. 25 (soon to be 26) year old quarterbacks with 3 successful seasons under their belt (paraphrasing here) don't just come available like this. Says the Bears are definitely in the mix and very much interested. Thinks the Bears defense continues to take away the ball and put them in good field position and that a lot of those field goals Robbie Gould has been getting will turn into touchdowns (blah blah blah - no really?).

 

Just figured I'd pass on what I heard.

 

It's a rare situation. How many times in the past 10 years has a franchise-level QB, just entering his prime, come available like this? These types of QBs are almost always sewn up long term. It's too hard to find one.

 

I agree you can't go by history. What history? This scenario hasn't presented itself to the Bears or really anyone else in recent memory. Unless I'm forgetting something.

[Guest]

Zach Zaidman (sp?) is on the Score right now - he's the Score's Bears beat guy. Said that although a lot of people have been down on the idea that the Bears might be interested in Cutler, given their history, you can't really go by history because this is a pretty much unprecedented situation. 25 (soon to be 26) year old quarterbacks with 3 successful seasons under their belt (paraphrasing here) don't just come available like this. Says the Bears are definitely in the mix and very much interested. Thinks the Bears defense continues to take away the ball and put them in good field position and that a lot of those field goals Robbie Gould has been getting will turn into touchdowns (blah blah blah - no really?).

 

Just figured I'd pass on what I heard.

 

It's a rare situation. How many times in the past 10 years has a franchise-level QB, just entering his prime, come available like this? These types of QBs are almost always sewn up long term. It's too hard to find one.

 

I agree you can't go by history. What history? This scenario hasn't presented itself to the Bears or really anyone else in recent memory. Unless I'm forgetting something.

 

Somewhat similar would be Elway refusing to go to Indianapolis as the first pick. Eli Manning refusing to play for San Diego. Neither actually played an NFL game, but they kind of became lotto picks to the highest bidders.

[Soul]

Actually, if you want to talk about history, let's talk about the Bears' inability to draft and coach QBs.

 

The Bears haven't been able to successfully identify and coach a QB from college in 20 years. And it can be argued that McMahon wasn't coached -- he just came in and did what he does.

 

Think of it this way. The Bears can't draft a superstar QB. And they can't coach a superstar QB. This is an opportunity to bypass those two glaring deficiencies. Deficiencies that have meant the Bears are perpetually without superior QB play every single year.

 

In short, this could be the Bears' only chance in decades to actually have a great QB. If we don't get Cutler, we could be sitting here in 2020 with our grey hair lamenting that we still haven't had a QB since Luckman. Because we aren't drafting one, and we aren't coaching one.

[gflore34]

Actually, if you want to talk about history, let's talk about the Bears' inability to draft and coach QBs.

 

The Bears haven't been able to successfully identify and coach a QB from college in 20 years. And it can be argued that McMahon wasn't coached -- he just came in and did what he does.

 

Think of it this way. The Bears can't draft a superstar QB. And they can't coach a superstar QB. This is an opportunity to bypass those two glaring deficiencies. Deficiencies that have meant the Bears are perpetually without superior QB play every single year.

 

In short, this could be the Bears' only chance in decades to actually have a great QB. If we don't get Cutler, we could be sitting here in 2020 with our grey hair lamenting that we still haven't had a QB since Luckman. Because we aren't drafting one, and we aren't coaching one.

 

Seconded and, although, as Jersey pointed out, Angelo has backed off on his season ending QB ramble, he still rambled on about the need for an NFL QB. What worries me is it makes way too much sense for the Bears to pursue Cutler, that's why they won't.

[Guest]

The Bears have reportedly made signing OT Orlando Pace a priority and plan to leave him at left tackle if he's signed.

In that scenario, 2008 first-rounder Chris Williams will be shifted to the right side with newly signed Kevin Shaffer becoming an $8 million swingman. It would also push Frank Omiyale into a guard spot and allow the Bears to concentrate on wide receiver and defense with their early-round draft picks.

 

I'd keep Williams on the left side. Pace at this point is the perfect RT.

 

Agreed.

[rawaction]

One thing I noticed. The teams that seem to be most likely destinations for Cutler are in pretty similar situations to the Bears. The Jets pick at 17. Denver doesn't want the 1, so Detroit will most likely be trading for the 20. Tampa has the 19th pick.

