Game 10 - BEARS @ San Francisco 49ers - 7:30 MNF

[Sammy Sofa]

My point is that maybe some of these huge problems (O-line, playcalling, horrible receivers) are not entirely the Bears' fault, but also a function of Cutler not being as good as we thought he was. Would the O-line be as bad with someone like Drew Brees getting rid of the ball quicker? Who knows. Is the "bad playcalling" a function of Cutler's inability to make good reads and throw to the open receiver? Maybe. Is the inability of the Bears to find good receivers strictly a function of their inability gauge the talent level of WR's? I still think this one is mostly on the Bears, but guys like Rodgers continue to put up huge numbers with randoms like Randall Cobb.

 

Through the three OC's and numerous offensive lineman and wide receivers, there's been one constant. Yet people are reluctant to really place any blame on that constant. I'm a big Cutler fan, but much of the discussion over the past few years has revolved around how the people surrounding Cutler have to improve. Maybe it's time some of that discussion turn a bit towards Cutler as well (and I'm talking about discussion from dedicated, educated Bears fan, not the ESPN crowd wailing about his body language or how he's not a "winner," whatever that means).

 

With that said, Devin Hester remains a horrible receiver.

 

Cutler isn't Rodgers. I'm not expecting him to be Rodgers and he doesn't have to be Rodgers to have success. And as great as Rodgers is, I'm not completely giving him the credit for success with someone like Cobb. It's a team game, and as ridiculously talented as he is he's got a lot more around him, player-wise and coaching-wise to help him succeed than Cutler does. Wanting things like "getting rid of the ball quicker" doesn't really work when the plays being drawn up and the players you can pass to aren't clicking. Are there key things Cutler could do better or ideally be more consistent with? Of course; but I don't understand the how the Bears' more glaring failings and inconsistencies somehow shift the blame more to him as time goes on. That just means they've dragged out rectifying major issues and doing all they can to maximize their QB's capabilities.

[Guest]

My point is that maybe some of these huge problems (O-line, playcalling, horrible receivers) are not entirely the Bears' fault, but also a function of Cutler not being as good as we thought he was. Would the O-line be as bad with someone like Drew Brees getting rid of the ball quicker? Who knows. Is the "bad playcalling" a function of Cutler's inability to make good reads and throw to the open receiver? Maybe. Is the inability of the Bears to find good receivers strictly a function of their inability gauge the talent level of WR's? I still think this one is mostly on the Bears, but guys like Rodgers continue to put up huge numbers with randoms like Randall Cobb.

 

Through the three OC's and numerous offensive lineman and wide receivers, there's been one constant. Yet people are reluctant to really place any blame on that constant. I'm a big Cutler fan, but much of the discussion over the past few years has revolved around how the people surrounding Cutler have to improve. Maybe it's time some of that discussion turn a bit towards Cutler as well (and I'm talking about discussion from dedicated, educated Bears fan, not the ESPN crowd wailing about his body language or how he's not a "winner," whatever that means).

 

With that said, Devin Hester remains a horrible receiver.

 

Cutler isn't Rodgers. I'm not expecting him to be Rodgers and he doesn't have to be Rodgers to have success. And as great as Rodgers is, I'm not completely giving him the credit for success with someone like Cobb. It's a team game, and as ridiculously talented as he is he's got a lot more around him, player-wise and coaching-wise to help him succeed than Cutler does. Wanting things like "getting rid of the ball quicker" doesn't really work when the plays being drawn up and the players you can pass to aren't clicking. Are there key things Cutler could do better or ideally be more consistent with? Of course; but I don't understand the how the Bears' more glaring failings and inconsistencies somehow shift the blame more to him as time goes on. That just means they've dragged out rectifying major issues and doing all they can to maximize their QB's capabilities.

 

 

I don't disagree with the overall point, but I don't buy that part. Not right now at least.

[Sammy Sofa]

No? I don't really follow the Packers, so I could be wrong, but I always just assume almost any team has a better OL/TE setup than the Bears.

[jersey cubs fan]

My point is that maybe some of these huge problems (O-line, playcalling, horrible receivers) are not entirely the Bears' fault, but also a function of Cutler not being as good as we thought he was.

 

My god that is a stupid point to try and make.

[Guest]

I really don't think there are many people who could come in and do a better job than Cutler. Is he in the top 5 QB's in the league? Nope. Is that what this team needs? Nope.

