Jay Cutler - Simply the Best?
by Adam T on Apr 3, 2009 1:19 PM CDT
Email
Print
So now we have to officially ask the question. Is Jay Cutler already the best QB the Bears have had in 20? 25? 30? years. Sadly, only one guy gets close and that was really on the strength of one year. I've pulled the Bears QB seasons back to 1995. I only kept ones in which a QB started for 7 games. That also (sadly) took out 4 seasons completely from the list.
I've compiled them in a simple table and bolded the number by the QB who has the best one.
Let us take a look, shall we?
| Cutler | |||||||
| Year | Games | Att | Comp | Comp% | Yards | TDs | Ints |
| 2008 | 16 | 384 | 616 | 62.3 | 4526 | 25 | 18 |
| Orton | |||||||
| 2008 | 15 | 272 | 465 | 58.5 | 2972 | 18 | 12 |
| Grossman | |||||||
| 2006 | 16 | 262 | 480 | 54.6 | 3193 | 23 | 20 |
| Orton | |||||||
| 2005 | 15 | 190 | 368 | 51.6 | 1869 | 9 | 13 |
| Stewart | |||||||
| 2003 | 9 | 126 | 251 | 50.2 | 1418 | 7 | 12 |
| Miller | |||||||
| 2002 | 8 | 180 | 314 | 57.3 | 1944 | 13 | 9 |
| Miller | |||||||
| 2001 | 14 | 228 | 395 | 57.7 | 2299 | 13 | 10 |
| McNown | |||||||
| 2000 | 10 | 154 | 280 | 55.0 | 1646 | 8 | 9 |
| Matthews | |||||||
| 1999 | 8 | 167 | 275 | 60.7 | 1645 | 10 | 6 |
| Kramer | |||||||
| 1998 | 8 | 151 | 250 | 60.4 | 1823 | 9 | 7 |
| Kramer | |||||||
| 1995 | 16 | 315 | 522 | 60.3 | 3838 | 29 | 10 |
I've left interceptions alone since the guys with the low numbers didn't play a full season.
So is it too easy to answer yes to the question? Only one QB bested Cutler in any category and that was just a fantastic year. Kramer and the Bears never matched those totals again.
What is your take? Is Jay Cutler the best QB we've seen in Chicago since Jimmy Mac?
114 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Hasn't done anything in Chicago yet...
It really doesn’t matter what he’s done before coming to Chicago. He’s thrown for a lot of yards with three very good receivers – but he was also inconsistent. He’s got a ton of talent, but he’s going to have to get the job done here before he can be the best we’ve had…
That said, I’m still super excited.
Why
does anyone think we have no receiving threats? Are olsen and clark and forte garbage? Hester is a threat too. I think he will have no issues with the talent on this teams offense. Yeah I do think we need one more good Receiver though. But that one good receiver would give us an offense that wouldnt just be good but that would pose all kinds of problems for any defense. Weapons Galore.
"Nobody who ever gave his best regretted it. "---George S. Halas
by Halas is God!!!!! on Apr 3, 2009 1:28 PM CDT up reply actions
Are olsen and clark and forte garbage?
No, but they aren’t WRs either.
I firmly believe that any man's finest hour, the greatest fulfillment of all that he holds dear, is that moment when he has worked his heart out in a good cause and lies exhausted on the field of battle - victorious. (Vince Lombardi)
Dude, for serious? 1986 was 23 years ago.
Can we drop it?
-halfblindcubbiegirl
They can catch
the ball, correct? Which makes them receiving threats.
"Nobody who ever gave his best regretted it. "---George S. Halas
by Halas is God!!!!! on Apr 3, 2009 1:38 PM CDT up reply actions
Just because someone can catch doesn't make them a threat.
But that’s not the point.
Shinons’ original comment that you replied to was:
He’s thrown for a lot of yards with three very good receivers
Your response was:
Why does anyone think we have no receiving threats? Are olsen and clark and forte garbage?
My reply was to your reply to his comment about the WRs.
I firmly believe that any man's finest hour, the greatest fulfillment of all that he holds dear, is that moment when he has worked his heart out in a good cause and lies exhausted on the field of battle - victorious. (Vince Lombardi)
Dude, for serious? 1986 was 23 years ago.
Can we drop it?
-halfblindcubbiegirl
olsen, forte
bothe can be split out wide for mismatch pourposes………i think we should go FA for another offensive wepon and use the draft to fill holes and add depth to the defence.
?
I never said anything about our receiving corps. But if you want to compare them, I think any quarterback in the league would refer to a “Marshall, Scheffler, Royal” combo as a greater threat than “Clark, Olsen, and Forte.” Actually, they’d probably respond with “Who are Forte, Clark, and Olsen?”
Cutler’s not passing for 4,000 yards plus relying on two tight ends and a running back.