 

Word is Cleveland could offer Quinn, Shaun Rogers, and a couple picks...which would probably trump anything the Bears could do. Orton is probably not going to be traded, as he only has 1 year left on his deal. Also of note is that the Broncos are a 3-4 team now, and the Bears don't have their biggest needs which are NT and OLB.

[rawaction]

Actually, if you want to talk about history, let's talk about the Bears' inability to draft and coach QBs.

 

The Bears haven't been able to successfully identify and coach a QB from college in 20 years. And it can be argued that McMahon wasn't coached -- he just came in and did what he does.

 

Think of it this way. The Bears can't draft a superstar QB. And they can't coach a superstar QB. This is an opportunity to bypass those two glaring deficiencies. Deficiencies that have meant the Bears are perpetually without superior QB play every single year.

 

In short, this could be the Bears' only chance in decades to actually have a great QB. If we don't get Cutler, we could be sitting here in 2020 with our grey hair lamenting that we still haven't had a QB since Luckman. Because we aren't drafting one, and we aren't coaching one.

 

Seconded and, although, as Jersey pointed out, Angelo has backed off on his season ending QB ramble, he still rambled on about the need for an NFL QB. What worries me is it makes way too much sense for the Bears to pursue Cutler, that's why they won't.

 

They are obviously pursuing, at least a little. Whether they get it done or not may or may not be in control.

[YearofDaCubs]

There's definitely a lot of competition. I think it takes 2 1sts and maybe 1 or 2 players to get it done. Sounds extreme but considering how long we've been waiting for a franchise Qb it's a move the Bears must make. On a side note I understand Pace can play at a high level but are they looking at all of these tackles because they are not sold on Williams? The last thing we need to deal with is yet another 1st round bust pick.

[dew1679666265]

There's definitely a lot of competition. I think it takes 2 1sts and maybe 1 or 2 players to get it done. Sounds extreme but considering how long we've been waiting for a franchise Qb it's a move the Bears must make. On a side note I understand Pace can play at a high level but are they looking at all of these tackles because they are not sold on Williams? The last thing we need to deal with is yet another 1st round bust pick.

 

With word that they're shifting Williams to RT if they sign Pace, I don't think they've given up on him.

 

I don't understand why they're not shifting Pace to RT, but I haven't seen anything that makes me think they're giving up on Williams.

[jersey cubs fan]

There's definitely a lot of competition. I think it takes 2 1sts and maybe 1 or 2 players to get it done. Sounds extreme but considering how long we've been waiting for a franchise Qb it's a move the Bears must make. On a side note I understand Pace can play at a high level but are they looking at all of these tackles because they are not sold on Williams? The last thing we need to deal with is yet another 1st round bust pick.

 

With word that they're shifting Williams to RT if they sign Pace, I don't think they've given up on him.

 

I don't understand why they're not shifting Pace to RT, but I haven't seen anything that makes me think they're giving up on Williams.

 

Shifting him to RT if they sign an aging LT is absolutely a sign that they are souring on the guy, or at least have doubt. Players who miss their entire rookie year to injury (on the first day of practice) don't tend to be given leeway from coaches.

 

Word was they drafted him because he was the most capable of starting from day one, and not necessarily the best LT prospect. Given how much that blew up in their face, I could see some tension there.

[dew1679666265]

There's definitely a lot of competition. I think it takes 2 1sts and maybe 1 or 2 players to get it done. Sounds extreme but considering how long we've been waiting for a franchise Qb it's a move the Bears must make. On a side note I understand Pace can play at a high level but are they looking at all of these tackles because they are not sold on Williams? The last thing we need to deal with is yet another 1st round bust pick.

 

With word that they're shifting Williams to RT if they sign Pace, I don't think they've given up on him.

 

I don't understand why they're not shifting Pace to RT, but I haven't seen anything that makes me think they're giving up on Williams.

 

Shifting him to RT if they sign an aging LT is absolutely a sign that they are souring on the guy, or at least have doubt. Players who miss their entire rookie year to injury (on the first day of practice) don't tend to be given leeway from coaches.

 

Word was they drafted him because he was the most capable of starting from day one, and not necessarily the best LT prospect. Given how much that blew up in their face, I could see some tension there.

