WrigleyField 22

I'm cringing at the fact that meatballs do love pointing to Orton and he's only slightly behind Cutler statistically. But for every Orton backer there is a McCown backer so it evens out alright. At the end of the day, so much still falls on this staff. Get a new staff. Draft them a developmental QB. Give the current offensive core two more years while continuing to replenish our youth with picks and mid-range FA signings... Things really don't look bad if Emery is ready to move on from Trestman. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk I don't know about this fictional "developmental" QB, if a QB is there that is an upgrade to Cutler you take him. If not, you dont. Well there won't be a QB guaranteed to be better. In the mid rounds it will be even harder. But we should definitely try. If it doesn't work out well have tons of "option years" on Cutler. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I figured as much, but didn't run thru the scenarios. I believe all the AFC/NFC games are over for all the contenders other than this week's GB/NE Superbowl preview (according to media). And the Bears lost 3 AFC games, which means if they win out they would only finish with 3 NFC losses, which is most years is good enough to win most tiebreakers. It's really weird- with so many intra-division and infra-conference games left among the NFC WC race, you don't even have to try out every scenario to figure out the WC possibilities. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Looks like at 10 wins Chicago would also win the tie breaker to Seattle, Ari, and Philly. Basically only GB of possible* 10 win teams gets us on the tie breaker *Possible being used here very generously Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If the Bears win out (they won't) it will be very hard for them to not get in as a 10-6. It would probably mean no 10-6 teams get in. ETA- the Bears would have h2h against Dallas, Detroit, and San Fran. Philly, and Ari have conference heavy schedules so if they falter, Bears will get that tie breaker. Probably only concern is a 10-6 Seattle and 11-5 Dallas but I haven't been able to create that scenario yet, it keeps coming out with all 11-5 teams. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk SF/Seattle and Dal/Philly play each other twice to end the year. One of them sweeping the other would be ideal. Ironically all 3 matchups (those 2 plus Lions/Bears) all play Thursday and all play in the next 3 weeks. Ideally, Seattle and Philly would sweep as the Bears would have tiebreakers over Detroit, Dallas and SF if they win the next 2 at least. But if Philly got swept by Dallas, they still play Seattle (at Philly) so that's potential for 3 NFC losses. Likewise, if SF sweeps Seattle, they still have to go to Philly and Arizona and they have been beatable on the road, so they could have 3 NFC losses left. Wouldn't we want SF and Seattle to possibly split? Arizona is still the favorite to win the division, so either of them sweeping increases the odds of that team taking one of the 2 WC spots. If they split and end at 10-6 that's good, but they could also split some games with Ari or other teams and end up 11-5, which is bad. Or if Phi loses only their two to Dallas and Dallas loses only to us and they each end up 11-5 or various other outcomes that create multiple 11 win non-division winners. Seriously the Yahoo link posted in last weeks thread is great for understanding the remaining schedule and impacts. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If the Bears win out (they won't) it will be very hard for them to not get in as a 10-6. It would probably mean no 10-6 teams get in. ETA- the Bears would have h2h against Dallas, Detroit, and San Fran. Philly, and Ari have conference heavy schedules so if they falter, Bears will get that tie breaker. Probably only concern is a 10-6 Seattle and 11-5 Dallas but I haven't been able to create that scenario yet, it keeps coming out with all 11-5 teams. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk SF/Seattle and Dal/Philly play each other twice to end the year. One of them sweeping the other would be ideal. Ironically all 3 matchups (those 2 plus Lions/Bears) all play Thursday and all play in the next 3 weeks. Ideally, Seattle and Philly would sweep as the Bears would have tiebreakers over Detroit, Dallas and SF if they win the next 2 at least. But if Philly got swept by Dallas, they still play Seattle (at Philly) so that's potential for 3 NFC losses. Likewise, if SF sweeps Seattle, they still have to go to Philly and Arizona and they have been beatable on the road, so they could have 3 NFC losses left. Yea if teams split a lot of games is where we basically get two 11-5 WC teams and the Bears miss out even at 10-6. But even that requires a pretty specific split of games. Based on history two 11-5 WC is not common so I wouldn't count on that as an outcome. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yea I guess I'm not replying to any post specifically in this thread, but there's a lot of lamenting here. The general meatball stance is what my post is more directed to. what meatball stance? That Emery should have moved on from Cutler. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm cringing at the fact that meatballs do love pointing to Orton and he's only slightly behind Cutler statistically. But for every Orton backer there is a McCown backer so it evens out alright. At the end of the day, so much still falls on this staff. Get a new staff. Draft them a developmental QB. Give the current offensive core two more years while continuing to replenish our youth with picks and mid-range FA signings... Things really don't look bad if Emery is ready to move on from Trestman. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yea I guess I'm not replying to any post specifically in this thread, but there's a lot of lamenting here. The general meatball stance is what my post is more directed to. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Since Emery has been GM the only three QBs were available and top Cutler by DVOA : Manning (wouldn't have beat out Elway/Broncos) Alex Smith (would have to beat offer of #34 pick in 2013, and give similar deal) and Brian Hoyer (hindsight, will get big deal soon). In striking distance is Orton. No one else available is really close in performance. (A few others technically available but require high picks we didn't have, and even among top QB picks the success rate vs Cutler is not great. Once you get to the fourth and get possibilities like Cousins the relative successes are definitely the exceptions). So Orton is the best argument, but you still have to spend all that extra cash efficiently to make up for the downgrade. QBs just don't become available so even as the 18th best QB it was right to extend him. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The real question is where Cutler ranks among QBs who would have otherwise been available the past few years (draft or FA) and any opportunity costs we would have pursuing those. I have a feeling Cutler would still be the best move. Only guy who jumps out is maybe Hoyer, but let's be honest that was out of nowhere and very reliant on hindsight. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Because TVM. If you can only trade him as a 10M/Y player, then eat that money on the backend and trade him away. Front loading is mostly valuable in situations where a teams budget is year to year only. If you roll over budgets, which we apparently do, it doesn't usually matter, but it would all depend on the specifics of the structure, whether backloading or front loading. If you have a funky structure that's based on poor assumptions of return... It's bad either way. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If the Bears win out (they won't) it will be very hard for them to not get in as a 10-6. It would probably mean no 10-6 teams get in. ETA- the Bears would have h2h against Dallas, Detroit, and San Fran. Philly, and Ari have conference heavy schedules so if they falter, Bears will get that tie breaker. Probably only concern is a 10-6 Seattle and 11-5 Dallas but I haven't been able to create that scenario yet, it keeps coming out with all 11-5 teams. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Even in the past when Jay has been the dagger, it has at often come on the heels of poor first halves. I agree he should have been given the reigns to burry TB yesterday and not play conservatively. Even if you wanted to go with Leno at TE for extra protection, you let Jay, Jeffery, and Marshall do their thing with Forte hanging around as the dump off. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