Exactly.
And my reply was to Halas, not you.
I firmly believe that any man's finest hour, the greatest fulfillment of all that he holds dear, is that moment when he has worked his heart out in a good cause and lies exhausted on the field of battle - victorious. (Vince Lombardi)
Dude, for serious? 1986 was 23 years ago.
Can we drop it?
-halfblindcubbiegirl
And to your
response, He is including Scheffler as a “receiver” soo, yeah. Your statement is moot.
"Nobody who ever gave his best regretted it. "---George S. Halas
by Halas is God!!!!! on Apr 3, 2009 2:05 PM CDT up reply actions
Lmao.
I firmly believe that any man's finest hour, the greatest fulfillment of all that he holds dear, is that moment when he has worked his heart out in a good cause and lies exhausted on the field of battle - victorious. (Vince Lombardi)
Dude, for serious? 1986 was 23 years ago.
Can we drop it?
-halfblindcubbiegirl
Did you think
he was talkin about Brandon Stokley or something?
"Nobody who ever gave his best regretted it. "---George S. Halas
by Halas is God!!!!! on Apr 3, 2009 2:09 PM CDT up reply actions
Tony Scheffler
TE…
I firmly believe that any man's finest hour, the greatest fulfillment of all that he holds dear, is that moment when he has worked his heart out in a good cause and lies exhausted on the field of battle - victorious. (Vince Lombardi)
Dude, for serious? 1986 was 23 years ago.
Can we drop it?
-halfblindcubbiegirl
This was just one big
clusterfrakk of a conversation.
I firmly believe that any man's finest hour, the greatest fulfillment of all that he holds dear, is that moment when he has worked his heart out in a good cause and lies exhausted on the field of battle - victorious. (Vince Lombardi)
Dude, for serious? 1986 was 23 years ago.
Can we drop it?
-halfblindcubbiegirl
Youre right
my point was the Bears have receiving threats as well. He was mentioning Cutlers 3 threats in Denver, Marshall, Royal and Scheffler. Not all of which are “wide receivers.” I just think with the other options we have who can “catch” the ball if we added one more reciever to the mix Id take our offense over the Denver one any day.
"Nobody who ever gave his best regretted it. "---George S. Halas
by Halas is God!!!!! on Apr 3, 2009 2:16 PM CDT up reply actions
I'd take ours now,
But if Cutler had stayed there, and they hadn’t sent 43 RBs to the IR, I’d take their’s any day over ours.
I firmly believe that any man's finest hour, the greatest fulfillment of all that he holds dear, is that moment when he has worked his heart out in a good cause and lies exhausted on the field of battle - victorious. (Vince Lombardi)
Dude, for serious? 1986 was 23 years ago.
Can we drop it?
-halfblindcubbiegirl
Could do without Marshall
I think ours has potential – Royal is more polished than Hester, but he wouldn’t be that much better without Marshall opening things up for him. And Marshall is a franchise type player, but Lord, he’s an idiot. I can do without his type on my team. Hopefully Olsen can start reaching some of his potential and be a Scheffler for us. But still – ours has a lot more potential than production, and it’s certainly the opposite that’s true for them.
No, receiving corps....coooooorps
I called Marshall, Royal and Scheffler their receiving corps. There’s a difference between a receiving corps and a receiving threat. Marshall and Royal are the threats that open the field for Scheffler. Sheesh.
Apples and Oranges
anyone who can catch the ball is an eligible receiver. Oye Vey
"Nobody who ever gave his best regretted it. "---George S. Halas
by Halas is God!!!!! on Apr 3, 2009 2:35 PM CDT up reply actions
Seriously
We’re going to throw for 4,500 yards to Clark, Forte, and Olsen? What the hell is your point?
Scheffler
bettrer than olsen, clark,. do you smoke crack? id rather have kellen davis if you talking bout weapons at the TE position…..Scheffler is more of a blocking TE anyway.
Youre Kidding right
I think everyone in the league knows who Forte is after last season. Royal, asside from a few BIG games didnt do all that much. And Id take Olsen over Scheffler any day.
"Nobody who ever gave his best regretted it. "---George S. Halas
by Halas is God!!!!! on Apr 3, 2009 2:03 PM CDT up reply actions
this blog, seems more democratic, unlike the bill’s blog, where if you speak out against the team’s moves, the overseer quickly reacts by accusing you of blasphemy and divisive comments. blah blah blah! well, the bears should gave up a lot to acquire cutler, but it is a bold and necessary move. the franchise was in dire need of an effective leader at the most important position in the nfl. well, they got who i think will be a great quarterback. but in repsonse to your comment about wr’s, the fact is that chicago still lacks a bona fide wr. hey, torry holt is up there in age, but he can possible have a great year if you sign him to a one year contract. burress just got cut. otherwise, i would look in the draft to improve your wr position.
