Poll: How many more games do the Bears win?
- Thread starter ClownBaby
- Start date
An NFL mock draft from today and I found it funny they project the Bears to draft DL with the first pick. Would kinda seem like a Bears type move.
Hopefully they lose the rest and are in the hunt for an actual franchise quarterback.
Where could their season ending 1st Round pick place (5-11-0) and Mitch Trubisky move them up to?
Where could their season ending 1st Round pick place (5-11-0) and Mitch Trubisky move them up to?
Not in the hunt for Trevor Lawrence or Justin Fields. Right now they would have the 17th pick in the draft I believe. If they lose out maybe they get up to #8-10. And at this point do you have any faith that they’d draft the right QB, develop an offense around him and put him in a position to succeed?
Don’t see them winning another game. Two losses to GB, loss at Minnesota - hard to see them beating Detroit as they should’ve lost to them the first time. Houston and Jax are 50-50 but even then would put them in NFL draft hell at 7-9. There are a lot of really good QB’s coming in the next draft if they choose to be smart enough to draft one that can actually play.
I am not nor have ever been a Bears fan, but I've been living in their market for my entire life so I get to see their miserable product far more than I care to do. I don't understand the fans and management at all. You've got an O-line that couldn't block traffic with a head on semi truck on semi truck collision on a country lane. But you keep drafting mediocre QBs rather than O linemen. These guys reach their potential by being cannon fodder for the opposing defenses. QBs cost lots of dollars, OLs cost far less and are usually a much surer bet when taken in the earlier rounds. Why not trade down for a couple decent picks and stock up on the OL? Give them a year and then you can go after a QB that won't have to spend all his time worrying about becoming a pile of human debris underneath a slew of tacklers.
Walter was truly a great RB because he spent most of his career behind a pathetic O-line. In his last couple years they finally thought to put something decent in front of him to block someone. McMahon was an adequate QB that didn't have to make out his will before every game. Because of the O-Line, they had an offense that could actually win games for them while the Defense did their thing so well. They get a very good QB in Cutler and they can't protect him but they complain about his sideline demeanor. Everything is about the QB, nothing at all about what makes a QB able to do good things.
Everyone gives lip service to the fact that the O-Line isn't good, but in their next breath they think the solution is a different QB. I don't get it at all.
Walter was truly a great RB because he spent most of his career behind a pathetic O-line. In his last couple years they finally thought to put something decent in front of him to block someone. McMahon was an adequate QB that didn't have to make out his will before every game. Because of the O-Line, they had an offense that could actually win games for them while the Defense did their thing so well. They get a very good QB in Cutler and they can't protect him but they complain about his sideline demeanor. Everything is about the QB, nothing at all about what makes a QB able to do good things.
Everyone gives lip service to the fact that the O-Line isn't good, but in their next breath they think the solution is a different QB. I don't get it at all.
This is probably the best post I have seen about the Bears in months and it didn't even come from a Bears fan. We all get upset about QB play but let's face it. The game starts on both lines. I also thought Cutler was a good QB with nothing to work with and no line. But that is a different story. Montgomery is in the top 5 in the league with yards after contact. What does that tell you? It means he is getting hit before he gets going much of the time and has a sh*tty line.
We all remember the glory days of the Bears in the 1980s. They had an outstanding OL back then. They weren't very good before or after that because they didn't have that line.
I have said time after time, Mahomes couldn't win with this team. And his stats wouldn't be anywhere near what they currently are. He has WR Tyreek Hill to throw to and Kelce at TE and an outstanding O-Line. Now they have improved their running game even further. Mahomes is the best QB in the league. But he wouldn't be anywhere near the best if he was playing in Chicago with the awful cast.
Sorry you were right on to something up until you said Cutler was a very good QB. It’s obvious you couldn’t pick a good QB any better than the Bears staff/ownership.
That’s two of you that no nothing about what a good QB. I do agree about building a good O-Line. Cutler sucked and was not a good QB. Look at his stats then look at what he did in his career. Did he ever win anything? The answer is a big fat NO!
Corey and Blue Ruin, both of you are letting your personal feelings get in the way of your objective judgement. Cutler was a good QB. I am not saying he was great. He wasn't. For most of the time he was in Chicago he had sh*t to work with. I didn't care at times for his demeaner either. But as for his work on the field goes, he was good.
