Hairyducked Idiot
-
Posts
39,504 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
46
Content Type
Profiles
Joomla Posts 1
Chicago Cubs Videos
Chicago Cubs Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits
2026 Chicago Cubs Top Prospects Ranking
News
2023 Chicago Cubs Draft Picks
Guides & Resources
2024 Chicago Cubs Draft Picks
The Chicago Cubs Players Project
2025 Chicago Cubs Draft Pick Tracker
Blogs
Events
Forums
Store
Gallery
Everything posted by Hairyducked Idiot
-
I'm not ignoring any of those things. I've fully acknowledged them repeatedly. I just don't place the same weight on them that you guys do, especially when metered out on a per-pass basis. If you assume that Cutler will be good enough and healthy enough to be the Bears' starter for the next 10 years, then absolutely it will have been worth it.
-
I wish. He has way better facial hair than I do.
-
Yeah, that's one of the single, dumbest things I have ever read on this board. The only thing remotely comparable in the recent NFL would be JaMarcus Russell's 2008. So yes, that response went about four steps too far.
-
I fully believe Cutler could have Warren Moon's career with the right surrounding cast. Jurgensen isn't modern era. Fouts is a reasonable comp that puts Cutler in a very positive light, excellent point. Marino's high pick totals came in many, many more attempts.
-
I was under the impression that the Bears acquired him in part because of his age and hoping that he would get better with time. Especially taken as a per-pass basis, his pre-2009 numbers were good but not "franchise" level. If I'm wrong about that, then I apologize.
-
Well, instead of going back and forth with "Well, YOU only care about picks" and "YOU only care about the TDs," let's lay it all out there: 20th in yards per attempt 13th in yards 19th in completion percentage 8th in touchdowns 13th in touchdown percentage 1st in interceptions 5th in interception percentage That's the entirety of Jay Cutler's season (unless there is anything else you want to add.) We agree: That the Bears' surrounding cast was awful around him. We agree: That having an awful surrounding cast had a significant impact on his stats. We disagree: Projecting forward, and presuming the offensive cast around him improves, Cutler is likely to be good enough to justify his contract and the assets the Bears acquired to get him. Does that pretty much sum it up?
-
You guys were freaking out way, way before I said that. So obviously that can't be the reason you find my opinion wildly unacceptable.
-
Yes. I'm so black-and-white that I said there was a chance he could still recover and become the quarterback they hope, and that of course the offense around him had a large part to do with his problems.
-
Forgive me for thinking that when a quarterback leads the league in interceptions, that should be the defining portion of his season.
-
I'm saying Cutler didn't improve our situation, and since he didn't, I'd rather just have the two first-round draft picks back.
-
Hmm. CCP making pretty much the exact same point I did (and notice I never once called Cutler a "bust"), yet no hysterical "I can't believe this guy" responses. You're not saying anything close to the exact same thing. So what have I said that's different from what he said?
-
Agreed.
-
Saying I don't think 2 first-round picks was worth it and that there's a good chance he's never a "franchise" QB is over-the-top negative?
-
Hmm. CCP making pretty much the exact same point I did (and notice I never once called Cutler a "bust"), yet no hysterical "I can't believe this guy" responses.
-
If you want to reply to things that people didn't write, why not just open a text editing program or something? It seems foolish to spend money on an internet connection if you are going to ignore what your browser presents and just make stuff up.
-
Defenses also play better with leads.
-
Because I want Cutler to be a lot better than Favre, and Manning threw his his 28 picks as a rookie at age 22. He only broke 20 once after that. Wait, are you saying you want Cutler's career to be better than Favre's career? If that's your expectation than I can see why you'd be disappointed, damn. Or I think the high-INT era of Favre's career was incredibly overrated
-
Again, this is where we'll have to respectfully disagree. I've seen too many Lovie Smith teams win seven to nine games with ball control. Read: phenomenal defense and special teams. Funny how much better a defense looks when the other team isn't given the ball in great field position 26 times through picks.
-
Again, this is where we'll have to respectfully disagree. I've seen too many Lovie Smith teams win seven to nine games with ball control.
-
Because I want Cutler to be a lot better than Favre, and Manning threw his his 28 picks as a rookie at age 22. He only broke 20 once after that.
-
That'd give us 2400 yards, 15 touchdowns, 10 picks? It'd be close, but yeah, I'd probably take that season over 3600, 27,26
-
actually, no he didn't. but favre is the single seasons packers' leader, peyton with the colts (unitas is second and third), tarkenton with the vikings, sonny jurgensen with the eagles, stabler with oakland. do want a list of great quarterbacks who have thrown 26 ints or more in a single season? In the modern era, in their age 26 season? Sure.
-
No point, because the fundamental disagreement is going to be that I'll take a season with fewer yards and touchdowns in exchange for a lot fewer picks. Everyone else in this argument has made it clear that they don't think the picks are nearly as much of a negative as I do. That's going to be where we differ.
-
And that's where I guess we'll just have to disagree. There are certain levels of awful that are so jarring that it completely upsets previous projections. The plexiglass principle is true to a point, but if somethings enough of an outlier, it probably means you need to adjust your expectations. Teams win games. Quarterbacks do not.
-
Not many. I'd say maybe 4-5. Maybe. And I'm assuming by "better" you're not only meaning "less picks," right? Then we'll just have to agree to disagree.