Well
we have one of those overseers too. Fortunately for us, nobody gives a damn about what he says and he has no authority.
Over at BCB?
I firmly believe that any man's finest hour, the greatest fulfillment of all that he holds dear, is that moment when he has worked his heart out in a good cause and lies exhausted on the field of battle - victorious. (Vince Lombardi)
Dude, for serious? 1986 was 23 years ago.
Can we drop it?
-halfblindcubbiegirl
i've been on bcb for a year now
and i’ve had no problems being an “overseer”. As long as you’re not an ass you’re fine.
The shortest distance between two points is under construction.
by halfblindcubbiegirl on Apr 3, 2009 4:06 PM CDT up reply actions
as long as you don't disagree too much
you are fine.
So inconsistent
that he threw for over 62%?
"I'm not so mean. I wouldn't ever go out to hurt anybody deliberately - unless it was, you know, important, like a league game or something." - Dick Butkus
Are we
crowning him already? Cause if you wanna crown him, crown him. Lol, sorry But yeah the stats dont really lie. Look at his amazing completion % and most defenses knew the pass was coming cause they had no run game.
"Nobody who ever gave his best regretted it. "---George S. Halas
by Halas is God!!!!! on Apr 3, 2009 1:25 PM CDT reply actions
No running game?
They had alot of injuries yes but look at the stats there yards per carry better the ours and also had more total rushing yards on the year!
Just remember this recent Quote from Lovie
“Chad Hutchenson is our Quarterback.” That alone tells you more than anyone needs to know about our QB history.
"Nobody who ever gave his best regretted it. "---George S. Halas
by Halas is God!!!!! on Apr 3, 2009 1:32 PM CDT reply actions
GOD
THE DREADED KORDELL STEWART, HATED THAT GUY…. other than kramer rex and orton were probally the best we had since jimmy mac….
"" Jay Cutler is our quaterback" haha
Kramer was the only Pro Bowler
since JMc.
I firmly believe that any man's finest hour, the greatest fulfillment of all that he holds dear, is that moment when he has worked his heart out in a good cause and lies exhausted on the field of battle - victorious. (Vince Lombardi)
Dude, for serious? 1986 was 23 years ago.
Can we drop it?
-halfblindcubbiegirl
Wow.
1) I have no idea why I had that in my head.
2) He should have gone for the 1995 season.
3) I’m using the rest of my mulligans for the rest of the year. (This Cutler business must have me out of focus)
Thanks for the reality check.
I firmly believe that any man's finest hour, the greatest fulfillment of all that he holds dear, is that moment when he has worked his heart out in a good cause and lies exhausted on the field of battle - victorious. (Vince Lombardi)
Dude, for serious? 1986 was 23 years ago.
Can we drop it?
-halfblindcubbiegirl
He had a great year
but it’s hard to get more votes than Favre, Aikman, Steve Young, and Warren Moon. They were the QBs that year.
When you're giddy
AND its friday, you’re allowed to be out of focus. In fact, I’d be more worried about you if you WEREN’T out of focus.
The shortest distance between two points is under construction.
by halfblindcubbiegirl on Apr 3, 2009 2:53 PM CDT up reply actions
Hub Arkush reporting now that...
The deal looked like it was gonna be 1st round 1009, 3rd round 2009 and Orton, for Cutler.
Then, mid-day yesterday… Washington stepped and increased the pot, that’s when Angelo immediately put his foot on the throttle and threw in the 2010 1st round pick. Done.
"You win because of the quarterback. We have to get that position stabilized. We're fixated on that." -- Jerry Angelo (12.30.2008)
Jerry Angelo trades for Jay Cutler! (4.2.2009)
.
Let Cutler...
play and start some games before we crown them.
It seems we crown and decrown QBs before they even play. I hope that doesn’t happen with Cutler if he has a rocky start.
And Chicago
Went 9 – 7 in 1995 with that incredible passing season.
I’m glad we gave up two 1st rounders, a third rounder, and Kyle Orton for no significant improvement.
Insert clever and witty remark slash pun here!
UMD 8/04 - 5/08: Go Terps!
End of the Dark Ages?
Courtesy of Smells Like Mascot
"You win because of the quarterback. We have to get that position stabilized. We're fixated on that." -- Jerry Angelo (12.30.2008)
Jerry Angelo trades for Jay Cutler! (4.2.2009)
.
by SackMan on Apr 3, 2009 2:45 PM CDT reply actions 13 recs
Lmao.
Another I wish I could wreck twice.
I firmly believe that any man's finest hour, the greatest fulfillment of all that he holds dear, is that moment when he has worked his heart out in a good cause and lies exhausted on the field of battle - victorious. (Vince Lombardi)
Dude, for serious? 1986 was 23 years ago.