Come on Blue Ruin, you're better than this. If you judge a QB on whether he leads the league in interceptions you had better look at some other QBs. Did you know Joe Namath threw more interceptions in his career than TDs. And the numbers aren't close. He led the league in INTs 4 times. Yet he is in the HOF. Cutler was among the leaders in sacks? You do understand if he was among the leaders in being sacked it is a result of a horrible O-Line correct? You are using flawed criteria.
Corey you never liked Cutler. The guy could have cured cancer and you'd still be a never Cutlerer. Cutler threw for over 3,000 yards five times with the Bears. I don't know if there has ever been a Bears QB who did that. In his last full season with the Bears he threw for 3,659 yards, threw 21 TDs and 11 Ints. completed 64.4% of his passes and had a QB rating of 92.3. Those are solid, good numbers.
Also, did you know Cutler is 40th all time in career QB rating at 85.3? I will bet neither of you had a clue about that. That means he was a good QB although not great. And Corey, don't ever tell me I know nothing about what it takes to be a good QB. I just gave you a bunch of information which proves me being right. it is obvious to me you know little about the position if that is your subjective opinion.
The fact is, the Bears haven't had a QB nearly as good as Cutler this century and probably all the way back to Jim McMahon.
Come on Blue Ruin, you're better than this. If you judge a QB on whether he leads the league in interceptions you had better look at some other QBs. Did you know Joe Namath threw more interceptions in his career than TDs. And the numbers aren't close. He led the league in INTs 4 times. Yet he is in the HOF. Cutler was among the leaders in sacks? You do understand if he was among the leaders in being sacked it is a result of a horrible O-Line correct? You are using flawed criteria.
Corey you never liked Cutler. The guy could have cured cancer and you'd still be a never Cutlerer. Cutler threw for over 3,000 yards five times with the Bears. I don't know if there has ever been a Bears QB who did that. In his last full season with the Bears he threw for 3,659 yards, threw 21 TDs and 11 Ints. completed 64.4% of his passes and had a QB rating of 92.3. Those are solid, good numbers.
Also, did you know Cutler is 40th all time in career QB rating at 85.3? I will bet neither of you had a clue about that. That means he was a good QB although not great. And Corey, don't ever tell me I know nothing about what it takes to be a good QB. I just gave you a bunch of information which proves me being right. it is obvious to me you know little about the position if that is your subjective opinion.
The fact is, the Bears haven't had a QB nearly as good as Cutler this century and probably all the way back to Jim McMahon.
OK, I might get in some trouble here or at least a heated debate with this...but here goes. I don't have to personally "like" a QB to think he is good or can help a team. Personally I couldn't stand Phil Simms as a player. But he was a damned good QB who won a SB in the 1980s when it was very difficult to make it through the NFC playoffs.
So, I am wondering if the Bears should at least entertain the idea of bringing Colin Kaepernick in to help. I understand the guy hasn't played in a while and doesn't know the system. I don't want this to get political, etc. and no talk about kneeling etc. I wouldn't doubt the guy is probably still better than Trubisky or Foles. Maybe it should be talked about...maybe not. Would CK want too much money? But maybe he is the guy to at least bridge the gap the team faces to get to the point of drafting, signing and developing a new QB.
Just a thought.
So, I am wondering if the Bears should at least entertain the idea of bringing Colin Kaepernick in to help. I understand the guy hasn't played in a while and doesn't know the system. I don't want this to get political, etc. and no talk about kneeling etc. I wouldn't doubt the guy is probably still better than Trubisky or Foles. Maybe it should be talked about...maybe not. Would CK want too much money? But maybe he is the guy to at least bridge the gap the team faces to get to the point of drafting, signing and developing a new QB.
Just a thought.
The main reason it won't happen is that CK would have to be at least an above average QB to justify the shitstorm signing him would bring. While he might be an improvement over Mitch or Nick and that's a big might, he almost certainly doesn't have the skills walking in the door that would make him an above average starter.
Agree to an extent. I don't think the Bears are truly interested in winning anymore games this season. I believe the players still are mostly (not McCullers).
That is an awful thought because any professional team should be trying to win every game. I know organizations do tank seasons if they think it will help in the draft. But in the Bears' case, I am not confident they know what they are doing when they draft offensive players...especially QBs.
You're right that I hated Cutler with a visceral intensity. Yes, he had a rating of 85, which means that he was average, not elite. And his knack for getting sacked can be blamed on his immobility as much as on the offensive line. Joe Namath threw a lot of interceptions, but he also had more attempts, completions, and yardage than JC. Namath is in the NFL's Hall of Fame, Cutler is in Vanderbuilt's.
