Jay Cutlers interceptions and the media
I'm so sick of hearing the so called "experts" talking about Jays interceptions. No matter how good the guy plays, even when he doesn't throw any interceptions, they still have to say some of the dumbest things. Last week, I heard someone say, "he almost threw 4 interceptions", but he didn't. Now this week, some idiot on ESPN, I think it was Shaun Springs said, "if Samuels was playing he would of had 3 interceptions", really? Here is a few QBs with more interceptions than Jay right now, but you don't hear too much talk about them... Brett Farve, Peyton Manning, Drew Brees, Eli Manning, Carson Palmer, and Donovan McNabb. Get a clue you so called experts, and if your gonna bash Jay for his interceptions, why not talk about some of the other QBs interception numbers. Anyone else getting tired of the hypocrisy ?
This FanPost was written by a Windy City Gridiron member, and does not necessarily reflect the ideas or opinions of its staff or community.
108 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I know the feeling
i stopped caring no matter how well Jay plays or the Bears play they still want to hate, let them do it.
Jay played flawless yesterday, did he take some chances? Hell yeah he did hes a QUARTERBACK in NATIONAL EFFIN FOOTBALL LEAGUE. When your playing an explosive offense you have to do whatever you can to put up some points and Jay did that.
As far as as the Samuel thing, i highly doubt that first of all 40% of jays picks came in ONE GAME people need to realize that if you take that game out he has 15tds to 6 ints. Jay through once pick against philly last year not sure if it was to samuel but that was with a much mediocre offense to say the least.
Let them hate, you know why? They gotta beleive sooner because all their precious teams coudlnt beat Chicago.
Dallas
Greenbay
Minnesota
Miami
Philly all were supposed to expose the bears and they did they exposed The Best team in the NFC.
Guns dont kill people. Brian Urlacher kills people.
Funny how with the Bears winning
some here prefer to focus on trash some talking heads are saying
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
It’s more about what they’re not saying, that really bothers me
All women are beautiful when the lights are off!
by touchdown bears on Nov 30, 2010 8:26 AM CST reply actions
Read around the web.
There’s a ton being written about those other QB’s interceptions. You’re just not in front of it all the time, because it’s not the main team that you pull for.
With that said, that Samuals comment was absurd. But it doesn’t surprise me coming from a guy that was dressed like Daryl Johnston was.
-------
cheekymonkeyart.com | follow me on facebook and twitter
The What if game is only played to make their point
I say if your are really gonna play What if, then you have to account for the dropped passes from his receivers too.
If you go in the bathroom, turn off the lights, and say "Da Coach" 5 times while facing the mirror... Ditka will appear and slap the wussy right out of you.
by Lester A. Wiltfong Jr. on Nov 30, 2010 10:12 AM CST reply actions
Jay throws a lot of picks...
But an 8-3 record speaks for itself.
dear gar/pax,
trade for carmelo anthony.
thank you
He hasn't thrown alot of picks
this year.
4 out of his 10 picks came in one game.
He has thrown 15 tds to 10 ints. Which means he throws 50% more tds than ints. He’s +5 in the int/td ratio.
+ friggin 5.
People need to check themselves
13. It's a magic number
by suckmyditka on Nov 30, 2010 10:25 AM CST up reply actions
not to be that guy but...
he’s thrown 16 TDs
If you go in the bathroom, turn off the lights, and say "Da Coach" 5 times while facing the mirror... Ditka will appear and slap the wussy right out of you.
by Lester A. Wiltfong Jr. on Nov 30, 2010 10:33 AM CST up reply actions
Totally agree.
I just meant that in his career, he has thrown his fair share of picks. I’m not bashing Jay, I think he is a great QB. I’m just saying, with his arm and confidence, there is always a risk. I was at the game Sunday, and countless times my heart nearly skipped a beat as he threw it to a spot (as he is supposed to) and the receiver barely got there. Especially the Greg Olsen touchdown nearly made me pee my pants.
dear gar/pax,
trade for carmelo anthony.
thank you
New offence too.
I’m really impressed with how things are going right now for this offence.
Five foot three seems to thrive on his misery...
by awfullyquiet on Nov 30, 2010 1:41 PM CST up reply actions
Cutler is a ball3r
He’s hot this year. He had one bad game where he threw 4 picks, but look at Peyton Manning. 4 picks against the Chargers, two of which were returned for TDs. So yeah.
13. It's a magic number
Drew Brees also threw 4 picks with 2 pick sixes agaisnt the browns. At home no less.
Adrian Pedestrian!! Now that's funny Mr. Bayless...
Jay Cutler throws interceptions, it's a fact and it's not likely to change
Not saying he shouldn’t be our starting QB, but it’s like you have such a short memory one great game can wipe out all the interceptions he’s thrown. Now Cutler is a good QB, has the potential to be great, but he’s going to throw interceptions, it’s just the way it goes.
I am a bear of very little brains and big words bother me.
"Jay Cutler throws interceptions, it's a fact and it's not likely to change"
Just like every other QB that has ever played the game. I’ve posted on this several times. QBs throw INTs. It happens and it happens a lot. When he throws more INTs than TDs, then come and talk to me.
in•san•i•ty \in-ˈsa-nə-tē\ noun
1 : The practice of repeating the same action while expecting different results.
by Timothy Hockemeyer on Nov 30, 2010 7:54 PM CST up reply actions
That doesn't happen very often
But if you look at his past, he’s come close. Cutler is a good QB, in the upper half of the league, but you are ignorant to think he’s not turnover prone. Cutler should stay, for a long time hopefully, but if you expect less then 15+ interceptions a season, he isn’t your guy.
I am a bear of very little brains and big words bother me.
Nobody said he wasn't turnover prone.
But you are the ignorant one if you don’t realize that “turnover prone” is among the most useless phrases in all of football lexicon, usually uttered by people who have little to no understanding of the game and an aversion to the over dramatic.
I’m not going to spend a whole lot of time going over all of the HOF QBs who threw for more INTs than Cutler in the first five years of their careers, other than to note that there is but one QB in the hall of fame who had to learn more systems in his first 5 seasons (Dan Fouts) and he threw far more INTs than TDs in his first 5 seasons before Don Coryell showed up and stabilized his system.
What I will say is that Cutler could be a glorified Rex Grossman or the next Brett Favre or John Elway (both of whom threw more INTs than Cutler has in their first 5 seasons and both played in very stable systems) but we will never know until Cutler actually has the opportunity to develop into a system. Pretend in to be able to label a QB without viewing him under conditions that allowed guys like Manning and Brady to be the leaders of their generation is pompous as best.
BTW, Jay has thrown all of 10 INTs this season, and had 2 multiple INT games this season (4 vs WAS and 2 vs MIN). Some other “Turnover Prone” QBs this season?