 

Having Peyton Manning behind center might get you a few more accurate passes and maybe one or two less interceptions, but you'd have had your back up QB in his place in game 2 or 3 after one too many hits to the cranium. Drew Brees would be watching Kellen Davis let balls go between his fingers over and over.

 

The problem with the offense of this team is NOT the QB. It's the offensive line and the lack of playmakers outside of Marshall and Forte. Hopefully Jeffery's return will remedy that a bit. Hopefully Evan Rodriguez can remedy that a bit if he gets a shot at starting TE.

Not to pick on you, but these kind of statements always bother me. Having a great defense shouldn't excuse the Bears (or any other team) from maximizing the talent at what is far and away the most important position on the team. If the Bears could get Aaron Rodgers, for example, I would hope they'd try everything in their power to do it, regardless of how the team is constructed.

 

I get the playcalling arguments, but Cutler now has two of the best playmakers in the league, so we can't really blame his performance on a lack of talent surrounding him. And even the playcalling argument has its holes. I remember someone posting an article after the Packers game breaking down some of Cutler's decisionmaking, and a lot of the botched plays were based on his own choices on where to throw the ball.

 

I'd be all over replacing Cutler with Rodgers, but that won't be happening anytime soon. While he does now have one of the best receivers in the league, he has also been dealing with arguably the worst receiver in the league on the other side of the field in Hester. He's made pretty good use of that really good receiver, but he just can't polish the turd that is Hester.

 

The play calling has really been one of the biggest problems to Cutler's success. Just this past week against Houston, everyone in the stadium and watching at home knew when they were calling run plays and when they were passing. I recall one play on first down where there was no one lining up in the receiver slots. The best way to kill the run game is to make sure you inform the defense that, yes, you are attempting a running play. Tice's play calling takes a lot of the guesswork out of it for the defense.

 

In my eyes, the problems on the offense don't fall on Cutler. There are breakdowns on the line, receivers running routes and the general play calling that deserve the brunt of our anger. Hopefully the return of Jeffery will help.

[Guest]

No? I don't really follow the Packers, so I could be wrong, but I always just assume almost any team has a better OL/TE setup than the Bears.

 

their o-line is also awful. they are much better off at TE, but with all their injuries, i'd put marshall and forte ahead of anything gb has at the moment

[Sammy Sofa]

No? I don't really follow the Packers, so I could be wrong, but I always just assume almost any team has a better OL/TE setup than the Bears.

 

their o-line is also awful. they are much better off at TE, but with all their injuries, i'd put marshall and forte ahead of anything gb has at the moment

 

So would I. Cutler isn't someone like Rodgers or Manning who is going to make lesser players look great, but I think it's obvious to everyone what he can do with those guys and you would think the team would do everything they can to capitalize on that.

[KingCubsFan]

My point is that maybe some of these huge problems (O-line, playcalling, horrible receivers) are not entirely the Bears' fault, but also a function of Cutler not being as good as we thought he was. Would the O-line be as bad with someone like Drew Brees getting rid of the ball quicker? Who knows. Is the "bad playcalling" a function of Cutler's inability to make good reads and throw to the open receiver? Maybe. Is the inability of the Bears to find good receivers strictly a function of their inability gauge the talent level of WR's? I still think this one is mostly on the Bears, but guys like Rodgers continue to put up huge numbers with randoms like Randall Cobb.

 

Through the three OC's and numerous offensive lineman and wide receivers, there's been one constant. Yet people are reluctant to really place any blame on that constant. I'm a big Cutler fan, but much of the discussion over the past few years has revolved around how the people surrounding Cutler have to improve. Maybe it's time some of that discussion turn a bit towards Cutler as well (and I'm talking about discussion from dedicated, educated Bears fan, not the ESPN crowd wailing about his body language or how he's not a "winner," whatever that means).

 

With that said, Devin Hester remains a horrible receiver.

 

Cutler isn't Rodgers. I'm not expecting him to be Rodgers and he doesn't have to be Rodgers to have success. And as great as Rodgers is, I'm not completely giving him the credit for success with someone like Cobb. It's a team game, and as ridiculously talented as he is he's got a lot more around him, player-wise and coaching-wise to help him succeed than Cutler does. Wanting things like "getting rid of the ball quicker" doesn't really work when the plays being drawn up and the players you can pass to aren't clicking. Are there key things Cutler could do better or ideally be more consistent with? Of course; but I don't understand the how the Bears' more glaring failings and inconsistencies somehow shift the blame more to him as time goes on. That just means they've dragged out rectifying major issues and doing all they can to maximize their QB's capabilities.