Can we drop it?
-halfblindcubbiegirl
make that 3 wrecks
:-)
The shortest distance between two points is under construction.
by halfblindcubbiegirl on Apr 3, 2009 2:52 PM CDT up reply actions
also
i totally stole this and plastered it on my facebook. thanks, man.
The shortest distance between two points is under construction.
by halfblindcubbiegirl on Apr 3, 2009 3:11 PM CDT up reply actions
rec um up
"Nobody who ever gave his best regretted it. "---George S. Halas
by Halas is God!!!!! on Apr 3, 2009 2:57 PM CDT up reply actions
uhhh
nay?
Think With Your Dipstick Jimmy!
by ifuwannacrownem on Apr 4, 2009 3:50 PM CDT up reply actions
Kramer was better than Mac
Sorry, but to me its true. McMahon was a great leader, and perfect for that team. But he was terribly inaccurate. He gets a lot of credit for handing the ball to Walter and watching the D score.
So I put Kramer at 1 from your list. And yeah, I think Cutler will probably wind up being better than him based on what we’ve seen so far.
And for the people who keep talking about Cutler’s receiving corps, remind me, where was Eddie Royal drafted last year? The second round. We still could get a guy like that this year, and I’ll bet having a QB like Cutler is part of what made him look so great in the first place. Can we get a Marshall? Not so much. But Torry Holt (please, PLEASE sign him Angelo), Hester, a 2d round pick, and Bennett (Cutler’s old target at Vanderbilt) will get the job done.
Look
Jim McMahon set 56 NCAA passing records. He’s statistically the greatest QB in college football history. He took those same passing skills to Chicago. The 85 Bears led the league in scoring. Watch highlights from game three that year, the Minnesota Miracle, when Mac came off the bench in the middle of the third quarter and three two TD’s on his first two passses, and another one on the Bear’s third possession. Three TD’s in five minutes to pull out victory from the jaws of defeat.
Terribly inaccurate? That’s hysterical.
Damn, my +1 was meant to go here
"You win because of the quarterback. We have to get that position stabilized. We're fixated on that." -- Jerry Angelo (12.30.2008)
Jerry Angelo trades for Jay Cutler! (4.2.2009)
.
eric kramer was a journey man
mcmahon would have been a star without the injuries
McMahon was a star... with the injuries.
Jerry Vainisi used to have this grading system. And I quote this right out of the book Papa Bear.
“If he [Jimmy Mac] was hurt and on the sidelines, and could play, the team played to a C level. The players figured he would comi and save the game. If he was hurt and not dressed, we played to a B level. The players knew they had to do it themsleves. If he was hale and hearty, we were A. No way we could lose.”
"You win because of the quarterback. We have to get that position stabilized. We're fixated on that." -- Jerry Angelo (12.30.2008)
Jerry Angelo trades for Jay Cutler! (4.2.2009)
.
As a general reply re McMahon/Kramer
Look at Mac’s stat line from 1985 — the year the “Bears led the league in scoring.”
178 completions, 313 attempts, 56.9%, for 2392 yards, 15 TDs, 11 Ints.
You know who compares favorably to those stats? Orton last year. Only Orton was better.
272 completions, 465 attempts, 58.5%, for 2972 yards, 18 TDs, 12 Ints.
Orton — who we just dumped — had a slightly higher completion percentage, significantly more passing yards, 3 more TDs, only one Int. Now look at Kramer in 95:
315 completions, 522 attempts, 60.3%, for 3838 yards, 29 TDs, 10 Int.
With one LESS interception, he almost doubled McMahon’s TDs, and threw for 1,500 more yards.
I love McMahon. He was great for what that team was. But it was a running team with the greatest defense that ever was. It wasn’t a passing team, and McMahon wasn’t a great passing QB.
by Orval Overall on Apr 4, 2009 10:41 AM CDT up reply actions
Orval
Stats only tell PART of the story. Leadership is HUGE. As well as this . . . BIG PLAYS!!!! Like the game in Minnesota which turned their season around. Three TD’s in five minutes to put the Bears at 3-0 instead of 2-1. There would have been no “almost undefeated Bears” that year if they started out 2-1 instead of 3-0.
How many times did we see Orton miss on a wide open Hester downfield? See, saying that Orton had a “slighly higher completition percentage” means NOTHING to me. The essence of great QB play is this; can your QB hit on enough big plays in the passing game to lead your team to victory?
That’s the key and please don’t compare Orton to McMahon in that catagory.
The Bears had Payton. What did they win? Nothing
The Bears had Buddy’s defense. What did they win? Nothing
Only when McMahon came into the picture did they win. Period. Even Mike Ditka said this much.