Philip Rivers has 9 INTs and 2 multi-INT games.
Aaron Rodgers has 9 INTs and 3 multi-INT games.
Peyton Manning has 11 INTS and 3 multi-INT games
Drew Brees has 15 INTs and 4 multi-INT games
Brett Favre has 17 INTs and 5 multi-INT games
Eli Manning has 16 INTs and 6 multi-INT games.
Funny, I don’t read a whole lot of articles about Rivers, Rodgers, Manning and Brees being “turnover prone”.
Here’s another interesting thought. In the last 5 seasons, Cutler has thrown 73 INTs. In the last 5 seasons, Drew Brees has thrown 72 INTs. Do you read many articles about Drews INT problems? And how many systems has Brees learned in those 5 years? 1. Cutler? 3.
Context matters.
in•san•i•ty \in-ˈsa-nə-tē\ noun
1 : The practice of repeating the same action while expecting different results.
by Timothy Hockemeyer on Dec 1, 2010 7:11 AM CST up reply actions
You want context?
Over the past four seasons, Cutler is in the top five for interceptions, averaging a bit over 18 per season. It’s that simple. I know you feel obligated to defend that guy, but guess what, Rivers, Manning, Rodgers and Brees all turn the ball over less then Cutler does. You can list a small trend in a season, I can list a trend that lasts his whole career. So yea, keep listing those guys all you want, but Cutler throws a lot of interceptions, more then average in this league, and while that’s forgivable, it’s only forgivable when he wins something. Want to know why people look over Brees problem, he won a Super Bowl.
Cutler is here to stay, and that’s a good thing, so stop getting so defensive, but like your sig stats, unless something changes with Cutler, you aren’t going to get any different results.
I am a bear of very little brains and big words bother me.
Yeah throws a lot of interceptions, but he’s had to learn how many offenses? Compare other QBs first 5 years in the league and see where Jay is then. He threw a lot last year, due to the fact that Turner sucked at being OC and used the complete idiots guide to calling an NFL offense, and the defenses were obviously reading the same book, so Jay tried to win in spite of Turner.
All women are beautiful when the lights are off!
by touchdown bears on Dec 1, 2010 10:49 AM CST up reply actions
Cutler threw interceptions b/c of Ron Turner's OC abilities?
That’s classic.
-------
cheekymonkeyart.com | follow me on facebook and twitter
Actually, can you name a QB that didn't throw a lot of INTs under Turner?
Yes, I would say that, considering the difference in Cutler and Orton without Turner, that yes, Turners crappy playcalliong had something to do with his QBs INT ratio.
Not that it had everything to do with it, but it certainly was a big factor. Ask Kyle and Jay.
in•san•i•ty \in-ˈsa-nə-tē\ noun
1 : The practice of repeating the same action while expecting different results.
by Timothy Hockemeyer on Dec 1, 2010 6:53 PM CST up reply actions
If the plays not there, throw it away.
-------
cheekymonkeyart.com | follow me on facebook and twitter
Tell that to Manning.
Easy to say from your photoshopped couch, my friend. Funny how many INTs were thrown by even the smartest of QBs.
in•san•i•ty \in-ˈsa-nə-tē\ noun
1 : The practice of repeating the same action while expecting different results.
by Timothy Hockemeyer on Dec 1, 2010 7:24 PM CST up reply actions
Nope, but he's the Colts WR Coach, lol. How's that for Funny??
in•san•i•ty \in-ˈsa-nə-tē\ noun
1 : The practice of repeating the same action while expecting different results.
by Timothy Hockemeyer on Dec 1, 2010 7:26 PM CST up reply actions
Know what else Cutler has?
Exactly zero seasons of more INTs than TDs.
Even in last year’s 26 INT season he didn’t do it.
So what if he throws INTs. Guess what else he throws? Hint, he has 97 of them in his career, which is more than the 73 INTs in his career.
by Steven Schweickert on Dec 1, 2010 12:36 PM CST up reply actions
Yea and so what
It’s very, very rare for a starting QB who is actually half way decent to ever throw more int then TD’s. You know what, I like Cutler, but you little fan boys are just tiring. Sigh, no real use talking about it then.
I am a bear of very little brains and big words bother me.
I'm a Cutler fan-boy?
ME? That’s rich.
If I’m a fanboy, that makes you an extreme Cutler hater.
No. I just feel like Cutler gets way too much heat for a problem that’s blown out of proportion. Do I like 73 INTs? No. Is it by far the worst ever? No.
Again, a third system in five years is not an easy thing to work with.
by Steven Schweickert on Dec 1, 2010 1:54 PM CST up reply actions
Cutler has a history of throwing an above average number of interceptions
It’s a fact, this isn’t about other QB’s, it’s about Cutler. Why am I not allowed to point it out. Am I saying Cutler sucks, no, am I saying we should trade him, no, I’m making a criticism, am I not allowed to do that?
I am a bear of very little brains and big words bother me.
You're totally allowed to point it out.
Just like I’m allowed to point out that for all the harm his INTs do, he also throws TDs. I hope I can do this without immediately being referred to as a fanboy or apologist.
by Steven Schweickert on Dec 1, 2010 3:44 PM CST up reply actions
Smudge, are you just looking at random things
and saying you love them?
by Steven Schweickert on Dec 1, 2010 3:57 PM CST up reply actions
Of course you are.
But Cutler does not exist in a vacuum, so the other QBs are needed to create a point by which to evaluate. Are we not allowed to point out the facts?
in•san•i•ty \in-ˈsa-nə-tē\ noun
1 : The practice of repeating the same action while expecting different results.
by Timothy Hockemeyer on Dec 1, 2010 7:19 PM CST up reply actions
So, if people don't agree with you, they are fanboys.
No legitimate points, rights? Then you are right, I guess there is no reason to talk to you. You just don’t get it. It’s not about proclaiming Cutler is great. It’s about waiting to judge him until you have a stable control to base a determination from.
You seem to be the one displaying “fanboy” tendencies. Making determinations without context and jumping to labels without sufficient data. But seeing the position you are taking, I wonder who your actually a fanboy of (Vick) after watching Cutler have his best (Vick) game as a Bear and showing up the possible league MVP, choosing that point to make rash and frankly (VICK) poorly thought out determinations (Vick) without taking environment into account.
BGN called. They approve of your message. ;)
in•san•i•ty \in-ˈsa-nə-tē\ noun
1 : The practice of repeating the same action while expecting different results.
by Timothy Hockemeyer on Dec 1, 2010 7:08 PM CST up reply actions
No, I call people fanboys who don't like facts
I rarely use the term, and I like Cutler, so why are you upset again?
I am a bear of very little brains and big words bother me.