Who said Cutler was an elite QB? Not me. Jay Cutler is 28th all time in the NFL in passing yardage. That doesn't make him just an average QB. He was a good but not great QB. You should actually do some research before you come here with opinions. Where the hell are you getting your information? Looks like I have to educate you.
Joe Namath had 3762 passing attempts and completed 1886 of those passes for a whopping completion percentage of 50.1%. Cutler attempted 4920 passes and completed 3048 of them for a completion percentage of 62%. Namath threw 173 TD passes while throwing 220 INTs. Cutler threw 227 TDs while throwing 160 INTs. Namath threw for a career 27,763 yards while Cutler threw for 35,133 yards. So, you are wrong about everything concerning their numbers. I am a big Namath fan.
And as for the interceptions, it was you who gave one of Cutler's faults as his leading the league in INTs. I merely gave another example of a HOF QB who threw far more INTs than TD passes in his career. Namath's career QB rating was 65.5 and he is sitting in the HOF. Cutler's career QB rating was 85.3.
And I have to tell you. There are a lot of people who feel Namath doesn't belong in the HOF based on his career numbers, etc. there are a lot of guys with much better numbers who aren't in the HOF. But, Namath did do a lot for the AFL and really put it on the map. He was good in Super Bowl III but not really outstanding. I don' think there has ever been a QB voted the SB MVP who didn't throw a single TD pass. But Namath didn't in that game. He managed the clock very well but I think Matt Snell deserved the MVP in that game. So do lots of other people. I think that one game put Namath in the HOF because if the Colts had won Namath wouldn't be in the HOF. Playing in New York didn't hurt him either.
Please do me a favor and have your facts correct when debating. It helps.
That's basically 20 years of mediocrity and futility. Their defense and special teams did carry them to a SB one of those years but it wasn't enough to overcome the terrible offense.
Has anyone ever told you that you have a rather blunt and abrasive tone? I know the answer is yes and I know you don't really care so it's a rhetorical question really. I usually agree with most of what you say but damn brother, take the hostility down a notch. Smile when you type
LTHS
I am not going to argue with you about Cutler he was a very average QB at best. Your stats are very misleading. Tell me what did he ever win at any level? How many playoff games did he win? I for one remember a rival Championship playoff game where he quit against the Packers. I am sure you remember that game. You can say what you want about Cutler you can have that guy as your QB. I don’t personally hate Cutler I actually think aside from football he seems like a pretty good guy.
By the way Cutlers record with the Bears 50-49.
154 TDs and 109 Interceptions. I don’t know how many fumbles but it was high. He won 1 playoff game while with the Bears. He also had games where he threw 4-5 interceptions in a game. Hardly a good QB. I know you point to passing yards but I look at wins and losses from the leader of the team. I usually agree with you LTHS but on this one we’re light years apart. My opinion and you have yours. I doubt if you had a team you would pick Cutler knowing what we know. Just saying.
Last edited:
I just hate debating guys who make ridiculous and nonsensical arguments instead of being objective. Just because you personally hate a QB, it doesn't mean the guy sucked as a QB.Has anyone ever told you that you have a rather blunt and abrasive tone? I know the answer is yes and I know you don't really care so it's a rhetorical question really. I usually agree with most of what you say but damn brother, take the hostility down a notch. Smile when you type
In other words what I am saying is, I am impatient with the uninformed and stupidity. The guy comes here quoting stats that are absolutely and totally false. What he posted, he just made up. So, I have to do his homework and get the facts straight. I am also impatient with guys who are intellectually lazy. The information I provided is very easy to find at profootballreference.com.
I have no problem dealing with children who get things wrong or who just make things up. After all, they are children and we can and should be patient with them. But, when I come here, to a football board, with other adults who follow and like football, I expect more knowledge that that. But more importantly, I expect people, if they are going to debate stats, to quote those facts correctly. And just about everyone here does that. And we wonder why so many people are uninformed. There was a perfect example.
You have your opinion, which I respect and I have mine. The numbers say he was better than average. I don't think he had enough help. The Bears had Greg Olsen and let him go. That wasn't Cutler's fault. And I think that was a big turning point in his career with the Bears because Cutler was rightfully pissed about it.
I agree that winning can be a part of how a QB can be rated. It definitely adds a star to the legacy if a QB goes to and especially if he wins a SB. But it isn't everything. Here is another example. Joe Flacco and Trent Dilfer have both won a SB. Dan Fouts and Philip Rivers have never played in one. Fouts is in the HOF and Rivers is going to the HOF.