 

Here's a pretty simplistic way of articulating what I'm trying to say. This is the article I was talking about before: http://mattwaldmanrsp.com/2012/09/26/what-is-wrong-with-jay-cutler/

 

Look at the first play this guy analyzes. Here's a few posts about that play from this board after it happens:

Terrible first 2 offensive possessions, ruined almost completely by the offensive line. Following the script of the Indy game so far, hopefully without the pick 6

 

Stop with the play action until the run is established. They're selling out on the blitz.

 

If Cutler doesn't miss the wide-open guy, are we blaming the offense's ineptitude on playcalling and the offensive line?

 

 

Now look at how he breaks down the third play he analyzes. Here's some of the board's reaction:

 

Holy crap the O-Line looks terrible

 

Blocking. We suck at it.

 

This article makes a good argument that the sack was on Cutler's lack of awareness in the pocket. If he steps up, are we blaming the O-line?

[cubbyvirus00]

No? I don't really follow the Packers, so I could be wrong, but I always just assume almost any team has a better OL/TE setup than the Bears.

 

You do realize that at least half of the league has O-line problems and that there are really only 2 teams with top notch fronts.

[Guest]

No? I don't really follow the Packers, so I could be wrong, but I always just assume almost any team has a better OL/TE setup than the Bears.

 

You do realize that at least half of the league has O-line problems and that there are really only 2 teams with top notch fronts.

 

I really think teams have to reevaluate how they put together an offensive line.

 

These huge fat dudes can't keep up with the speed and strength that defenses are coming at them with now.

[jersey cubs fan]

there are 4 teams in the league who have made fewer pass attempts than the Bears, and 4 teams in the league who have given up more sacks.

 

There are loads of teams out there who realized long ago that you win consistently in this league through the air. The Bears have paid lip service to that notion only recently but still live with a defense/special teams/running game commitment before passing.

 

I guarantee you Tom Brady would not be Tom Brady if he was drafted by the Bears. Drew Brees would not be Drew Brees in Chicago. Roethlisberger may have been able to do many of the same things he has, although he'd have had to do it with far less at receiver and in the coaching department. Rodgers is a special player, but it helps that he was drafted by a high powered offensive team like Green Bay with a commitment to winning through the air. This is not baseball. Your team, teammates and coaches matter. You cannot simply bring a QB to an offensively inept organization and expect him to put up numbers that QBs on passing-centric teams put up.

Edited November 15, 2012 by jersey cubs fan

[Guest]

No? I don't really follow the Packers, so I could be wrong, but I always just assume almost any team has a better OL/TE setup than the Bears.

 

their o-line is also awful. they are much better off at TE, but with all their injuries, i'd put marshall and forte ahead of anything gb has at the moment

 

Most teams gear their offense towards the pass. GB has been running out RB's that none of us had ever heard of prior to their first carry and still winning games. Jordy Nelson, James Jones and Jermichael Finley scare the crap out of most secondaries and that's without listing Cobb's emergence or Jennings' injury woes. Chicago is proud of their run first heritage, and the play calling almost always puts the passing game in the back seat.

 

How would Cutler do if he was the starting QB in GB instead of Rodgers? I'd say he would be pretty successful with guys who know how to open up the field and get open. Not Aaron Rodgers successful, but successful enough that no one would be questioning the offensive production, IMO.

 

We got a small taste of what it would be like with 2 quality receivers with Jeffery hauling in a long touchdown catch. I don't recall there being Cutler concerns when both of his starting receivers were in there.

[Sammy Sofa]

Again, this just goes back to my point about how the Bears have fucked this up in that it seems that they, outside of trading for Marshall, have seemingly gone out of their way to exacerbate Cutler's flaws as opposed to playing to his strengths. Hey, your talented QB doesn't have the best pocket awareness? Shouldn't that be motivation to do whatever it takes to improve the long neglected and universally mocked OL (nevermind bringing in someone like Martz)? I'd love it if Cutler had better pocket awareness, but you'd still have a terrible, terrible OL and nigh-useless TE's critically impacting nearly every game. Cutler having more awareness would effectively amount to him taking sacks "better;" yeah, less turnovers but in the grand scheme of things the offense is still stymied.