Did the smile look upsetting?
Your facts are relative, and that point is one that seems to evade your grasp. You are ignoring mitigating factors in those stats, and I find that very “fanboyish” as well as an affront to the facts you claim to like.
in•san•i•ty \in-ˈsa-nə-tē\ noun
1 : The practice of repeating the same action while expecting different results.
by Timothy Hockemeyer on Dec 1, 2010 7:18 PM CST up reply actions
I like facts.
Being I have to work with them every day.
Since I have nothing better to add… What T-Train said, ditto for SJS.
by Steven Schweickert on Dec 1, 2010 7:24 PM CST up reply actions
Facts aren't relative, unless you are a relativist then nothing you or I say ever matters
And this site gets boring fast. An interception is an interception, a touchdown is a touchdown, pretty simple in my mind. To say that Cutler doesn’t throw an above average number of interceptions is like looking at a blue barn and calling it red. I’m making a statement, not saying Cutler is a bad QB because of it, but I sure wouldn’t mind if he cut down a bit. Unless you like them then by all means, they can stay.
I am a bear of very little brains and big words bother me.
Would you say that Brees, either Manning,
Hasselbeck, Warner all throw an above average number of INTs, as well? If you would (and they do) then that challenges the relevance of the statement, does it not?
And you right, facts are not relative…….. if you live in a vacuum. Mitigating factors make any “fact” based on statistics relative. Turning a blind eye to those factors can quickly make you fact foolish.
And please point out where I said Cutler doesn’t throw an above average number of INTs. You cannot, because I never have, nor have I attempted to portray his numbers as average or below. What I have done is shown that guys like Brees, the Mannings, Favre and other top rated QBs are throwing similar numbers of INTs while nobody is talking about how many poor decisions are being made (other than maybe in Eli’s case). Straw Man arguments like this one will never get you anywhere with me.
And now on to the second Straw Man. Where did I say that I was fine with his INT numbers? Again, nowhere. I have stated that I cannot judge his decision making while the system is so volatile. I have stated my opinion on QB performance and it’s relationship to the instability of the systems around that QB. But I have not ever stated I thought the number of INTs being thrown was OK. Stick to what we are discussing instead of creating arguments for me that I don’t believe in.
in•san•i•ty \in-ˈsa-nə-tē\ noun
1 : The practice of repeating the same action while expecting different results.
by Timothy Hockemeyer on Dec 2, 2010 7:41 AM CST up reply actions
It feels like you've said this about context so many times
and never accusatory or bristling with it that I keep hearing Morgan Freeman’s voice going “Yes, yes, you could use statistics in context to be more accurate… How interesting…”
by Steven Schweickert on Dec 2, 2010 9:19 AM CST up reply actions
I can handle being Morgan Freeman......
Much loved, oscar winning, wealthy and successful. I’ve definitely been compared to worse ;)
in•san•i•ty \in-ˈsa-nə-tē\ noun
1 : The practice of repeating the same action while expecting different results.
by Timothy Hockemeyer on Dec 2, 2010 9:55 AM CST up reply actions
Only a fool takes facts at face value
and ignores context
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Dec 2, 2010 7:46 AM CST up reply actions
Context....
How many QBs have learned 3 systems in those 5 years? I know you feel obligated to crap on the guy, but guess what, Cutler Has thrown 1 more INT than Drew Brees in those 5 years, and nobody is talking about Brees INT problems.
Every QB you listed up there has played in the same system for the last 5 years. Can you name one we consider good who hasn’t? Do you think there might be a reason?
As far as defensive goes, I’m the one refusing to make a determination based on poor statistics that are out of context. You, sir, are the one getting all worked up because someone showed you the folly of that determination, which you are making. By the way, Name all the QBs in that top 5 for INTs.
Brett Favre:79
Eli Manning: 78
Jay Cutler: 73
Drew Brees: 72
Ben Roethlisberger: 65 (even with his 6 game suspension)
but let’s continue down the list:
Matt Hasselbeck: 63
Peyton Manning: 62
Philip Rivers:54
Kurt Warner: 50 (while only playing 4 of those years)
Donovan McNabb: 47
I love this stuff. Notice a few things here.
(1) Other than Favre (who has been with 3 teams, but only 2 systems) and Cutler (3 systems) and McNabb (new system this year and it shows with 13 INTs in 11 games which is the most of his career), everyone on this list has played in the same system over the entirety of this sample.
(2) The INT prone Cutler has few INTs than Eli and Brett, and only 1 more than Brees, but you’ll also notice that he has all of 10-11 more than guy who are considered efficient like Hasselbeck and Manning. That comes out to throwing 2 more INTs a year than Peyton Manning.
But wait! How fair is it to compare Jay Cutler’s first 5 years in 3 systems with a grizzled sage like Peyton Manning in his 9th through his 13th seasons in the system. I mean, you would expect a huge difference between the two, would you not?
So how did Manning perform in his first 5 seasons? Why, he threw an astounding 100 INTs in his first 5 years. But of course we all knew that, right? I mean, his turnover problems were constant news in his first 5 seasons, right? The league was harping on it, and Ron Jaworski was writing articles on it and ESP was telling us all about it, right? They didn’t?
Hmmmmmm…………………
in•san•i•ty \in-ˈsa-nə-tē\ noun
1 : The practice of repeating the same action while expecting different results.
by Timothy Hockemeyer on Dec 1, 2010 6:52 PM CST up reply actions
Sigh, no use I suppose
I could use a video montage and a table full of stats and it wouldn’t change your mind. Guess it goes to show how entrenched people can be in their opinions, myself included.
I am a bear of very little brains and big words bother me.
I have yet to form an opinion.
I think that is where I confuse you. I haven’t dismissed Cutler, and I haven’t bought into him. In all honesty, I would be the computer sitting in from of you telling you I have insufficient data to perform this task.
:)
in•san•i•ty \in-ˈsa-nə-tē\ noun
1 : The practice of repeating the same action while expecting different results.
by Timothy Hockemeyer on Dec 1, 2010 7:21 PM CST up reply actions
I suppose that's fair
And I usually take a wait and see approach, but it usually ends after three or four years, and it’s been about that, so just wondering, how long does it take for you to form an opinion?
I am a bear of very little brains and big words bother me.
Depends on the situation.
The one thing I know for certain about QBs is that without a stable system, they are destined to fail. It is a fact that is far to often overlooked with young QBs. Look at the majority of you 1st round success stories vs you 1st round failures.
Many high picks are taken by distressed clubs that are going through change at the administrative level, and a good number of those QBs will fail due to imstability in the coaches offices and the systems implemented. See Alex Smith, Akili Smith and David Carr for three good examples of players who had all of the tools and would have benefited from a tumble in the draft because of this very problem.