franchising cutler would have only served the purpose of creating more tension on the team and would have gone against everything they were trying to do this year (which was build on last year's offensive success and win). In retrospect, if you were going to crap the bed you'd want Cutler on the tag so you can get rid of him next year, but that wasn't the goal then. Agreed. But even with the deal looking worse now... We're still okay. Yea were committed to Cutler for another year, but even if you decide to move on and draft a Rd1 QB you aren't forced to rush him. And when it's all said and done we've been active filling holes in FA and remain in a good cap situation. The alternative is a bit more cash in Virginias pocket. Looking at the upcoming cap for 2015 is interesting. Not surprisingly most of the true playoff contenders are in tough cap spots. If Emery does his job well we will too in about 3 years (due to resigning picks) Also NO is in certified cap hell. They can probably get Bree's to restructure and they'll need to, but they'll still have to make a few cuts and could very well be coming off a losing record while still facing the other first place division winners. Maybe Sean Payton becomes available in 2016... Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

And extensions help mitigate FA risk where your only tool is the one previously mentioned franchise tag. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

People need to stop treating the franchise tag as some cap space holy grail. Fact is you spend w ton of money and usually piss off and alienate one of your best players. A lot of the contracts Clifg Stein has drawn up lately are basically mini two year franchise tags (where the second year is a savings) with team options. We've been maintaining flexibility, bottom line. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think generally the interception complaining tends to be meat balling. The fumbles are not as much. Now, not to say interceptions are unimportant but overall context tends to be thrown out the door. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

They shouldn't but they'll find a way, 9-7 baby. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Never mind Artest goes to Longley Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I love this kind of stuff. I'd love to see a similar article on the NBA. I want to say I've seen something similar before for the NBA, might even have been a Grantland/Simmons article. I might have to Google it. I know, for example, that you can trace the draft pick the Bulls used on Joakim Noah all the way back Kelvin Ransey, drafted in 1980 and immediately traded to Portland for Ronnie Lester and a 1981 1st round draft pick (the immortal, Al Wood). Hmmm. I know Noah, Taj, and McDermott trace their roots to the Curry trade. I guess Antonio Davis was also sent in the same trade. So Davis to Jalen Rose to Artest to... Pippen(?)... Gets us to 1987. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Unless it's just a case of the coach trying to deflect blame away from his players, our returners have done what Trestman/DeCamillis have wanted. But with this being the case it's really odd to have two failed returners still on the roster. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Anyone else a little underwhelmed by possible Trestman replacements? Looking around the lists posted online I think my favorite candidate is our third choice from 2013 (Bevell). I know a lot seem enamored by Bowles but I must be missing something... Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm trying to remember the failed drives from midfield. Was that the second Cutler interception and bogus Cutler unsportsmanlike call? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

They played better in the Vikings game and the actual play calling looked about as good as it had all year (low bar). I'd buy the implementing different looks thing based on the Vikings game, even if there were some clear execution and time management issues that limited the total point output. The Pack game- I didnt seen anything that looked different play calling wise. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Even if you want to account for the high stakes pressure the offense was put in, there seemed to be very little of giving Jay different looks. So either he ignored the calls/opportunities or it wasn't really implemented at all. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk