Anyone else enjoy seeing the real Jay Cutler? (1 Viewer)

[Tau837]

Every year, the Shark Pool is DELUGED with threads following Week One that amount to:A) Look at how smart I was! B) Look at how dumb you were!C) All of the aboveAnd then half of those very same threads look RIDICULOUS within a few weeks and people either slink away with their tails between their legs or have to main up and eat crow.One week does not a season make. If your team looks unbeatable, it's probably not. If your team looks like it's headed for the basement, you're probably still a contender.

This is true, but IMO it is also true that the "real" Jay Cutler was evident in last night's game. He will make some plays downfield and he will force some balls that he shouldn't. That's him in a nutshell. It was inevitable that his overall play would suffer without Shanahan and with a poorer supporting cast on offense (OL and WRs). I'm sure he won't throw 4 interceptions each week, but he will likely lead the league or be very close to it.People in here seem to be largely excusing Cutler's play last night by blaming the WRs and citing that it was a tough road game. While there is some merit to these arguments, it was more about Cutler IMO. Sure, a couple of his interceptions might have been the fault of his receivers... but there were at least 3 other throws that should have been intercepted that the defenders dropped. Even on the TD to Hester, Cutler threw it into double coverage and was fortunate that Collins fell asleep on the play.It's only one game, so maybe it will only get better from here... but Cutler is the one who has to perform better. It's not like the team didn't know it was going with an inexperienced receiving group... it shouldn't come as a shock to anyone, and that's not changing anytime soon.One of the excuses made for Cutler in Denver had to do with its poor defense. And I'm not saying that was wrong, because it was a poor defense. But now that he has a good defense, the onus is on Cutler to change his style of play. It is no longer appropriate for him to be reckless with the ball, taking chances to make plays. The opportunity was there last night for the Bears to get a big division win on the road and they blew it, mostly because of Cutler. That's the bottom line.

 

[Touchdown Syndrome]

Every year, the Shark Pool is DELUGED with threads following Week One that amount to:A) Look at how smart I was! B) Look at how dumb you were!C) All of the aboveAnd then half of those very same threads look RIDICULOUS within a few weeks and people either slink away with their tails between their legs or have to main up and eat crow.One week does not a season make. If your team looks unbeatable, it's probably not. If your team looks like it's headed for the basement, you're probably still a contender.

Many members of the "Shark" Pool seem to allergic to logic and reason (ie: someone referencing Cutler's college won/loss record....at effing Vanderbilt)Of course, there's also a ton of actual intelligent opinions and insight to be found, which makes it pretty much my top fantasy info resource. Every season you just have to sift through the absurd questions and the typical overreactions.

 

[Masked Vigilante]

All of a sudden its looking like Matt Leinart has the best future from this QB class.

 

[stevegamer]

I blame Cutler for two of the picks. The last one, Knox wasn't open, and was falling down.

It was a pass to a spot. The ball was thrown by the time he fell down. This makes no sense.

My take on it is that you shouldn't throw the ball to a spot if your receiver is that covered. I understand the difference in opinions.Cutler threw plenty of balls into the hands & chests of players on both teams that got dropped. The biggest negative I found in total with Chicago is that they fell in love with the shiny new toy, and forgot their best player on offense. I'm not sure how much that was Cutler audibilizing to passes or simply tossing the script - but it wasn't due to game situation.

 

[Ghost Rider]

The biggest negative I found in total with Chicago is that they fell in love with the shiny new toy, and forgot their best player on offense.

I assume you are talking about Matt Forte, right? The same Matt Forte who carried the ball 25 times for 55 yards? 25 carries is forgetting about him?

 

[SeniorVBDStudent]

Cutler>>>>>>OrtonBroncos O outside of Cutler>>>>>>>>Bears O outside of Orton

Second part is incorrect due to Matt Forte. Clearly Marshall, Royal, Stokely, etc. are better than the DREK at WR in Chicago, but Forte is an elite talent and was under-utilized last night (more screens and dumpoff's please).

