Thread: Article tough on Smith -- even tougher on Cutler

Originally Posted by Riczaj01

No rakk, it's not a matter of who's available, here's a link to a list:

http://www.kffl.com/static/nfl/featu.../fa.php?y=2013

Great names such as : Derrick Anderson, Charlie Batch, Jason Campbell, Rex Grossman, Matt Moore, Brady Quinn...and all are going to cost you 3+ mil a year like campbell did. Pick one and let's enjoy that shitty qb train again; b/c one thing Cutler has proven is you'll need the backup at least a few qtr's if not a few games. Why target a vet qb that has proven to be a failure everywhere else when you can target a vet OL/TE that might actually still have value instead? Why not draft a young qb w/more upside and less cost and brings more value to the position?

Dude, it's going to be on of those jokers, plus there's a whole lot more who will be FAs. Clemens, Leftwich, Leinart, Carr, Daniel,...and more. So, again, all we have to go on is what Emery has already done. Pick a name, any name, because he's bring in a veteran regardless, and all else will fall in behind that.

Originally Posted by Riczaj01

Sadly Loki, he's the most talented of the FA crops; if he's let go by NYJ's, and what people aren't realizing. The FA crop is as bad as it's ever been.

Raak, he's had 1 year; and the team was not going to allow him to go youth after the Haine debacle(which wasn't about youth but poor qb talent). The Vet qb was nothing but a PR stunt, and it worked until campbell had to take the field. We really don't know what he's going to do; but if he is building the team for the future and building depth; the worst thing he can do is bring in another vet qb that is going to be WAY over priced.

If Emery brings another vet in this year, like he did last, then we know his MO, and what to expect from him. PR stunt or over-reaction to 2011, it is a luxury we can't afford though. It all circles back to Lovie-Tice like everything else on the offense. Coaching the back up right, and designing a game plan that he's comfortable with and can execute. I read an article yesterday that had Rodgers discussing Matt Flynn's record setting performance against the Lions last year. Aaron stated they worked with Flynn all week on what plays Matt was comfortable with and that's what they stuck with all game. The didn't deviate from it, and they guy goes on to set a franchise record with 6 TDs, and turns it into $10 M in guaranteed money from Seattle. And, as it turns out, he's not even good enough to beat out a 3rd rounder.

Big difference this year with Emery I didn't consider. This will be his first draft with his scouting department having an entire year to prepare. Last year he had to work with what he was left with and missed the college regular season. So, whichever Rookie they draft, and there's no doubt they're drafting someone, their scouting reports should be accurate enough determining he can come in and back up Cutler. Only thing we can do is go off of history, that tells this team, with these coaches, cannot draft a rookie qb and get him prepared to play on Sunday. This is year two with Emery, so if things are going to be different, now is time is should show.

Rakk, I will agree that if Lovie/Tice/Bates/toub or whoever is here next year ya they probably go vet qb b/c no one is capable of developing a qb w/this coaching staff.
If they are gone though, all bets should be off. Young qb's are showing they can perform w /the best of them; and at the cost they are a far better bet then a retred who's proven not good enough.
As for Flynn, I think he's good but hard to beat out Russell Wilson the way he is playing isn't it?

Originally Posted by Riczaj01

Rakk, I will agree that if Lovie/Tice/Bates/toub or whoever is here next year ya they probably go vet qb b/c no one is capable of developing a qb w/this coaching staff.
If they are gone though, all bets should be off. Young qb's are showing they can perform w /the best of them; and at the cost they are a far better bet then a retred who's proven not good enough.
As for Flynn, I think he's good but hard to beat out Russell Wilson the way he is playing isn't it?

Yes, and who knew? Credit Pete Carroll and staff. I had not considered this is Emery's first draft, with his team, where he's been able to evaluate all season long. I think that's why he went with Campbell, and didn't even bother drafting one. Blanchard was probably the closet thing he was looking for that he could get on the street UDFA-wise as a rookie. It was a roll the dice, and if he had worked out, McCown wouldn't be here, and with Campbell gone, Blanchard would have the job. I think it's no secret we will be drafting a QB this year.

Originally Posted by XaosGorilla

Ric, I like a lot of your posts, but I disagree with you on this one. The bears have one of, if not the worst, o-lines in the nfl. There is NO backup QB, Vet or Rookie who can play well from behind it. I would rather focus on improving the o-line in the hopes that with better protection, jay will play more games, and should our backup have to play at least he will have a chance to throw the ball before he has defenders all over him.

The alternative that you recommend Ric, is to choose to say that other position backups are more important than starting o-linemen. Positions like, defensive ones? or maybe WRs? or TEs? maybe safeties? While I am not trying to dispute the bears needs at other positions, it seems to me that the line of reasoning that you are advocating is the same one that has got the bears to where it is. A team with an O-line that is so bad it can't use the talent that it does have. If the same thing is done again, that the most likely result will be more of the same, will it not?

I'd rather the bears fix the o-line, it would make both the run and pass game better, regardless of who is playing behind the line.

Xaos, 1 thanks for hte compliment. One of the reasons I only post here is b/c of the great postesr like Benj/Soul/Loki/etc, and it's been nice to see new posters like you MP/and JABF show up and be active.

It's just a difference in philosphy. And I'm okay w/people not agreeing, that's what allows for the conversation.
I'd just rather spend cap money on a guy that can play and play well(FA OL'men/TE's) then on a backup qb who's proven he cannot play(ecspeically w/how young the OL already is). For me in FA you grab 2 OL men, and then draft your MLB round 1, OG/TE round 2. and then if it's a OG, then in round 4 decide if in FA or the later rounds if its easier to find a quality TE or QB(imo it's TE). then draft the other in round 4. 5-7 get depth at WR/DB/DL/OL.