I love Walter Payton. To me, he was the greatest all-around player in the NFL. Nobody is a bigger Buddy Ryan fan than me. I moved from Chicago to Phoenix in 1994 when Buddy became the HC of the Cardinals.
Tha said, McMahon and his leadership/passing skills were the difference between the Bears having a great running game and defense (and not winning anything) to the Bears dominating the league.
Stats only mean so much. Example? Willie Gault. Look at his TD totals:
1983 – 8
1984 – 6
1985 – 1
1986 – 5
1987 – 7
He averaged almost 6 TD’s a season except for 1985, when he only scored one TD (as a WR, he scored one on a kick return).
Does that mean he was crappy in 1985. I seriously doubt it.
Please, Orval. As I stated, McMahon was the greatest passer in college football history. Do you think he forgot how to do that once he got to the NFL?
All's you need to look at
is the ’84 NFC Championship game against the 49ers. With an injured Jim McMahon on the bench the Bears were shut out 23-0.
The next year, in 1985, those two (almost) exact same teams, on the same field and this time the Bears win 26-10. The difference. McMahon played in 1985.
Without him they score zip. With him, 26 points.
And by the way, if McMahon had played for a warm weather passing team (Miami, SF, SD) he’d have his name in NFL record books like he did in college.
McMahon played for one of the most conservative coaches ever in the NFL.
When you say that McMahon wasn’t a great passing QB you really are showing your ignorance on the subject at hand.
Now if you define “great passing QB” with numbers like Cutler put up last year in Denver, then you’re right. McMahon never put up those numbers. Why? Because he didn’’t play for Mike Shanahan, who wanted to throw the ball downfield. He played for Ditka, who wanted to run on every play.
You can’t say that McMahon wasn’t a great passing QB because he didn’t put up big passing numbers. He wasn’t ALLOWED to throw the ball often enough to do so.
If McMahon wasn't a great QB, why did the Bears in the 80's win just 1 SB?
Whenever McMahon got hurt the offense collapsed as defenses keyed on the running game. A healthy McMahon would have meant a Bears dynasty in the 80’s.
because they didnt have a second, decent QB on the roster
If they had a guy with Kyle Orton’s ability backing up McMahon, they could have won in 86. Instead they had Tomczack, who couldn’t get it done.
by Orval Overall on Apr 4, 2009 2:40 PM CDT up reply actions
You know who else was good in college?
Cade McClown and Rick Mirer. So what? Matt Leinart was great in college, does that make him a great pro QB? How about Joey Harrington? A total stud in college, not so much in the pros.
I’m not saying McMahon was bad like those guys. He was a very good QB. But people mythologize him like he was 10 feet tall and could throw the ball 100 yards downfield or something just bc they won the Super Bowl. He was an above average QB on a great team, not a great QB on an above average team.
The Minnesota game was great, I’ll grant you that. But 15 TDs was the most he ever threw in a season, and most years was closer to 10. How can you say he was a terrific QB?
by Orval Overall on Apr 4, 2009 12:39 PM CDT up reply actions
And
If you want to talk about single game performances, I could just as easily show you the bad to match the good. Against Minnesota he had the best game of the year in 85, single-handedly won it for them.
He was great the following week too, against Washington.
And then his QB ratings in the Bears next several games (all of them wins): 77.1, 62.0, 63.6, 82.9, 75.2, 68.2, 68.6, 65.3. And I’m leaving out the Miami game where he only came off the bench for part of it and posted even worse numbers).
When the Bears beat the Cowboys 44-0 that year, McMahon was in blue jeans on the sideline. That team could win with him, obviously. But it could also win without him.
by Orval Overall on Apr 4, 2009 12:52 PM CDT up reply actions
And
He’s the first to admit he’s had bad plays/games. I’m not saying he was God.
Now, as to them winning (and often big) while he was on the sidelines? Yes. However, let’s look closer. Football, as well as all sports are as much mental as physical. If a team really believes that they can win, they usually find a way to do so. Conversely, if they don’t have that confidence, they usually find a way to lose.
Jim McMahon GAVE that team the confidence to win. Period! They knew, with him, they could score and probably win. That game in Minnesota gave them the confidence that they were special that year, at least according to players like Mike Singletary.
When Mcmahon was out, the Bears were good enough on both sides of the ball that they were still able to dominate. But (and this is KEY) they knew that McMahon was coming back. And they knew, in BIG games against great opponents (see the NFC Championship game in ’84 against the Niners) that they probably needed more than the back-up QB. And they were right.
They had a three game stretch that year were they beat Detroit 24-3, Dallas 44-0 and Atlanta 36-0 WITHOUT McMahon. They outscored two crappy teams and one good team 104-3 with McMahon on the bench. These games were in week 10,11 and 12.
They were on a roll by midseason at that point. Their confidence level was sky high. Walter and the defense carried them in those games.