 

[Manster]

Every year, the Shark Pool is DELUGED with threads following Week One that amount to:A) Look at how smart I was! B) Look at how dumb you were!C) All of the aboveAnd then half of those very same threads look RIDICULOUS within a few weeks and people either slink away with their tails between their legs or have to main up and eat crow.One week does not a season make. If your team looks unbeatable, it's probably not. If your team looks like it's headed for the basement, you're probably still a contender.

the overreaction can be pretty amusing

 

[Sinn Fein]

I blame Cutler for two of the picks. The last one, Knox wasn't open, and was falling down.

It was a pass to a spot. The ball was thrown by the time he fell down. This makes no sense.

My take on it is that you shouldn't throw the ball to a spot if your receiver is that covered. I understand the difference in opinions.Cutler threw plenty of balls into the hands & chests of players on both teams that got dropped. The biggest negative I found in total with Chicago is that they fell in love with the shiny new toy, and forgot their best player on offense. I'm not sure how much that was Cutler audibilizing to passes or simply tossing the script - but it wasn't due to game situation.

That is a great point. It is very similar to the Vikings bringing in Favre. With the type of running game and defense those teams have, the QBs just have to manage the games, and make a few key plays throughout the game. The Vikings had 22 pass plays, the Bears 36 - in a game that was always within one score. That is too many - and lends itself to poor throws.The Bears were a better team with Orton, and the Bronco's were a better team with Cutler, because those QBs fit the style of play for their teams better. Now that they have switched teams, they each have to adapt to a new style. I think Orton, because of his offensive weapons and demeanor, will adapt easier.

 

[Maroney=Sped]

Cutler is usually worse when he's in an away game. Look back at the stats while he was with the Bronco's. He's not consistant, so if you have a decent QB2, use him when Cutler is not at home.

Yeah, definitely only use him when he's playing at Invesco.

 

[Sinn Fein]

Cutler is usually worse when he's in an away game. Look back at the stats while he was with the Bronco's. He's not consistant, so if you have a decent QB2, use him when Cutler is not at home.

Maybe the Bears should do that

 

[stevegamer]

The biggest negative I found in total with Chicago is that they fell in love with the shiny new toy, and forgot their best player on offense.

I assume you are talking about Matt Forte, right? The same Matt Forte who carried the ball 25 times for 55 yards? 25 carries is forgetting about him?

If you saw the game - most of those carries came later in the game. They weren't using the run to set anything up, and looked absolutely horrid on offense early on. They had fallen in love with the shiny new toy early on, and got back to basics later.He was targeted on 1 pass, I think, which was a screen that ended up being picked. He's a good receiver out of the backfield, and using him on a swing pass or two would've forced the Packers to defend that area in ways that would've been better than the awful quick passes to the WR's they were using.

 

[Ghost Rider]

I agree that the running game was not utilized enough in the first half, but they weren't exactly running the ball well at all, either. Their OC has to figure out the right balance of running and what passing plays to call. You don't want to get Cutler in a situation where he is throwing too much, as that is when he tries to do too much and picks happen. Simply put, their offense is a work in progress, and there will be some growing pains. Yesterday was some of those pains.

 

[Banger]

I blame Cutler for two of the picks. The last one, Knox wasn't open, and was falling down.

It was a pass to a spot. The ball was thrown by the time he fell down. This makes no sense.

My take on it is that you shouldn't throw the ball to a spot if your receiver is that covered. I understand the difference in opinions.Cutler threw plenty of balls into the hands & chests of players on both teams that got dropped. The biggest negative I found in total with Chicago is that they fell in love with the shiny new toy, and forgot their best player on offense. I'm not sure how much that was Cutler audibilizing to passes or simply tossing the script - but it wasn't due to game situation.

That is a great point. It is very similar to the Vikings bringing in Favre. With the type of running game and defense those teams have, the QBs just have to manage the games, and make a few key plays throughout the game. The Vikings had 22 pass plays, the Bears 36 - in a game that was always within one score. That is too many - and lends itself to poor throws.The Bears were a better team with Orton, and the Bronco's were a better team with Cutler, because those QBs fit the style of play for their teams better. Now that they have switched teams, they each have to adapt to a new style. I think Orton, because of his offensive weapons and demeanor, will adapt easier.