Then you look at players like Rivers, Roethlisberger, Manning and Favre and note that all have done very well, though they still had some growing pains (though not as many as the players who fell into unstable situations) and all have been in the same system, or spent the vast majority of their early careers in the same system.
One of the most telling things to me is that the only modern QB I can find in the Hall of Fame or that a consensus would say was a great QB that dealt with multiple system changes early in their career was Dan Fouts, and Fouts was truly terrible his first 6 years (as he dealt with a Chargers Organization in chaos that guided Fouts through four head coaches in his first 6 seasons. It wasn’t til Coryell took over in the middle of Fouts’ 6th season and stabilized the offense for a decade to come that Dan got on track.
Here’s what I’m talking about.
Fouts first 5 years in average per season.
three systems
117 Cmp, 219 Att, 53.5 Cmp%, 7 TDs, 11 INTs, 1351 Yards and a 64.5 QBR
Fouts final 10 years under Coryell.
one system
271 Cmp, 451 Att, 60.1 Cmp%, 22 TDs, 18 INTs, 3538 Yards and an 84.1 QBR (How is Coryell not in the HOF yet?)
I honestly am not a big fan of Mike Martz, but I am honestly afraid of Angelo (or whoever replaces him in the event of his departure) wasting all that was spent on Cutler just to set him up to fail with his 4th different system in 4 years in 2011.
This is a shortened version of the fanpost I am writing later this week on this very subject.
In essence, I’ll have enough data on Cutler when he has spent significant time in a system that not only won’t is stable, but there is little threat of departure from. Remember that Shanahan was on the hot seat for over a year before his departure over the Denver Defense that had repeatedly failed the offense that Cutler was running. Right now, we are trying to judge a QB on his decision making process with a history steeped in instability and ineptitude from his coaching department.
“But he spent three years in Shanahan’s system!” you say?
I say that he spent three year learning a mentality that if he didn’t do something to win the game on every drive, then his defense would lose it for him and watching a coach grasp feebly onto a job he had lost through defensive mismanagement and fail miserably. He then watches a new offensive “genius” come in and try to push him to the side for a backup QB from NE, ending in one of the most costly trades ever (Two first and a 2nd rounder plus a starting QB for a starting QB and a 5th rounder) with Cutler ending up in a city so offensively inept that it’s fans hope he can unseat a 50’s era relic as the greatest QB the town has seen. His new OC is a mistake so nice that Chicago made it twice who managed to ruin his fair share of QBs and whose play-book failed miserably at the college level after failing miserably in Chicago in his first reign of ignorant bliss. Cutler has the worst season of his career and the Douche is Loose. But nobody legitimate wants the job because there are no viable options that believe working under Lovie to be more than a 1 year gig that places a dark blemish on their resume, so Smith has to settle for someone who is already considered damaged goods. Luckily for him, the damaged OC also happens to have a bright mind and a few trick yet up his sleeve.
But is one year enough? I think not. Honestly, I’d like to see Cutler play in this system at least through the end of 2011 before I will feel comfortable making a honest call on him either way. I see trends, some I like and some I don’t. But, honestly, when we got Cutler, I kind of felt like we got a rookie all over again, because I knew that young QBs struggle when they are forced into too much change too early. And I knew that Dan Fouts was the only field general I have ever seen who managed to work a HOF career out of a chaotic beginning.
Will Cutler end up the way of Fouts or Carr? Time will tell, hopefully, because at this point, I cannot.
in•san•i•ty \in-ˈsa-nə-tē\ noun
1 : The practice of repeating the same action while expecting different results.
by Timothy Hockemeyer on Dec 2, 2010 7:15 AM CST up reply actions
And the problem is I could create a video montage of Peyton Manning screwing up, as well.
But it would also have nothing to do with the fact that we have not seen Cutler in a stable system, yet,and thus have insufficient data to say he’s great or that he sucks.
in•san•i•ty \in-ˈsa-nə-tē\ noun
1 : The practice of repeating the same action while expecting different results.
by Timothy Hockemeyer on Dec 1, 2010 7:23 PM CST up reply actions
Don't get me wrong....
I think Peyton is the best QB in the league right now. However, everyone gives him a pass because of the talent around him right now. I thought a great QB makes the talent around him better. Seriously, if Peyton had the talent that Jay has around him; he would be seriously injured or would have thrown at least ten more picks.
Isn't that like saying...
“If Asante Samuels plays, Cutler throws three picks minimum.”
-------
cheekymonkeyart.com | follow me on facebook and twitter
I was thinking that if Dieon Sanders would have played
He would have had 4 picks minimum against Cutler
If you go in the bathroom, turn off the lights, and say "Da Coach" 5 times while facing the mirror... Ditka will appear and slap the wussy right out of you.
by Lester A. Wiltfong Jr. on Dec 1, 2010 4:21 PM CST up reply actions
I was just saying....
until you what if guys decided to post was that Peyton gets a pass even though he has played in the same system for almost his entire career and now has the same kind of talent except for a better O-line that Jay had to put p with last year and most of this year.
Actually, we're not "what if'ing" at all.
Exactly the opposite.
And the Colts practice team have the same talent as our top WRs? Really.
Eventually everyone needs to stop making excuses for Cutler, and allow him to shelter some of the blame for the poor decisions he often makes with the football.
-------
cheekymonkeyart.com | follow me on facebook and twitter
Actually, lol....
The guy so many on here keep clamoring for, Devin Aromashodu is a Colts practice squad wash-out. So, if DA really is the best, most complete receiver on this team, as many here have claimed, then yes, The Colts practice squad members are better than our best receiver, who happens to be a wash-out from that squad.
All kidding aside, of course Cutler shoulders some of the blame, but lets be real. In most of what you read, Cutler shoulders all of the blame. When do people stop sheltering the organization for not providing legitimate receivers, legitimate linemen and a stable offensive system?
I’ll ask you the same question I’ve repeated over and over to others.
Name me one quality modern QB who has had success through 3 different systems in 5 years. In fact, Name me any modern QB who has had success in their early career while sustaining multiple system changes. Just one. That’s all I ask.
in•san•i•ty \in-ˈsa-nə-tē\ noun
1 : The practice of repeating the same action while expecting different results.
by Timothy Hockemeyer on Dec 2, 2010 9:53 AM CST up reply actions
Matt Cassel
Three different systems in three different years.
And QBs shoulder the blame. That’s why they get paid the big bucks, and generally why they wear C’s on their chest. Their big boys, they can take it.
-------
cheekymonkeyart.com | follow me on facebook and twitter
by David Taylor on Dec 2, 2010 11:01 AM CST up reply actions
And by their, I meant they're.