Why was their confidence “sky-high.” Because when McMahon arrived in 1982, the Bears FINALLY, after a long, long time had a real QB who was a great passer.
Their confidence was “sky high” cause of games like the Minnesota game. They knew, with McMahon in the huddle, that they were never out of a game. McMahon authored one of the greatest comebacks in college football history (the 1980 Holiday Bowl).
That’s who Jim McMahon was.
Wait.
You’re saying the fact that they beat 3 teams 104-3 without McMahon playing was because of McMahon?
What, was he like a comic book superhero or something? Controlled their minds from the sideline or something?
by Orval Overall on Apr 4, 2009 1:22 PM CDT up reply actions
Now you're being ignorant. Really.
Try to follow. OK. I’ll go slowwwwwwww. What’s the problem with the Bears under Lovie Smith (and before)? Little (if any) confidence in the QB position. Right?
I’m saying that, almost as soon as Jim McMahon arrived in Chicago, he gave everybody (teammates, coaches, fans) confidence in his ability at that position.
McMahon played in the first nine games in 1985 (he started eight and of course came off the bench in week three to rescue the Bears against the Vikings) and led the Bears to a 9-0 record.
I don’t know if you were alive then or what, but by the time they were on a roll, to say the least. They were the talk of the country, not just the NFL.
McMahon led them there whether you like it or not. So yeah, by that time, they had so much CONFIDENCE that could win some games mainly with just their dominating defense and with Fuller handing off to Payton.
However, if you honestly think that Steve Fuller could have led them through the playoffs and the SB then you need serious help.
No less an authority than Don Shula said that Jim McMahon played one of the great games at QB in SB XX.
Try to follow. The greatness of Jim McMahon was a BIG factor in the Bears going 9-0 (and of course, Steve Fuller put up three FG’s in 2 1/2 quarters in Minnesota. McMahon put up three TD"s in five minutes. Without McMahon they NEVER even get to 3-0).
By then, nobody was going to stop them.
He, as the QB, LED them there.
Look
You “twist” things around. Stay on topic, please. I didn’t say McMahon was good in college. I said he’s the greatest passer in NCAA DIV 1 football.
Now, let’s go back to your post. Are you saying that Cade McClown and Rick Mirer were the greatest passers in college football history? Didn’t think so.
My comment about McMahon and his 56 records was basically just a starting point: I think anyone would agree that if some sets more passing records than anyone else in the history of college football that it would be a fair assessment to say that he knows how to throw a fottball!
Stay on message!
Listen. Don’t tell me how many TD passes he threw. It’s meaningless. Sometimes guys catch a long ball and are tackled at the one yard line. It then becomes a one yard, RUSHING TD, instead of a long, passing TD.
Willie Gault basically averaged 6-7 TD’s with the Bears, yet only had one in 1985. They threw pretty much the same number of passes in ’85 as in those other years. Maybe in 1985 he got tackled 5 or 6 times inside the five yard line instead of running it in. Maybe. Who cares.
Besides, when you say that he only threw 15 TD’s, are you taking into account that he misssed half of 84, and I think 5 games in 1985?
Factor that in when you say that the most TD’s he threw was 15. the Bears, as you know, were not a passing team. They were a running team. However, McMahon had the ability to throw all day long and make big plays while doing so. HE WASN"T ALLOWED TO DO IT! Big difference.
do you think
they would have been a running team if Mac was a better QB? That Peyton Manning on that team would have had 15 TDs and 11 picks? No, don’t think so. They were a running team because they had Walter and a great line, and also because their QB wasn’t good enough to carry the offense.
by Orval Overall on Apr 4, 2009 1:16 PM CDT up reply actions
Are you kidding?
Really. Is this a joke? Are you serious? They just drafted the greatest passer in college football history! Are you paying attention!!!! Please.
And they put the greatest passer in college football history on a team with the greatest runner in the NFL (statistically at that time) with one of the most conservative coaches ever in the game. And to be fair to Ditka, when you have a great defense and the incomparable Walter Payton, why NOT be conservative. Especially in cold weather Chicago.
What were you expecting, for the Bears to turn into the Miami Dolphins of the North?
When you have a great defense and a GREAT RB, you use those two things to win games. However, they never WON IT ALL (or even came close) with just those two things. They needed the “missing ingredient.”
Jim McMahon basically had a photographic memory when it came to reading defenses. He watched very little film (cause he didn’t need to). This upset Ditka cause in Dallas, Staubach watched a lot of film. McMahon didn’t neeed to. First off, he didn’t like the “vantage point.” He really didn’t like watching coaches film from an overhead angle cause that viewpoint is totally different from his (field level).
But he didn’t need much film. When he got to the line, he read defenses (both pre-snap and after the snap) as well as any QB who’s ever played the game.
