JonJayCutler

What the hell is going on around here? Most dysfunctional 4-2 team ever.

I'd give them a 2nd rounder for Mankins, but in no way would I give up a 1st. He's 28 and will probably start declining in a year or two.

Once more, I am not blaming Rodgers for every close game loss, nor am I denying that a lot of winning consists of luck and relying on other players/teammates. I'm simply trying to make the point that winning is not COMPLETELY out of his control like some here are making it sound. I'd just like to see Rodgers lead his troops down the field and engineer a complete game-winning drive once in awhile when it matters most (or maybe I wouldn't since I'm a Bears fan :wink:). But there's not much point in continuing this debate as we've seemed to reach an impasse.

We're getting way too technical here. I am not trying to knock Rodgers, because the guy is a great QB. I'm simply stating that at some point the guy has to take it upon himself to win games if he's going to be among the elite. You can't always rely on a FG kicker or defense to win you a game; sometimes you just have to put the ball in the endzone yourself. By blaming teammates for losing games, you could argue that with a better O-Line and WRs, Cutler could be an elite QB, but no one considers him even close to that. You have to find a way to win and pickup your teammates, and Rodgers has had chances to do that. An individual does not win a game in a team sport. Football, especially, is one of the most team-dependent sports in existence when it comes to wins. Nobody puts the ball in the end zone themselves. It's not technical, it's just not considering a team sport appropriately when we assign wins to a player. No QB literally puts the ball in the endzone themselves, but you can still step up and make a play. If what you said is completely true about the team effort and all the other factors, then there is no point in arguing and no way of TRULY knowing which QBs are elite, right? Anyone who has watched the Packers over the past couple years has seen that Rodgers has lacked a certain "clutch" ability at crucial times in games. He has not been bad in those situations, but far from perfect. For instance, he threw a pretty bad pick to Landry in the Washington game last week. People can't just say Crosby should have won it for him. His kick that hit the upright was far from a gimme FG.

We're getting way too technical here. I am not trying to knock Rodgers, because the guy is a great QB. I'm simply stating that at some point the guy has to take it upon himself to win games if he's going to be among the elite. You can't always rely on a FG kicker or defense to win you a game; sometimes you just have to put the ball in the endzone yourself. By blaming teammates for losing games, you could argue that with a better O-Line and WRs, Cutler could be an elite QB, but no one considers him even close to that. You have to find a way to win and pickup your teammates, and Rodgers has had chances to do that.

Senseless. It makes perfect sense, my point being that Rodgers needs to take it to the next level. While he is not doing anything to lose those games, he's not really doing anything to win them either. The elite QBs find a way to go above and beyond. And yes, while I don't necessarily agree that wins/super bowls should determine the legacy of a QB, the fact remains that they do.

I don't buy that the Vikings have the best chance to win the division. Their secondary is awful and their D-Line has been very underwhelming. Their QB situation is a serious problem. But the GB-MIN game will pretty much decide whether or not this becomes a 3-horse race. And yeah I don't think Rodgers can be mentioned in the Manning/Brady/Brees category anymore, at least for the time being. Gotta win games even if it's not his fault when they lose.

I had to miss this game. I see the O-Line was horrible once again, but how did Cutler look in general? At least the Packers lost again.

It does suck that Briggs will probably not play, but we shouldn't need him to win this game. Hopefully he can go against Washington, but I'd be okay with sitting him again with the bye being the week after. I rather get him completely healthy because we're going to need him the 2nd half of the year. I liked what I saw from Iwuh in the preseason. Let's hope he takes advantage of his opportunity.

Considering the Patriots are asking for a 1st rounder (LOL) for Mankins, I doubt they'd entertain the idea of a 4th round pick along with an injury-prone DT who has clearly fallen off.

I was thinking this last night. Casual NHL fans have barely even heard of Stamkos. That's what playing for a lousy team will get you.

Again, it depends totally on the severity of the concussions he's suffered, and I've read nothing that suggests any of his concussions were severe (which would involve losing consciousness). There are 3 grades of concussions...

Even if Cutler has indeed had 4 previous concussions, I'm still not worried. This is football. Concussions happen. If we're talking about the mild variety, I'd have a hard time believing there is a QB in the NFL who hasn't experienced one. Does a history of concussions make Cutler more likely to be concussed again? Maybe, but I don't see it is as career-threatening as long as he doesn't suffer any severe season-ending concussions like Trent Green went through.

I'll take Jay's word for it that it was his first concussion, at least his first significant concussion. If nothing he suffered in the past was worthy of mentioning until now, then I wouldn't worry about it. Steve Young was getting lambasted on a regular basis, which was largely due to his frequent scrambling. That's not what's happening to Cutler...yet.

Love the idea. Angelo said in his interview they want to get bigger on the OL and this definitely helps that. Omiyale-C.Williams-Kreutz-E.Williams-J.Webb I expect Garza, Louis, and Shaffer to be rotated in and out, but this looks like our new starting 5.

I'm in a stats mood so here's one for ya... Robbie Gould is 96/100 in his career on kicks under 40 yards. Pretty insane if you consider the city he kicks in and all the missed short FGs in the NFL lately. In my opinion, now that he's shown he can hit from beyond 50 yards, he's pretty much solidifed himself as the 2nd best kicker in the NFL behind Kaeding. I think you could argue Gould is more clutch than Kaeding though. Like someone here said Sunday, he's worth every penny.

And just like that Forte is up to 4.2 ypc and on pace for about 1,000 yards. While I don't expect him to have another game like that the rest of the year, having a similar gameplan this week wouldn't hurt since we don't know exactly how sharp Cutler will be.

Vikings and Cowboys both 1-3. A lot of people had these teams in the NFC title game. I love the NFL.

Just as long it doesn't come down to Week 17 at Lambeau. I'm pretty sure there's no way we win that game if it's for the division.

The game in Detroit scares the crap out of me and is far from any sort of lock. This is not the same Lions team we're accustomed to seeing, they're a couple breaks away from being 4-1. Our schedule does get tougher but at least we play the two best AFC East teams (Jets, Pats) at home. We should be able to get one of those two.

Idonije had 3 sacks? Good for him. We needed someone on the DL to step up besides Peppers. Any word on the Briggs injury?

There is no clear best team in the NFC right now. Heck, you could probably say the same for the AFC too. This is a weird year in the NFL. Tons of "good teams" but no dominant teams.

The Grossman games against Minnesota and Green Bay in 06 are the only ones that could rival today. But because with "Bad Rex" came "Good Rex" and Todd Collins is just crap all around, today seems worse.

Grossman against Green Bay in December of 06.

A 17-point win on the road with our backup QB turning in one of the worst performances in Bears QB history? It was far from an impressive win, but it certainly was not unimpressive. The defense was nothing less than beastly today. Carolina's offense is bad but they weren't nearly this bad against New Orleans.