-------
cheekymonkeyart.com | follow me on facebook and twitter
by David Taylor on Dec 2, 2010 11:01 AM CST up reply actions
Cassell is back in the same Patriot system he was in before
Charlie Weis is calling his offense
If you go in the bathroom, turn off the lights, and say "Da Coach" 5 times while facing the mirror... Ditka will appear and slap the wussy right out of you.
by Lester A. Wiltfong Jr. on Dec 2, 2010 12:32 PM CST up reply actions
Was he though?
Cassel came into New England in 2005.
2005 also happened to be… Weis’s first year as Notre Dame Head Whipping Boy Coach.
This also happens to be Weis’ first year in the NFL since then.
by Steven Schweickert on Dec 2, 2010 12:40 PM CST up reply actions
Never mind.
Even given the information I cited, you’re correct about it being the same system.
System was installed by Weis in New England; when McDaniels went to Denver he instituted it there, so McDaniels ran it in New England., and the Chiefs have been using it since Chan Gailey (and now with Weis).
So Weis may not have worked with Cassel before, but it’s still the same system.
by Steven Schweickert on Dec 2, 2010 12:45 PM CST up reply actions
Isn't that being over-technical?
Good quarterbacks don’t typically go through three completely different systems in five years. Why don’t we just throw in “where it rained on the fourth night in October” as a stat. That way we can completely exonerate Jay from all blame.
And I dunno know about the systems exactly… but didn’t Favre do alright in a five year span, under three different teams? Are we going to eliminate players with more than X amount of experience now.
-------
cheekymonkeyart.com | follow me on facebook and twitter
I don't know about it being over-technical or not...
But I’d rather the QB have stability in his earlier “football-formative” years when he can solidify himself and develop instead of frantically running for his life and spending more time studying systems than throwing balls.
As far as Favre, the Vikings OC was his QB coach or OC or whatever for five years in GB, right?
We aren’t necessarily looking to exonerate Jay from blame. What Train is saying, and something I’m starting to buy into myself (if I haven’t completely already), is that we really aren’t sure what we have (as far as good QB or bad QB) because we can’t properly evaluate when he’s on his ass or running for his life or learning a third system. Whether you buy Cassel’s Chiefs system being his third or not, or an established QB like Favre in his third team in five years, that’s more the exception than the rule.
What I’m seeing though, even through the instability and occasionally bad line-and-receiver play is that he’s growing a bit. Instead of winging it and forcing plays, he’s pulling it down and running with it. Stuff like that.
by Steven Schweickert on Dec 2, 2010 2:35 PM CST up reply actions
No doubt.
I don’t disagree with anything you said. And I don’t think Max is saying he’s a bad QB either. All he’s saying is that Cutler throws picks, It’s a fact. We knew it before the trade. It’s happened since the trade. Can he get better, yes. At times this year, it’s shown up. And at other times, he looks like he’s grown.
Maxwell, nor I, am saying Cutler = bad. Or Cutler = good. We’re just stating that it is what it is.
-------
cheekymonkeyart.com | follow me on facebook and twitter
And we aren't arguing he's "good" or "bad" yet either...
And we acknowledge he throws picks…
So what are we arguing about again?
by Steven Schweickert on Dec 2, 2010 2:45 PM CST up reply actions
And I guess I'd be interested
to hear someone give me starting caliber QBs who have started in three separate systems in five years. Succeeded or not. Like I said, and I could be wrong, but I don’t know of too many good starting caliber QB’s that get shipped around to that many different systems in that short of time.
What about Jeff Garcia… from 05-08. Had some success in all three stops (Det, Eagles, TB). Again, not sure about the systems.
-------
cheekymonkeyart.com | follow me on facebook and twitter
Well,
Garcia does have the distinct “Five Teams in Five Years” distinction from 03-08 (SFO including the prior four years, then CLE, DET, PHI, TB, in order).
In that five year span, 9121 yards in 51 games with a 59.76 Comp Percentage with 54 TDs to 34 INTs. I’m not sure how much “success” that is in all that system-bouncing, and he was more or less a backup for the DET/PHI portion of that span. He did have a Pro Bowl appearance in 2007… when he threw for 13 TDs to 4 INTs and 2440 yards.
(In that five year span, an average game was 178.84 yards on about 15-26 passing, with 1.06 TDs to 0.67 INTs)
In his first five years, all in SFO, 16,408 yards in 74 games with a 74-56 TD-INT with a 61.40 Comp Percentage and three Pro Bowl appearances.
(In this five year span, an average game was 221.73 yards on about 20-32 passing, with 1 TD to 0.76 INTs)
(Average game numbers are calculated by hand using PFR’s numbers, sorry…)
Like I said, for two of those seasons he was used as a backup, and aside from that he wasn’t particularly good in his other stops. The 2007 NFC Pro Bowl QBs, if you’re curious, were Favre, Hasselbeck, Romo, and Garcia. His 2,440 yards in 13 games are easily the lowest of any of the QBs, and the next lowest was Roethlisberger in the AFC with 3,154 in 15 games and in the NFC, Hasselbeck with 3,966.
Rambling aside, it looks like in the span in question, he was basically reduced to a game manager to the extreme (as some teams are wont to do with backups). And the Eagles still had a healthy Westbrook to hand the ball off to.
by Steven Schweickert on Dec 2, 2010 3:25 PM CST up reply actions
The question
was name a QB that had some success through three systems in five years. Detroit (got hurt, came back and played well, then struggled down the stretch), Phi (pro bowl, even coming in as a backup), and TB (took his team to the playoffs in first year).
Doesn’t that fit the qualifications that were asked. If not, I’m not really sure what you guys want… I’ve provided three answers so far, and yet you cherry pick points that have nothing to do with the original question.
Like I said… why don’t you just throw in that the QB has to be balding… or that he was born in July?
And again, give me some starting caliber QBs that have been three systems in five years that have had the ability to succeed, but failed. It works both ways.
And once more, the above doesn’t typically happen with good quarterbacks (not that I’m saying Jay isn’t).
-------
cheekymonkeyart.com | follow me on facebook and twitter
I'm not trying to get involved with anything.
I’m just trying to provide responses to what you’ve asked. You brought up Garcia, I gave the stats for his time in SFO and his time bouncing around with five teams in five years. I think we both agree there’s a significant dropoff in stats between “stable” time and “unstable” or “bouncearound” time, and I tried giving a plausible reason.
Lester brought up Weis with Cassel, I thought he might’ve been wrong cause Weis was at Notre Dame, then I recanted that by following the system chain to show it’s the same system. Same with the Favre point, though that’s more of a stretch.
I’m not trying to cherry pick to be a pain in the ass; I’m trying to offer an explanation and a slight challenge to your definition of “success” or why the QB may not meet your qualifications. I don’t think I’m leaving out any numbers or anything and I truly don’t mean to; I’m just trying to look at what you propose.