He was great at reading the defense and knowing just where to go with the ball, all the while, as he operated Ditka’s CONSERVATIVE, ball control offense.
And in making big plays in the passing game. And the operative word here is QUALITY, not quantity. It’s not how many passes you throw, it’s how successful you are WHEN you throw. And not in “completition percentage points.” In making a BIG play (long gain or TD) when you catch the defense in a mistake or somewhat out of position. QUALITY! Not Quantity.
Please reread the above paragraph again until it sinks in.
Look, you just don’t get it. You really don’t. You are completely missing the fact that Iron Mike was as conservative as they come. Much like Bill Parcells.
Look, in 1984 the Niners won it all. In 85 the Bears and in 86 the Giants. What’s the difference there? You had three great QB’s (Montana, McMahon and Simms). The difference? Montana played in warm weatther for Bill walsh, an offensive GENIUS who’s WCO system changed the game of Pro-Football. Walsh’s system was designed to move the ball and score points in the passing game. Bill walsh was a QB’s DREAM!
McMahon and Simms? They played in cold weather cities for two of the most conservative, ball control, Neanderthal HC’s in the history of the game.
Try to think through things and apply some logic here. It would REALLY help out!
The last word
is yours my friend. I can’t read all of this, and won’t try to, so I can’t respond either.
by Orval Overall on Apr 4, 2009 1:46 PM CDT up reply actions
No problem
You don’t know what you’re talking about. But leave with this.
You know who Mike Ditka is, don’t you? Don’t listen to GeoMak, listen to Iron Mike: “Without Jim McMahon, we don’t win the Super Bowl!”
Mike Ditka
In his book, “In life, first you Kick Ass” on page 29: “Now the thing about McMahon . . . he’d drive you crazy with audibles . But he could read a defense, he was a MASTER at seeing the field, and he could sense the blitz.”
You’re an expert on Kramer and McNown and everybody else. Ever hear any of those guys referred to as “a master at seeing the field?”
Don’t feel bad. Neither have I.
BTW: The reference to driving Ditka crazy with audibles? That refers to McMahon changing ANOTHER running play (or screen pass) into a passing play. McMahon should have gotten paid extra for all the “coaching he had to do.”
Page 51
“Now the thing about McMahon is he has the uncanny ability to recognize a blitz just by reading the defense. He could look at a safety and know what was coming just from the safety’s alignment, just from his eyes, just from his attitude and body language.”
+1
He didn’t always throw a spiral… sometimes his passes looked like Butt-Head’s kicks… but they were right on the money.
"You win because of the quarterback. We have to get that position stabilized. We're fixated on that." -- Jerry Angelo (12.30.2008)
Jerry Angelo trades for Jay Cutler! (4.2.2009)
.
Now... if I'm the Bears, this is what I do.
Invite every WR that may potentially be on the board in the 2nd or 3rd round to Halas Hall for a private workout… and have Cutler throwing the ball to them.
Then say, “Jay… which one do you like the best?”
"You win because of the quarterback. We have to get that position stabilized. We're fixated on that." -- Jerry Angelo (12.30.2008)
Jerry Angelo trades for Jay Cutler! (4.2.2009)
.
by SackMan on Apr 3, 2009 3:47 PM CDT reply actions 1 recs
haha
The shortest distance between two points is under construction.
by halfblindcubbiegirl on Apr 3, 2009 3:48 PM CDT up reply actions
I can envision Cutler
In the draft room w/ Angelo telling him who he likes the most.
"The phone's for you, I think it's the Devil."
unverified internet rumor of the day:
Torry Holt is at Halas Hall right now.
will provide evidence if any becomes available.
Seriously?
Brian McRae's 5 o'clock shadow
by PurpleLineToWrigley on Apr 3, 2009 3:54 PM CDT up reply actions
i am being serious that it is an unconfirmed internet rumor
but i have no idea if it’s true.
I don't beleive it... it's on PFT. And they're on top of everything.
"You win because of the quarterback. We have to get that position stabilized. We're fixated on that." -- Jerry Angelo (12.30.2008)
Jerry Angelo trades for Jay Cutler! (4.2.2009)
.
I meant... "it's not on PFT."
"You win because of the quarterback. We have to get that position stabilized. We're fixated on that." -- Jerry Angelo (12.30.2008)
Jerry Angelo trades for Jay Cutler! (4.2.2009)
.
let me say this again:
an unconfirmed internet rumor
Lmao here.
I firmly believe that any man's finest hour, the greatest fulfillment of all that he holds dear, is that moment when he has worked his heart out in a good cause and lies exhausted on the field of battle - victorious. (Vince Lombardi)
Dude, for serious? 1986 was 23 years ago.
Can we drop it?
-halfblindcubbiegirl
tempchad just started it
The shortest distance between two points is under construction.
by halfblindcubbiegirl on Apr 3, 2009 4:07 PM CDT up reply actions
and here.