 

To me it means one of two things, most likely:

 

1) They're giving preference to the veteran and letting Pace keep his more normal position. Also, they could figure that Pace has played LT much longer than Williams has and, therefore, the switch would be easier for the younger Williams.

 

2) They simply think Williams would make a better RT than Pace. Maybe he's more comfortable making the switch or in their meeting with Pace they determined he would not be comfortable at all with the switch.

 

If they were saying that Williams would compete with Shaffer for the RT job or just coming right out and saying that Williams would back up Pace at LT, that would cause me to think they've lost confidence. But swapping a young player's position - while still starting him - doesn't strike me as giving up on him.

[jersey cubs fan]

There's definitely a lot of competition. I think it takes 2 1sts and maybe 1 or 2 players to get it done. Sounds extreme but considering how long we've been waiting for a franchise Qb it's a move the Bears must make. On a side note I understand Pace can play at a high level but are they looking at all of these tackles because they are not sold on Williams? The last thing we need to deal with is yet another 1st round bust pick.

 

With word that they're shifting Williams to RT if they sign Pace, I don't think they've given up on him.

 

I don't understand why they're not shifting Pace to RT, but I haven't seen anything that makes me think they're giving up on Williams.

 

Shifting him to RT if they sign an aging LT is absolutely a sign that they are souring on the guy, or at least have doubt. Players who miss their entire rookie year to injury (on the first day of practice) don't tend to be given leeway from coaches.

 

Word was they drafted him because he was the most capable of starting from day one, and not necessarily the best LT prospect. Given how much that blew up in their face, I could see some tension there.

 

To me it means one of two things, most likely:

 

1) They're giving preference to the veteran and letting Pace keep his more normal position. Also, they could figure that Pace has played LT much longer than Williams has and, therefore, the switch would be easier for the younger Williams.

 

2) They simply think Williams would make a better RT than Pace. Maybe he's more comfortable making the switch or in their meeting with Pace they determined he would not be comfortable at all with the switch.

 

If they were saying that Williams would compete with Shaffer for the RT job or just coming right out and saying that Williams would back up Pace at LT, that would cause me to think they've lost confidence. But swapping a young player's position - while still starting him - doesn't strike me as giving up on him.

 

No, not outright giving up, but souring on him.

[dew1679666265]

There's definitely a lot of competition. I think it takes 2 1sts and maybe 1 or 2 players to get it done. Sounds extreme but considering how long we've been waiting for a franchise Qb it's a move the Bears must make. On a side note I understand Pace can play at a high level but are they looking at all of these tackles because they are not sold on Williams? The last thing we need to deal with is yet another 1st round bust pick.

 

With word that they're shifting Williams to RT if they sign Pace, I don't think they've given up on him.

 

I don't understand why they're not shifting Pace to RT, but I haven't seen anything that makes me think they're giving up on Williams.

 

Shifting him to RT if they sign an aging LT is absolutely a sign that they are souring on the guy, or at least have doubt. Players who miss their entire rookie year to injury (on the first day of practice) don't tend to be given leeway from coaches.

 

Word was they drafted him because he was the most capable of starting from day one, and not necessarily the best LT prospect. Given how much that blew up in their face, I could see some tension there.

 

To me it means one of two things, most likely:

 

1) They're giving preference to the veteran and letting Pace keep his more normal position. Also, they could figure that Pace has played LT much longer than Williams has and, therefore, the switch would be easier for the younger Williams.

 

2) They simply think Williams would make a better RT than Pace. Maybe he's more comfortable making the switch or in their meeting with Pace they determined he would not be comfortable at all with the switch.

 

If they were saying that Williams would compete with Shaffer for the RT job or just coming right out and saying that Williams would back up Pace at LT, that would cause me to think they've lost confidence. But swapping a young player's position - while still starting him - doesn't strike me as giving up on him.

 

No, not outright giving up, but souring on him.

 

Yeah, the "giving up" was poor wording on my part. But I don't think it necessarily means they're souring on him either. It could very well mean one of the two situations I brought up - neither of which would be souring on him.

[rawaction]

No, I think it means they are souring on him. Everyone knows Pace is not a long-term option. For them to delay Williams from playing on the left side after not allowing him to play over St. Clair last year, would be an ominous sign to me. It reminds me of the Cubs starting Shawn Estes and keeping Juan Cruz in the bullpen back in the day.