One thing where I may be wrong is in that five year stretch, there are four games that he didn’t start but played in; I’m trying to isolate those so those numbers aren’t that far off, but changing four numbers out of 51 might not change a whole lot. If I get more work downtime tomorrow I’ll work on that.
Garcia was a good QB. But in CLE he was a starter in 10 games with all of 1731 yards and a 10-9 TD-INT. That led to him being signed as a backup in two places before getting a chance to start in TB, where yes he went to the Pro Bowl and the Playoffs, but just looking at that stat line, you’d have no idea that in the games he played he played at a high enough level to do it, unless a 12-4 TD ratio is that impressive. I wouldn’t call that a success upon jumping into that much “instability” based on numbers, but the fact enough voters thought his first TB season was Pro Bowl-worthy and his team went to the playoffs says otherwise I guess. But define success as a backup in DET and PHI. Cause that, combined with his time in CLE, don’t exactly scream “success” to me.
You’re right. He was a good QB that landed in five separate teams (not sure on systems either). I’m not sure if he was a success or not in those stops, that’s all I’m looking at with this.
by Steven Schweickert on Dec 2, 2010 4:16 PM CST up reply actions
I think our definitions of "success" is where the disconnect lies.
I’m just saying he had some success in all three places, not that he lit the world on fire.
-------
cheekymonkeyart.com | follow me on facebook and twitter
Agree to disagree then?
I mean, if you adjust the per-game figures I gave before by those four games, he still only threw for about 194 yards per game, himself. His TB team had some success, and sure he only threw four picks that season, but the impression I get is that he was basically Orton-under-Turner-in-05’d, and wasn’t asked to be “the man”. And his time in Cleveland equates to about 173 per game.
I dunno, maybe I’m misremembering something that the stats don’t show. Definitely plausible, I can barely remember what I did at work today.
by Steven Schweickert on Dec 2, 2010 8:41 PM CST up reply actions
ok....
And again, give me some starting caliber QBs that have been three systems in five years that have had the ability to succeed, but failed. It works both ways.
This is exactly my point. putting a QB in this situation is taking the ability to succeed away. It’s not that it works both ways, but that it is the same thing. My point isn’t that Jay is good or bad, but that he hasn’t been put in a position to succeed. All of this “bald”/“July” crap is misdirection. I asked a very simple question. You responded with two guys who changed teams, but not systems and another guy who was so successful that he lost those jobs to Joey Harrington, AJ Feeley and Brian Griese.
And once more, the above doesn’t typically happen with good quarterbacks (not that I’m saying Jay isn’t).
I am proposing the exact opposite. That it happens to good QBs all the time, but that situation, in and of itself leads to the failure of these QBs. Of course, it is unprovable. I know this. It is a theory that cannot be proven right or wrong. But I think the evidence points in the direction of the theory. Every HOP QB played in the system for all or the vast majority of their career. And it takes us getting all the waydown the list of “successful” QB to get to Jeff Garcia to find a QB who played in multiple systems in a short timeframe and still performed (arguably) successfully.
in•san•i•ty \in-ˈsa-nə-tē\ noun
1 : The practice of repeating the same action while expecting different results.
by Timothy Hockemeyer on Dec 3, 2010 8:04 AM CST up reply actions
Okay...
So, your asking an invalid question then. No?
You want us to name QBs who have been successful in three separate systems, in a five year span. When you can’t provide starting caliber QBs that have been unsuccessful in the same scenario.
And call the “bald”/“July” stuff misdirection all you want, it’s easy to argue stuff, when you try and cherry pick your stats to cater to the argument.
-------
cheekymonkeyart.com | follow me on facebook and twitter
by David Taylor on Dec 3, 2010 12:49 PM CST up reply actions
What?
So, does the question illustrate the point or not? David Carr, Alex Smith and Akili Smith are all good examples of QBs who, I believe, had all the tools to be successful but were put into positions of chaos by their organizations and failed because of it.
The question is not invalid just because you cannot answer it. The question was VERY simple: Name me one quality modern QB who has had success through 3 different systems in 5 years.
You first two attempts were guys playing in the same system across teams (Cassel and Farve, and Favre made it a point to land in the same system, while McDaniel’s lost Cutler because he was so concerned with having a QB who already knew the system and Haley went out and got Cassel because he wanted a QB who knew the system. Another set of situations that point to the validity of both the question and the argument.)
Your third attempt was a guy who, were we having a different discussion, you would be hard pressed to call successful.
You talk about Cherry picking your stats? You want to pick just games that Garcia did well in and ignore the fact that he performed poorly enough that he was replaced on all three teams. You are saying things like “He performed well but struggled down the stretch” and then tell me I’m cherry picking. I’m looking at the overall performance and the end result. He was replaced by bad QBs in all three stops. You are saying “stop cherry picking and look at how he performed in part of the season.”
You know I love you, Smudgers, but that’s the pot calling the kettle black. Garcia had some good games, but I cannot call a guy successful who losses a race weighted in his favor to a bad QB (DET), then gets replaced by AJ Feeley after the best performance of his life by a pretty well respected coaching staff that has done pretty well for itself as far as QBs go, and then gets demoted from 1st to third string because of his performance by a team that feels that Brian Griese is a better option. That’s not cherry picking. That’s looking at his overall body of work and realizing that three seperate teams felt that three guys that nobody would call successful (Harrington, Feeley and Griese) were better options than Garcia.
in•san•i•ty \in-ˈsa-nə-tē\ noun
1 : The practice of repeating the same action while expecting different results.
by Timothy Hockemeyer on Dec 3, 2010 10:06 PM CST up reply actions
And simple question...
that’s humorous. The question you asked is anything but simple. Your trying to get people find a flat comparison to Jay’s career, when there aren’t any like it. That I know of, anyhow.
-------
cheekymonkeyart.com | follow me on facebook and twitter
Simple question.....
just because the answer is zero doesn’t make the question complex. 0+0=0, see?
Dan Fouts would be the closest thing. He was horrible in his first 5 years under 3 different systems. Then Don Coryell comes in with a new system and stabilizes the whole thing. And Fouts goes on to the HOF. That would be the closest thing to the Cutler situation I can find.
I never asked for exact same. There are tons of QBs who have dealt with multiple system changes over 5 years. Cutler’s level of success, if you want to call it that, woul be the best I have been able to find so far, and I have been pooring over Pro-Football-Focus.com for weeks now trying to research this.
I’m not even close to done (It will probably take me months, if not years) is that I cannot find one QB who went through multiple system changes in their early career and had individual success during that time period. The only QB that had great success after the system was finally stabilized was Dan Fouts.