I firmly believe that any man's finest hour, the greatest fulfillment of all that he holds dear, is that moment when he has worked his heart out in a good cause and lies exhausted on the field of battle - victorious. (Vince Lombardi)
Dude, for serious? 1986 was 23 years ago.
Can we drop it?
-halfblindcubbiegirl
no, i read it
it was third or fourth hand info which still could all be bs
i totally qualified the statement.
Physically ill
Espn needs to say something positive about the Bears getting Cutler. I’m convinced if any other team landed him, they would be lauding it as the greatest move in the history of the NFL. Rediculous.
"I'm not so mean. I wouldn't ever go out to hurt anybody deliberately - unless it was, you know, important, like a league game or something." - Dick Butkus
ESPN is great at two things, and two things only:
Sports news, sports scores.
Everything else, everything else is atrocious. Their commentary, predictions, statistics, critics, dumbass 6pack of questions… god awful.
If you look at ESPN like that, they’re a pretty good programming network
I don't about everything
I love me some espn radio. the local stuff and van pelt and tirco is fantastic.
the rest of it is a big pile of suck
The shortest distance between two points is under construction.
by halfblindcubbiegirl on Apr 3, 2009 4:33 PM CDT up reply actions
I like Mike and Mike, they're pretty funny
I should’ve clarified. I’m talking more about Around the Horn, Cold Pizza, and Sportscenter than anything.
I know they pretty much suck
but a little recognition would be nice. It’s not everyday the Bears get a franchise QB, more like every 50 years or so.
"I'm not so mean. I wouldn't ever go out to hurt anybody deliberately - unless it was, you know, important, like a league game or something." - Dick Butkus
I like Schlereth BUT
he’s talking like an ass. He’s right about line play. That said, franchise QB’s are much harder to get than linemen. I live in Phoenix. In the last two years (thanks to Russ Grimm) the Cardinals have finally played well on the O-Line. And, there isn’t a Pro-Bowler (let alone a HOF’er) in the whole bunch.
Besides, even if the Bears had five Pro-Bowlers on the line, Schlereth would then say: but you have to have a franchise QB. You can’t win with less than that.
Sometimes, you can’t win with the “experts.”
WOW. I just noticed that....
Cutler completed 616 passes in only 384 attempts. That’s incredible! :) LOL.
"You win because of the quarterback. We have to get that position stabilized. We're fixated on that." -- Jerry Angelo (12.30.2008)
Jerry Angelo trades for Jay Cutler! (4.2.2009)
.
LMAO.
I firmly believe that any man's finest hour, the greatest fulfillment of all that he holds dear, is that moment when he has worked his heart out in a good cause and lies exhausted on the field of battle - victorious. (Vince Lombardi)
Dude, for serious? 1986 was 23 years ago.
Can we drop it?
-halfblindcubbiegirl
Here...
Change the B to a C… and you’re all set.
"You win because of the quarterback. We have to get that position stabilized. We're fixated on that." -- Jerry Angelo (12.30.2008)
Jerry Angelo trades for Jay Cutler! (4.2.2009)
.
Little Jay
They better let little Jay decide who theyre going to draft, and if they plan on extending any contracts, and if theyre making any coaching changes, and essentially any decision they ever make, up to and including if they will be using the restroom…if they dont, little Jay will get angry, he’ll take all his toys and leave to Detroit!!!
Henry Burris.
The man won a CFL title people!!! That’s better than any of the signal-callers the Bears have had since Mac.
As a Broncos Fan.....
I’m heartbroken….HEARTBROKEN……..he was the savior and he skipped out of town the moment things got “weird” Have fun Windy City. Hopefully Lovie will change his style to suit Jay’s needs to fling the ball here and there in an attempt to eat up yards and gain a legacy. Don’t get me wrong, I am a Bears fan now, i’ve always had a thing for your team ever since watching my first football game, the 86 Super Bowl. I…..AM…..HEARTBROKEN………….have fun fellas
Correction..........
The Bears are my SECOND favorite team………..by about a million years, 2 billion miles and 3 lifetimes of distance :)))))
P.S. Ur gonna LOOOVE the interceptions!!
orton is your quarterback
wow that sounds so much better than “our.”
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Community Guidelines
In Association With
Shutdown Corner - NFL - Yahoo! Sports
- Brandon Jacobs tells Gisele Bundchen to ‘shut up’
- Most disliked athlete? America still hasn’t forgiven Michael Vick
- Is Eli a Hall-of-Famer? Not according to Kurt Warner, he isn’t
- Tiquan Underwood, cut on Super Bowl eve, is a Patriot again
- Woman at Giants Super Bowl parade can’t wait to see Mark Sanchez (video)
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
