Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Chicago Bears' started by Henry Burris, Aug 1, 2013.
Please Register or Log in to Remove this Advertisement!
^^^This end of discussion.
The faults ascribed to Cutler are coachable problems, ones often exacerbated by the play book, the play calling, o-line and receivers. Prior to Trestman's arrival, Calvillo was guilty of exhibiting the same flaws as Cutler, yet Trestman corrected them very quickly. He also made sure that the receivers' skill set and the play calling matched what he taught Calvillo. The same ingredients are being put in place here to cut the sacks, the bad throws and improve the TD/Int ratio. We'll have to wait and see how things turn out.
Getting back to the subject of this thread, he won't ask his qb to do something that is really not a good idea. With Cutler's injury history, I doubt Trestman will be encouraging him to engage in plays that heighten that risk e.g. the read-option. The fact that the backups are getting a lot of early reps in TC suggests to me that Trestman plans to use them and not just in garbage time.
i was trying to say the same thing a little more gently, but ya, lets move on and see how the season starts.
I completely agree. Cutler has his warts, but none of them need to be permanent warts. Much of what is wrong with Cutler is that from watching him when he got here ands watching him recently, he no longer is as comfortable in the pocket. He is always looking for pressure with part of his mind and is not focusing on progressions because part of his focus is in not becoming part of the turf. So he is not moving as fast as the game around him since he is thinking about too much. Lovie and his slower practices did not help him come out of that. Trestman is helping him speed things up again and hopefully the line will give him more time (from the left side anyway). Cutler is not a statue. He can avoid pressure pretty well. When they come at you from all sides or with almost no warning, no one can do much about it.
I think what Trestman is doing with him will pay dividends. I wish the line was more solid than it is, but for the first time in years, we have made some significant progress. I think it will get addressed more next offseason. Where I saw no real progress in the last few years, I see a training regime that actually addresses what I feel can make a difference in Cutler seeing the field and having more time (more mental time, and probably more real clock time also) to make his check downs and so make better decisions. He also has more people around him that can catch and they will be better utilized.
I think some people are focusing on Cutler not having been productive. While I agree with that, I am not sure that everyone sees that not all has been on Cutler or that progress is actually being made this year (the first time since Cutler got here) to actually address the deficiencies. Will he be a Peyton Manning? Probably not, but the guy has talent and to write him off would be a mistake. I think he needs to be evaluated as the year goes on to see how he responds to all of the changes around him. It could go either way. But even if he gets no better (and I would agree that a new QB should then be considered), why get rid of him until that better QB shows up? I certainly don't think the right appoach is to say he is not as good as we want him to be and then end up with someone else that is worse. If they are going to make a change, they need to line up their ducks first. But I wouldn't do a damn thing until I see the fruits of the efforts that are being made to address his deficiencies.
Thanks for that info, Bill. The more I learn and hear about MT, the more I love the (somewhat unorthodox) decision to hire him. I like the boldness of it and I like MT's resume as a "QB polisher". No question, the stars are aligned, and intentionally DESIGNED, to make this a Cutler-Eval year. I see three broad categories of possible outcomes:
A) Jay has a lights out year and gets a big money contract. He becomes "the guy" for the foreseeable future, silencing the doubters.
B) Jay flops or disappoints despite the much improved resources handed to him this year. The team lets him walk in FA next year and drafts a QB in round 1 to take over and start over.
C) (most likely) Jay improves noticeably but doesn't take us on a deep playoff run. The team tags him or gives him a more modest extension and drafts a QB in round 2-3 to develop for a year or two down the road.
Check the score again. Mr. Deliverance's retort was "read the article and the stats then come back". Well, the article's only stats relate to wins loses. At least Lazar recognizes that this is a team sport and isn't blinded by hate. You've got a little hate too Ric, though you can actually debate a little. Oh, and while Cutler was in Denver, they did score lots, but also had a miserable defense....hence losses.
But, you are correct. The thread is about the read option, and I don't think it is a good idea w/ Cutler at the helm. Maybe for a gadget play 3 times all year, but nothing more.
I just want to say that the point of my posts was to have a little dicussion, to try to look at the whole picture. Just looking at stats is a really bad way to come to conclusions about anything.
No, but they are one of the only data points that is objective. Of course, you have to look past the raw numbers to look at extenuating circumstances and further, you have to be able to decide wheter those circumstances have left a permant mark or whether they can be corrected and then going even past that, given a correction -- what is the new ceiling. That's where the magic is as well as a person's ability to understand and reason. But if you don't start with the numbers, you don't even have a baseline.
I don't think you are saying anything different. It is not all about the numbers, yet without the numbers, everyone would be equal.
That's exactly what I was saying, only you said it a little bit better:)
To flesh out the change wrought by Trestman on Calvillo, when Trestman took over, Calvillo went from averaging a TD/Int ratio of 1.7 to 3.4, average passing yards per game from 226 to 292, and TDs per game from 1.2 to 1.9. To add context, in 2011 for a good part of season, Calvillo had to play with the knowledge that he had lesions on his thyroid that were probably cancerous (they were). In 2012, the D wasn't up to its usual standard. Sacks were way down as well.
And he achieved this with Trestman after the age of 35 when most qbs are retired or on the verge.