There are, however, ton’s of QBs who were drafted high and failed after multiple system changes.
But the question, while daunting, is simple. And the answer is that there are none.
in•san•i•ty \in-ˈsa-nə-tē\ noun
1 : The practice of repeating the same action while expecting different results.
by Timothy Hockemeyer on Dec 3, 2010 10:14 PM CST up reply actions
Garcia...
Detroit was same system with same coach as he played with tin SF. Mariucci. His stint with the eagles and with the bucs both ended with him not being brought back.
After being run out of San Fransisco, Garcia first stopped In Cleveland where he failed miserably. He was again run out of town.
He then rejoin Mouch in Det where he was benched in favor of Joey Harrington, because of poor play. He was not resigned.
He joined Philly to back up McNabb, and did a fine job, but the Eagles had so much faith in him that, even though he said he wanted to resign, they didn’t offer, and instead signed AJ Feeley. I’m not sure why, in all honesty. It’s not like Garcia was asking for a bunch of cash.
Garcia moved on to Tampa, where he played decently his first year, even getting a replacement nod to the Pro-Bowl when Brett Favre bowed out. But statistically, it was a less than average year and more a nod to his previous work the year before, I think. The following year he played so poorly that he lost his job to Chicago castoff Brian Griese. And he wasn’t resigned.
He then went to oakland, who released him in september because they thought Bruce Gradkowski was a better option.
I’m not sure that other than grasping for straws, you could call a guy who lost his job to AJ Feeley, Brian Griese and Joey Harrington is someone I would call successful.
The Favre and Cassel calls have already been covered. Same systems, different teams.
in•san•i•ty \in-ˈsa-nə-tē\ noun
1 : The practice of repeating the same action while expecting different results.
by Timothy Hockemeyer on Dec 3, 2010 7:43 AM CST up reply actions
So...
the QBs have to live up to your level of success now, to have had some success in those places. Got ya.
-------
cheekymonkeyart.com | follow me on facebook and twitter
by David Taylor on Dec 3, 2010 12:46 PM CST up reply actions
My level of success?
Seriously? Let’s run an experiment, then. Post Garcia’s statistics, his record and the story of each stop along with a poll of whether members think he is a successful NFL QB.
Because I think you are grasping at straws and cannot admit it. You are trying to prop up a guy who lost his job to Joey Harrington while working for the OC that brought him into the NFL at SF, who lost his job in Philly to AJ Freely and who was benched in favor of Brian Griese after Griese failed in Chicago as a successful QB.
I’m not making some steep unclimbable cliff to success. I’d say playing well enough to keep your job would be considered successful, wouldn’t you? In what world are we fired for our performance and still considered successful?
in•san•i•ty \in-ˈsa-nə-tē\ noun
1 : The practice of repeating the same action while expecting different results.
by Timothy Hockemeyer on Dec 3, 2010 9:44 PM CST up reply actions
And in Detroit.
Garcia got hurt, came back from injury and won the job, played well early, but eventually failed down the stretch. Which is why he was benched, and not resigned.
While you’re looking at the “got benched” aspect to prove your point, he did have some success there early on.
-------
cheekymonkeyart.com | follow me on facebook and twitter
by David Taylor on Dec 3, 2010 12:58 PM CST up reply actions
It's more "Harrington blew, let's see what else we can win with."
Garcia’s games in a DET uni:
10/23/05 vs CLE: 22-34, 210 yards, 0-0 TD/INT, Rush TD.
10/30/05 vs CHI: 23-35, 197 yards, 0-1 TD/INT.
When Garcia came back…
11/24/05 vs ATL (Thanksgiving Day): 14-24, 154, 1-1
12/4/05 vs MIN: 17-35, 126, 0-1
12/11/05 vs GNB: 13-24, 112, 1-0
12/18/05 vs CIN: 13-21, 138, 1-3
I won’t argue that he failed down the stretch, but I’m not even sure what the hell those first two games qualify for; not sure I’d call it a success. Maybe relative success compared to what garbage Harrington put up there.
by Steven Schweickert on Dec 3, 2010 1:21 PM CST up reply actions
Isn't this the part...
where I blame the coaches, lack of quality wideouts and/or line, or the players’ first year in the system. You know, the SOP for Cutler excuses.
-------
cheekymonkeyart.com | follow me on facebook and twitter
Look, we get it.
You want to blame Cutler for bad QB play when, well, he is bad. So do we.
We’re not about filtering everything down for excuses. We’re trying to say “Hey, it’s hard for a guy in a new system with no O-Line to play well,” which really, shouldn’t sound too much of a stretch.
Too often, all we heard last year when he was throwing 26 picks was “He’s bad, he’s a horrible QB, Denver won the trade, wharrrgarble.” If there’s some truth to that, it’ll show up even if he’s been in the same system for three or four years and has the Pats ‘07 O-Line in front of him. But when you have to pick up new plays, have to learn where the receivers will be all over again, have to run for your life on every play, there’ll be the more occasional pick.
The entire point behind T-Train’s apparently immortal question is to find someone who went through this much instability at the quarterback position and was successful doing it. No, you’re probably not going to find the exact scenario; on that, I agree with you. Do people’s definitions of success differ? Uh, yeah, of course it does. In fact, that’s the biggest disagreement we’re all having over Garcia’s late career; is that success or not?
I am willing to concede the whole O-Line thing; there’s plenty we can learn about Jay as a quarterback when pressure’s constantly in his face. I think his awareness and pocket presence have improved quite a bit, and he’s pulling the ball down more and not winging it into a safety’s or CB’s arms. He can’t do anything about those throws that are flat out missed by WRs or tipped by his WRs and caught by DBs or LBs.
If he’s a bad QB, it’ll show regardless of scheme, line play, et cetera. But that’s the thing, we haven’t seen him with full scheme knowledge/weapons and good line play; we’re seeing him in the middle of one season with a notoriously complex offensive system and for the most part unable to be comfortable in the pocket.
Obviously when he makes a bad decision or a bad throw, he deserves blame. But we need to understand why he’s making these errors before we can say he’s a good or bad QB.
by Steven Schweickert on Dec 3, 2010 2:04 PM CST up reply actions
I'm right there with you guys.
I don’t believe Jay to be a bad quarterback. In fact, he’s an extremely talented QB, who has the potential to be great. He throws a ton of picks, but we knew that before he was a Chicago Bear.
And yes, he’s getting better… becoming more aware, not throwing as recklessly, etc, etc. As should all QB’s this far into their careers. Granted Cutler’s has been more of a rocky road than most, because like I said, you typically don’t see QBs with his talent in that situation.
The only reason that I argued, was the question that was imposed. That’s all.
-------
cheekymonkeyart.com | follow me on facebook and twitter
Who's cherry picking?