Personally, I think Tony Romo was somewhere between a very good and an outstanding. QB. Yet he only won one playoff game too. Does that make him average? I don't think so. He was a very very good QB who just didn't get there. He had a career 97.1 QB rating. That is very good. Point is, winning may be part of it, but it isn't all of it by any stretch.
Personally Corey, I don't know why anyone would want to be a QB with the Bears. I really don't.
I do have one final question. I am sure you remember Rex Grossman. I remember how that guy was maligned too. But, if the Bears had Cutler at QB instead of Grossman in the SB against the Colts, do you think their chances of winning would have gone up? I do. I think they would have had a much better shot. But, we'll never know.
Think for a minute how good Cutler could have been if he had an O-Line like the Bears of the 1980s. Or if he had a few weapons. Have a good day buddy!
It's a clown show already so one more clown won't matter!
Personally Corey, I don't know why anyone would want to be a QB with the Bears. I really don't.
I do have one final question. I am sure you remember Rex Grossman. I remember how that guy was maligned too. But, if the Bears had Cutler at QB instead of Grossman in the SB against the Colts, do you think their chances of winning would have gone up? I do. I think they would have had a much better shot. But, we'll never know.
I agree with you statement. Why would anyone want to be a Bears QB. This franchise has doomed many QBs for whatever reason no one can explain. They can’t pick one and they certainly can’t coach one. It’s actually mind boggling. I said last year they should trade the house and pick Joe Burrow. I stand by that and he will most likely be the rookie of the year. I will say it again trade the house for Travor Lawrence.
build your team around a franchise QB . That said they would prolly ruin that that kid.
As for Cutler we can agree to disagree like we have done before but still can talk civil and move on to the next topic. Take care my friend. 👍
A quarterback is more than the sum of his statistics. There's such a thing as presence in the huddle and presence in the locker room. Namath could rally a team to come from behind. Even if they didn't win, he could inspire his teams to play their best. So could Jim McMahon, as he did against the Vikings, when he came off the bench in the second half and threw for three touchdowns. Like Namath, McMahon was a character, the perfect leader for a team that was full of characters. Erik Kramer and Jim Miller could also pull out a victory in the final minutes. Those were exciting games, something that Jay Cutler seemed incapable of producing.
Last edited:
Based on your post is the reason I wanted the Bears to draft Jalen Hurts last April in the 2nd Round. They won't get Fields or Lawrence and Hurts would have been a good fit!
Hurts isn't starting over Carson Wentz right now, and Wentz is playing awful.
I agree that a presence is a factor too. But, presence is what takes a QB from good to great in most cases. Cutler's numbers say he was good and above average because the average QB numbers are below his. You have to look through your personal bias of hatred with Cutler.
I loved Namath. I still like him. But his career numbers are probably the worst for a HOF QB. Like I said before, SB III got him into the HOF. There is a big difference between Namath and McMahon. All through his career, Namath wanted to get on the field and play and he came into the league as damaged goods. Even at the end of his career he was still trying to get on the field. McMahon, on the other hand, near the end of his career, was perfectly fine with standing on the sideline collecting a paycheck and said so.
I liked Jim McMahon, then I couldn't stand him. He did an outstanding job in 1985 with that team. But the guy just couldn't stay healthy and Dan Hampton has said more than once if he gave a sh*t more about his health the team could have won another SB or two. I agree with that. McMahon didn't even play in the 1986-87 playoffs and in his only game of the 1987-88 playoffs against Washington, he was horrible, throwing three second half interceptions with one being in the Redskins' end zone. Very few, if any people talk about that terrible performance. And I'll never forget his reaction to the 28-3 pasting the 49ers put on the Bears in the NFC Championship game in January of 1989, when he was interviewed after the game, shrugged it off and said, "the world didn't come to an end." Not it didn't. But his "don't give a sh*t" attitude was just as bad as Cutler or maybe worse because McMahon was playing for a better team.
1987 was about the time rumors were swirling around that the Bears were looking into getting Dan Marino in a trade. You have no idea how hard I prayed it would happen. Marino didn't want to come to Chicago. When I look at McMahon, he typifies how I feel about the Bears of the 1980s. One great season and nothing else.
Fun fact of the day... it's been almost 10 years since the Bears have won a playoff game (against Seattle back in January 2011) following the 2010 season. Of course they lost the NFC championship game the following week at home against none other than...the Green Bay Packers. Happy Thanksgiving everyone.
The Eagles aren't throwing Hurts under the bus and he'll be the projected starter in 2021.