[Guest]

No? I don't really follow the Packers, so I could be wrong, but I always just assume almost any team has a better OL/TE setup than the Bears.

 

their o-line is also awful. they are much better off at TE, but with all their injuries, i'd put marshall and forte ahead of anything gb has at the moment

 

Most teams gear their offense towards the pass. GB has been running out RB's that none of us had ever heard of prior to their first carry and still winning games. Jordy Nelson, James Jones and Jermichael Finley scare the crap out of most secondaries and that's without listing Cobb's emergence or Jennings' injury woes. Chicago is proud of their run first heritage, and the play calling almost always puts the passing game in the back seat.

 

How would Cutler do if he was the starting QB in GB instead of Rodgers? I'd say he would be pretty successful with guys who know how to open up the field and get open. Not Aaron Rodgers successful, but successful enough that no one would be questioning the offensive production, IMO.

 

We got a small taste of what it would be like with 2 quality receivers with Jeffery hauling in a long touchdown catch. I don't recall there being Cutler concerns when both of his starting receivers were in there.

 

They were both in there for his awful performance against GB.

 

(Admittedly, Forte wasn't for half the game, and going to him in the passing game seemed to be working when he got hurt.)

Edited November 15, 2012 by David

[Sammy Sofa]

No? I don't really follow the Packers, so I could be wrong, but I always just assume almost any team has a better OL/TE setup than the Bears.

 

You do realize that at least half of the league has O-line problems and that there are really only 2 teams with top notch fronts.

 

I'd settle for adequate.

[Guest]

No? I don't really follow the Packers, so I could be wrong, but I always just assume almost any team has a better OL/TE setup than the Bears.

 

their o-line is also awful. they are much better off at TE, but with all their injuries, i'd put marshall and forte ahead of anything gb has at the moment

 

Most teams gear their offense towards the pass. GB has been running out RB's that none of us had ever heard of prior to their first carry and still winning games. Jordy Nelson, James Jones and Jermichael Finley scare the crap out of most secondaries and that's without listing Cobb's emergence or Jennings' injury woes. Chicago is proud of their run first heritage, and the play calling almost always puts the passing game in the back seat.

 

How would Cutler do if he was the starting QB in GB instead of Rodgers? I'd say he would be pretty successful with guys who know how to open up the field and get open. Not Aaron Rodgers successful, but successful enough that no one would be questioning the offensive production, IMO.

 

We got a small taste of what it would be like with 2 quality receivers with Jeffery hauling in a long touchdown catch. I don't recall there being Cutler concerns when both of his starting receivers were in there.

 

They were both in there for his awful performance against GB.

 

(Admittedly, Forte wasn't for half the game, and going to him in the passing game seemed to be working when he got hurt.)

 

You are correct and that game was frustrating, but the play calling was what frustrated me, not Cutler. The play calling was as predictable in that game as it was in the Houston game, where it appeared as though they were content to play with an imaginary lead and run out the clock.

[Magnetic Curses]

if you're big and fast and have good feet and hands, you play defense.

[UMFan83]

Robbie Gould - K - Bears

Bears K Robbie Gould said the field conditions at Soldier Field could be a factor in if he re-signs.

Gould's contract is up after next season. He 10-of-13 at Soldier Field this season and appeared especially upset with the ragged, wet field in last Sunday night's loss to the Texans. "Those will be situations that I'm going to take into [consideration]," Gould said. "I don’t know if I want to deal with that as I get older as a kicker."

 

wtf is going on with Robbie? What the [expletive] does getting old have to do with anything as a kicker? Morten Anderson was out there kicking FGs in NY and KC in his mid-40's and he wasn't bitching. You are 30. STFU and make your kicks dude.

[UMFan83]

there are 4 teams in the league who have made fewer pass attempts than the Bears, and 4 teams in the league who have given up more sacks.

 

There are loads of teams out there who realized long ago that you win consistently in this league through the air. The Bears have paid lip service to that notion only recently but still live with a defense/special teams/running game commitment before passing.

 

I guarantee you Tom Brady would not be Tom Brady if he was drafted by the Bears. Drew Brees would not be Drew Brees in Chicago. Roethlisberger may have been able to do many of the same things he has, although he'd have had to do it with far less at receiver and in the coaching department. Rodgers is a special player, but it helps that he was drafted by a high powered offensive team like Green Bay with a commitment to winning through the air. This is not baseball. Your team, teammates and coaches matter. You cannot simply bring a QB to an offensively inept organization and expect him to put up numbers that QBs on passing-centric teams put up.

