Good article on Cutler and his impact on coaching search

Cutler looms large in Bears’ coaching search

Will the new Bears coach be allowed to be a bigger force in the organization that quarterback Jay Cutler is already? STEVE LUNDY | Staff Photographer

By Mike Imrem

Jay Cutler: Problem or solution?

Let's start the conversation by asserting that a case can be made that Cutler has become too big an issue in the Bears' search for a head coach.
My goodness, you'd think the guy is Tom Brady with 3 Super Bowl victories as a starting quarterback and assorted other accomplishments. Instead, until further notice he's still Jay freaking Cutler, for whatever the excuses are for his inconsistent play.
Yet the narrative over each coaching candidate includes whether he can tailor an offense to Cutler, whether he has a relationship with Cutler, whether he can get through to Cutler and coach him and fix his mechanics.
Now, this observation is going to rankle people but a couple of Cubs situations past and present keep rattling around in my consciousness pertaining to Cutler.
Anyway, the first observation has to do with — yikes! — Sammy Sosa.
The Cubs were so committed to Sosa, had so much invested in him, depended so much on his presence as the face of the franchise.
Then Don Baylor was hired as Cubs manager in 2000. He was an imposing man, a man with a lot of pride in himself and his performance.
Baylor came to town wanting to be firm with Sosa. He wanted to limit some of the Samminator's quirks that were distracting the club and not appreciated in the clubhouse.
Baylor's intended approach frightened the front office. They didn't want to disrupt what Sosa provided the Cubs on the field and off.
Baylor had to back off. Cubs management continued encouraging Sammy to be Sammy. The beat went on.
Cutler isn't Sosa. Not as overtly he isn't, anyway. But he has been entitled by the Bears to clash with offensive coordinators while being awarded his personal quarterbacks coach, wide receiver and license to annoy.
So, will the Bears' next head coach be empowered to be a bigger force within the organization than Cutler is and to draw the quarterback into his program rather than vice versa?
It's the first question a coaching candidate should ask Bears general manager Phil Emery during an interview.
The second observation is the comparison of Jay Cutler to starting pitcher Edwin Jackson, whom the Cubs recently signed to a $56 million free-agent contract.
As they warm up before a game, Jackson and Cutler each impresses with his arm, his physique and his prospects.
Even in games Jackson and Cutler will do things that make you go "Wow!" and lead you to believe they'll repeat them on every throw in every outing.
But they don't. They build spectators up only to let them back down. Mostly they leave everybody wanting more.
Questions linger over whether Cutler and Jackson are the best of what you see of them or the worst or something between.
So, should the Cubs have given Jackson all that money based on what they're guessing him to be?
Meanwhile, should the Bears give Cutler a big contract based on what they still can only be guessing he will be?
More relevant at the moment, should the Bears place so much weight evaluating coaching candidates on whether they can coexist with Cutler?
If the next Bill Belichick is available but doesn't believe in Cutler the way Bears management does, should he be disqualified from consideration?
Seriously, it just seems that Jay Cutler has become another complication in a process that is complicated enough.
mimrem@dailyherald.com

would call this "good article"...

If the new Coach wants a different QB, Cutler will be gone. That new coach knows that QBs that are better than Cutler aren't on the market and not in the draft this year. Next year, Culter gives this team the best chance to win.
We need a better OLine, a TE who can play and better coaching. After that, we can let Cutler walk next year.

Wow, I just really can't believe the amount of disrespect that Cutler gets in this town by some fans and the press. His attitude does not help, I understand, but this guy has all the tools to be a top 5 QB in this league. Yea, I said it, top 5. He has had obstacle after obstacle to overcome since joining this team (terrible offensive coordination over three different coordinators/offensive schemes in 4 years); pathetic WR play for 3 out of his 4 years here; we got rid of his only real TE target because the OC didn't like to use TE's like they are used in the modern era and offensive line protection that has been among the leagues worst for all of his four years. Just how much magic is this guy expected to perform? Yea, he's a gambler with some of his throws, but gamblers have won many Super Bowls in this league.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 4DaBERS

Wow, I just really can't believe the amount of disrespect that Cutler gets in this town by some fans and the press. His attitude does not help, I understand, but this guy has all the tools to be a top 5 QB in this league. Yea, I said it, top 5. He has had obstacle after obstacle to overcome since joining this team (terrible offensive coordination over three different coordinators/offensive schemes in 4 years); pathetic WR play for 3 out of his 4 years here; we got rid of his only real TE target because the OC didn't like to use TE's like they are used in the modern era and offensive line protection that has been among the leagues worst for all of his four years. Just how much magic is this guy expected to perform? Yea, he's a gambler with some of his throws, but gamblers have won many Super Bowls in this league.