Garcia was brought into DET by Mouch, who brought him into SF. Why Because Mouch didn’t like Joey Harrington, and Garcia was familiar with Mariucci’s system (not that a QB learning a new system is a hinderance, right. kinda like why both McNugget and Haley wanted Cassel because they were installing a system that he had already played in). Even under those circumstances Garcia failed and lost the position to the guy he was brought in to replace, who happened to suck.
ignoring the circumstances to fit your narration is where the real cherry picking is at, my friend.
in•san•i•ty \in-ˈsa-nə-tē\ noun
1 : The practice of repeating the same action while expecting different results.
by Timothy Hockemeyer on Dec 3, 2010 9:48 PM CST up reply actions
No, it's not overly technical....
It’s the same system. It’s not learning a new system. It’s that simple.
in•san•i•ty \in-ˈsa-nə-tē\ noun
1 : The practice of repeating the same action while expecting different results.
by Timothy Hockemeyer on Dec 3, 2010 7:52 AM CST up reply actions
Matt Cassel has played in the same system, devised by Charlie Weis, his whole career.
And, my friend, it honestly sounds like you’re saying that a QB should be responsible for the indiscretions of Coaches and GMs. Really? ummmm……wow.
in•san•i•ty \in-ˈsa-nə-tē\ noun
1 : The practice of repeating the same action while expecting different results.
by Timothy Hockemeyer on Dec 3, 2010 7:46 AM CST up reply actions
I said that?
methinks not.
-------
cheekymonkeyart.com | follow me on facebook and twitter
by David Taylor on Dec 3, 2010 12:44 PM CST up reply actions
Sounds like it to me....
And QBs shoulder the blame. That’s why they get paid the big bucks, and generally why they wear C’s on their chest. Their big boys, they can take it.
in•san•i•ty \in-ˈsa-nə-tē\ noun
1 : The practice of repeating the same action while expecting different results.
by Timothy Hockemeyer on Dec 3, 2010 9:39 PM CST up reply actions
Come one Primetime only gets 4???
When the world slips you a Jeffrey, stroke a furry wall.
- Aldous Snow
Yes and no...
Let’s be fair. Pretending Manning would have the same success without the tools around him is bogus. He would still be good, but look at how he’s performing now. He’s looking like Cutler circa 2009. Hell, over the past 4 weeks, since the injuries have mounted and he’s had to play with talent that in a lot of ways is closer to that in Chicago and that he is far less familiar and comfortable with, he has 7 TDs to 9 INTs and 3 Multiple INT games. Not very PM like, is it?
in•san•i•ty \in-ˈsa-nə-tē\ noun
1 : The practice of repeating the same action while expecting different results.
by Timothy Hockemeyer on Dec 1, 2010 7:13 PM CST up reply actions
Honestly....
with a better O-line and a number one WR. Jay will probably throw 10 -14 int’s a season. However, he will probably throw 32 – 36 TD’s a year. Jay is playing smart, and with continuity in a offense, the sky is the limit.
Take away the Washington game
and he’s thrown 6 picks in 11 games (okay 10 games since he missed the Carolina game.) Hardly an Int machine this year….he’s gonna make his mistakes, try and force one at times, and yes, a few will get picked. But one here or there is not bad….it’s how he reacts afterwards that is the tale….
They should be talking about the wins
Interceptions can hurt, and we’ve all seen the games where Jay has been burdened by the losses, but not talking about a 4 TD game in good light is ludicrous. What I can’t stand is the nonsense about “near” interceptions. It comes down to luck on whether some get picked and some don’t. There’s a reason why DBs are DBs and not WRs…..bad hands.
Screw these hack analysts/writers.
"He's a great candidate," Ryan said. "If I hadn't made him drop in coverage so often on running backs, he might be the all-time sack leader. They call it zone blitzing nowadays. We called it, 'Richard, pick him up.'" - Buddy Ryan on Richard Dent's HOF chances.
Right on !!!
" Everyone has a plan 'till they get punched in the mouth. " ~
Mike Tyson
by MidWayMonster54 on Nov 30, 2010 11:02 PM CST up reply actions
The difference between an "OMG great throw!" and "near pick" is the perception of the QB
Cutler has a rep for Ints so any close throw, completed or not, was lucky to not be picked. Using a very recent counter-example Vick has 1 pick on the year so his TD throw into triple coverage was “great”. With time and consistency Cutler’s good games won’t be “lucky”. If he keeps playing great and all people can think to talk about is “when’s he going to revert?” then you know they’re truly idiots grasping for something to talk about.
Incidentally I couldn’t have been the only one who saw what Vick’s last throw was heading into and started getting happy. I figured it to be incomplete at worst, probably knocked away, or intercepted. If Url had turned his head he’d have had an exclamation point to put on his case for winning Comeback POY over Vick.
----------
Is my mind a'goin on me or am I watchin you jibber jabber like some sorta jibberty box. Jibber Jabber on! Jibber Jabber on! -- Early Cuyler
That Vick TD
was Vick getting impatient with the short stuff and he tried to chuck it deep… It worked out for him…
If you go in the bathroom, turn off the lights, and say "Da Coach" 5 times while facing the mirror... Ditka will appear and slap the wussy right out of you.
by Lester A. Wiltfong Jr. on Dec 1, 2010 4:22 PM CST up reply actions
It was nice, though.
Give credit where it’s due, that was a awesome throw!
in•san•i•ty \in-ˈsa-nə-tē\ noun
1 : The practice of repeating the same action while expecting different results.
by Timothy Hockemeyer on Dec 1, 2010 7:14 PM CST up reply actions
I thought it was a great play.
He was desperate and put it right on the money where it needed to be. Can’t “hate” on that. I think Urlacher could have easily swatted it down had he even turned his head in the slightest way to his left, but he didn’t.
WILDCARD BITCHES!!! YEEEEHHHAAAAA!!!!!
I am sick of hearing about Rivers!!!
If you watch any of the games this year, Rivers has ample time to throw the ball to big tall WR’s who can go up and catch the ball. I do not know how many times announcers and myself have seen Rivers getting bailed out by his recievers, especially Gates. Rivers has played in the same system his entire career and plays in a weak division.
Still has to make the passes though.
And for the record, I can’t stand the guy.
-------
cheekymonkeyart.com | follow me on facebook and twitter
Weak division, but some of the best secondary talent in the league....
The Raiders, Cheifs and Broncos have some of the best talent in their secondaries in the league, to be fair.
in•san•i•ty \in-ˈsa-nə-tē\ noun
1 : The practice of repeating the same action while expecting different results.
by Timothy Hockemeyer on Dec 1, 2010 7:15 PM CST up reply actions

by 





