 

I'm definitely not disagreeing with you, but I am trying to think of examples of historicaly inept passing teams acquiring a pro bowl caliber QB and the results they got from it. The only thing I can think of is Kurt Warner going to the Giants and watching his career go down the tubes, only to be resurrected in Arizona. I can think of examples of QBs starting their careers at more offensively inept teams and getting traded/cut and then signing with the right team and blowing up. Steve Young and Brett Favre come to mind.

 

There are also a few journeymen QBs that I can think of that get passed around the league and every few years have a revival with the right team. Vinny Testaverde and Kerry Collins are 2 that might fit that mold.

[Banedon]

“I need to apologize to the grounds crew at Soldier Field and our grounds crew for my recent comments regarding the field,” the statement said. “I have since learned a lot more about the NFL’s policies and the measures that are taken at Soldier Field to ensure a reliable and safe playing surface. It was my mistake to speak prior to having a full understanding.

 

“That’s not why I missed a field goal on Sunday, and it’s not why I’ve missed the other field goals this year.”

[Guest]

Robbie Gould - K - Bears

Bears K Robbie Gould said the field conditions at Soldier Field could be a factor in if he re-signs.

Gould's contract is up after next season. He 10-of-13 at Soldier Field this season and appeared especially upset with the ragged, wet field in last Sunday night's loss to the Texans. "Those will be situations that I'm going to take into [consideration]," Gould said. "I don’t know if I want to deal with that as I get older as a kicker."

 

wtf is going on with Robbie? What the [expletive] does getting old have to do with anything as a kicker? Morten Anderson was out there kicking FGs in NY and KC in his mid-40's and he wasn't bitching. You are 30. STFU and make your kicks dude.

You seem really upset about this.

[cubbyvirus00]

I agree with this 100%. Cutler will never find himself in the best situation, but he has to put up better numbers and make better decisions.

 

Oh, so it's as simple as "making better decisions?" Well, that's an easy fix.

 

And he's been nowhere near "the best situation" in his time with the Bears. Not even close. I'm stunned (not really) that someone like you, as vocal as you've been about the OL and the playcalling, would suddenly reverse course like this.

 

How am I reversing course? I think that he's been dealt a crappy stable of talent overall, but this year he does have a pro bowl caliber WR and RB. He was also given Jeffrey who's an upgrade over Hester. Bennett is a decent #3.

 

Making better decisions is something that could comedown to the mechanics of playing QB and dissecting film in the off season putting more work into your craft. Aikman and Young harp on the fact that Cutler hasn't shown much improvement in mechanics and Aikman pointed out that Cutler is not a QB that has anticipation of a play but simply just throws to the open receiver lacking an overall feel in the game. I do think there is some truth to those statements.

 

The fact that this subject is so debatable and there can be a wide range of differing opinions is interesting. Dissecting Cutler's time here is not very easy.

[Sammy Sofa]

If a better option than Cutler came along of course I'd like to see the Bears pursue it if it was realistic to do so. I don't, however, think that's likely for the foreseeable future so I'd prefer it they tried to fully capitalize on Cutler's strengths as opposed to just assuming he can make do with whatever they go with. Worrying that Cutler can't make things work out of the team they've constructed is backwards.

[Guest]

There are also a few journeymen QBs that I can think of that get passed around the league and every few years have a revival with the right team. Vinny Testaverde and Kerry Collins are 2 that might fit that mold.

 

Philip Rivers has watched his O-line deteriorate along with weaker replacements for LaDanian Tomlinson and Vincent Jackson and it's definitely no longer the explosive offense he had previously.

[cubbyvirus00]

There are also a few journeymen QBs that I can think of that get passed around the league and every few years have a revival with the right team. Vinny Testaverde and Kerry Collins are 2 that might fit that mold.

 

Philip Rivers has watched his O-line deteriorate along with weaker replacements for LaDanian Tomlinson and Vincent Jackson and it's definitely no longer the explosive offense he had previously.

 

But Rivers has deteriorated himself with bad footwork, mechanics and forcing throws into double coverage. AJ Smith has done a shitty job of putting good players around him consistently.