---

Personally, I think he is a great QB that did not play as well as he could have, but disregarding my bias towards liking him, is the right approach to hiring a HC to require a relationship or past history or to have to want any one player? That is the question that this article brings forth to me. I think trashing Cutler at this point would be crazy, so I don't even consider that, but I agree that you don't hire a guy like that. (I would be upset if he got rid of Cutler, but I still don't think it should have the importance in the hiring process that it does).

I didn't think it was right to make Emery live with Lovie and I don't think it's right to make the HC live with any of the players or coaches. That means losing people like Toub (which I hate to lose), but if they don't want to be here anyway, they won't perform their best regardless.

IDK, just kind of the way I feel. Seems like the tail wags the dog sometimes.

Eh, kinda crappy article. Cutler liked Bates, but a huge part of the reason Bates wound up here is because more respectable candidates wanted no part, knowing there was a good chance Lovie would be fired and they would be out on their ass a year later. And Jay got his "personal receiver"? That bastard! If Jay hadn't "forced Emery's hand" and demanded we trade two measly third round picks for one of the top three receivers in football, we'd have Devin Hester catching 60 passes a year and we'd like it! It's not like Adam Sandler putting Rob Schneider into each of his films. Marshall does more to earn his pay than just be Jay's friend.

Also, I think the whole "will he fit with Jay?" narrative is a media creation. Jay isn't the malcontent the media makes him out to be. He doesn't get in fist-fights with coaches and other players. You don't need to bring in a freaking psychologist and find a coach who would work with Jay's fragile ego. It's not like Jay can only run one type of offense and can't possibly succeed doing anything else. That's bull. Jay's a good player. Hire a good coach, get a medioce offensive line and there will be no problems. I will add, however, that I hope the next coach has no previous ties to Cutler. If anything, Jay needs to be shaken from his comfort zone to get better, not given his own rat pack of friends to play with.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 4DaBERS

Wow, I just really can't believe the amount of disrespect that Cutler gets in this town by some fans and the press. His attitude does not help, I understand, but this guy has all the tools to be a top 5 QB in this league. Yea, I said it, top 5. He has had obstacle after obstacle to overcome since joining this team (terrible offensive coordination over three different coordinators/offensive schemes in 4 years); pathetic WR play for 3 out of his 4 years here; we got rid of his only real TE target because the OC didn't like to use TE's like they are used in the modern era and offensive line protection that has been among the leagues worst for all of his four years. Just how much magic is this guy expected to perform? Yea, he's a gambler with some of his throws, but gamblers have won many Super Bowls in this league.

---

This.

The whole article is a piece of crap full of all kinds of false assumptions and the guys dislike of Cutler is obvious. The bullshit about drawing a parallel to the Cubs and Sosa was such a reach I'm surprised the guy could even type after dislocating his arm from that. I was a waste of newsprint.

Jay Cutler IS the franchise QB around here and unless we find our own Colin Kaepernick or Russell Wilson he's not going anywhere. Emery wants a coach who not only build an offense around Cutler but who will also improve Cutler's ability to run it. That's what he said he planned to do and so far I haven't seen him fall short on any plan he's made public. That's not his style.

What Emery wants to see is what makes Trestman such a viable candidate. He's the guy with both the offensive design skills and QB development skills to make Emery's plan work. Cutler will get a new contract and you can quote me on that. We don't have another QB even in development and we won't have one before we need to deal with Cutler's extension so he'll get it.

WTF planet do these guys live on that allows them to come to earth and write for local newspapers because they can't live around Chicago or if they do they either don't listen very well or have problems processing what they do here if it doesn't agree with their way of thinking.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bearsinhouston

Personally, I think he is a great QB that did not play as well as he could have, but disregarding my bias towards liking him, is the right approach to hiring a HC to require a relationship or past history or to have to want any one player? That is the question that this article brings forth to me. I think trashing Cutler at this point would be crazy, so I don't even consider that, but I agree that you don't hire a guy like that. (I would be upset if he got rid of Cutler, but I still don't think it should have the importance in the hiring process that it does).

I didn't think it was right to make Emery live with Lovie and I don't think it's right to make the HC live with any of the players or coaches. That means losing people like Toub (which I hate to lose), but if they don't want to be here anyway, they won't perform their best regardless.

IDK, just kind of the way I feel. Seems like the tail wags the dog sometimes.

---

Don't take my comments personal H, I was referring to the article, and I wholeheartedly agree about the tail wagging the dog. I don't think our opinions are too far removed from one another. My opinion is that you do not pick a coach based on whether Cutty Likes/dislikes him and I think that's what Bates was brought in for. However, if you have a QB that has great POTENTIAL, then a coaching selection that can bring the most out of him would be wise in my opinion. "Great" Quarterbacks are very hard to find (as all Bear fans know) and if Cutler can be given protection and a sound offense to work in, I think he can be "great" (depending on ones definition of great). If that happens, then he is still young enough to outlast our next coach. Ultimately, I don't think Emery should base his selection on Cutler's opinion, nor do I think Cutler even needs to be asked, but it should be at least partially based on someone that can bring the most out of him and develop an offense that suits him. I think the media and some fans think we should simply select a coach and consequently an Offense that is successful without regard for the QB that we already have. I disagree with that philosophy because we don't have that other QB and we may never find him, thus putting us in the same boat we were before Cutler. Actually Denver's approach is similar to the latter which is exactly how they lost Cutler in the first place. It would be equivelent to having Urlacher in his prime, and hiring a DC to run a Defense that did not maximize the talents of your defensive star, your cutting off your nose despite your face.

Again, don't think my rant was directed at you, but more so the article as I'm getting a little sick of the Chicago media lately, specifically on this issue.

4DaBears - I agree with your point, but I don't think there is necessarily an offense Cutler can't run. I think Bates was hired less because Cutler liked him (as the media explained it) and more because no good candidates wanted to come in. Bates had no better options after getting fired in Seattle and sitting out a year.

That being said, the media has been too quick to ignore the issues (O-line, lack of TE's who could block or catch, lack of receiving talent before 2012, horrible or no offensive schemes). Instead, they construct this version of Jay as an enigmatic, delicate little flower which can only bloom in a 62 degree room and must be watered with mystical water from the top of the Hymalayas. He didn't stumble here because he didn't have one of the handful of coaches who he worked with in Denver, he stumbled here because everything sucked. Jay obviously isn't going to play the game Wilson does, and he isn't going to rush for 180 yards in a game like Kaepernick, but other than that, there's not much he can't do. I don't think they need to tailor an offensive scheme to him, other than allowing him to move out of the pocket. I think they just need to get the best offensive mind. I don't think there is one lone way to make Cutler successful, as the media narrative has gone.

Me take it personal? You know me better than that by now!

You pretty much said what I was trying to say but couldn't spit (type) out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 4DaBERS

Don't take my comments personal H, I was referring to the article, and I wholeheartedly agree about the tail wagging the dog. I don't think our opinions are too far removed from one another. My opinion is that you do not pick a coach based on whether Cutty Likes/dislikes him and I think that's what Bates was brought in for. However, if you have a QB that has great POTENTIAL, then a coaching selection that can bring the most out of him would be wise in my opinion. "Great" Quarterbacks are very hard to find (as all Bear fans know) and if Cutler can be given protection and a sound offense to work in, I think he can be "great" (depending on ones definition of great). If that happens, then he is still young enough to outlast our next coach. Ultimately, I don't think Emery should base his selection on Cutler's opinion, nor do I think Cutler even needs to be asked, but it should be at least partially based on someone that can bring the most out of him and develop an offense that suits him. I think the media and some fans think we should simply select a coach and consequently an Offense that is successful without regard for the QB that we already have. I disagree with that philosophy because we don't have that other QB and we may never find him, thus putting us in the same boat we were before Cutler. Actually Denver's approach is similar to the latter which is exactly how they lost Cutler in the first place. It would be equivelent to having Urlacher in his prime, and hiring a DC to run a Defense that did not maximize the talents of your defensive star, your cutting off your nose despite your face.

Again, don't think my rant was directed at you, but more so the article as I'm getting a little sick of the Chicago media lately, specifically on this issue.

---