Vikes def >>> Bears (Vikes were 6th vs. 21st for Bears)Vikes running game >>> Bears (Vikes were 5th vs. 24th for Bears)

The comparison is apples and oranges...The Vikes did need a game manager but the Bears need someone to help win games. It's not like they didn't run the ball last night, they ran 25 times but they were just ineffective.

 

[parrot]

Cutler will get the stats we like in fantasy football.It remains to be seen if he'll become a winner. Check out his win/loss record in college and in the NFL.

So the fact that he drove the field, chewed up 6 mins, on the road to get the lead with 2 mins to go and his defense couldn't hold it means he can't win? Ok.

Boy it must be nice to be Jay Cutler. Guy completes less than 50% of his passes, throws four picks, including a red-zone and a game ender, scores a total of 13 offensive points, and we're still going to blame the defense? Really?

 

[PatytonsGhost]

The biggest negative I found in total with Chicago is that they fell in love with the shiny new toy, and forgot their best player on offense.

I assume you are talking about Matt Forte, right? The same Matt Forte who carried the ball 25 times for 55 yards? 25 carries is forgetting about him?

If you saw the game - most of those carries came later in the game. They weren't using the run to set anything up, and looked absolutely horrid on offense early on. They had fallen in love with the shiny new toy early on, and got back to basics later.He was targeted on 1 pass, I think, which was a screen that ended up being picked. He's a good receiver out of the backfield, and using him on a swing pass or two would've forced the Packers to defend that area in ways that would've been better than the awful quick passes to the WR's they were using.

Turner, Smith and Cutler have all fallen in love with Cutler. They need to stop and remember this is a TEAM game and not just to display Cutlers gun slinging ways. A year ago they would have never allowed Orton to play the way Cutler played last nigth

 

[DrJ]

I would imagine if orton throws 4 picks and loses the game on the 4th, either last year w/the bears or this week, there'd be a rain of fire down on him as the worst qb ever.cutler just gets a bunch of excuses made for him.when are you people going to take his posters down off your bedroom walls?

No, people would write it off because of some ankle or finger injury and suggest that he's still a winner. See Broncos fans all offseason for exhibit A.And for the record, Cutler's career high in Int's still isn't as high as Orton's.

 

[Sinn Fein]

That is a great point. It is very similar to the Vikings bringing in Favre. With the type of running game and defense those teams have, the QBs just have to manage the games, and make a few key plays throughout the game. The Vikings had 22 pass plays, the Bears 36 - in a game that was always within one score. That is too many - and lends itself to poor throws.The Bears were a better team with Orton, and the Bronco's were a better team with Cutler, because those QBs fit the style of play for their teams better. Now that they have switched teams, they each have to adapt to a new style. I think Orton, because of his offensive weapons and demeanor, will adapt easier.

Vikes def >>> Bears (Vikes were 6th vs. 21st for Bears)Vikes running game >>> Bears (Vikes were 5th vs. 24th for Bears)The comparison is apples and oranges...The Vikes did need a game manager but the Bears need someone to help win games. It's not like they didn't run the ball last night, they ran 25 times but they were just ineffective.

Which do you think was more effective last night - the running game, or the passing game?

 

[Riffraff]

Cutler will get the stats we like in fantasy football.It remains to be seen if he'll become a winner. Check out his win/loss record in college and in the NFL.

So the fact that he drove the field, chewed up 6 mins, on the road to get the lead with 2 mins to go and his defense couldn't hold it means he can't win? Ok.

NFL = 17 wins 21 losses (includes the Ed Hocoli win)College = 11 wins 34 lossesSo yes... it remains to be seen if he'll be a winner. Just like I said.Sure he can't play every position, but perhaps he's not the game changer some fans think he is. Remains to be seen, just like I said.Don't take it personal.

Its not personal at all. I just think the whole he can't win thing is a joke and a ridiculously simplistic statment. Remember when Manning was a choker and couldn't win a big game?

Just wanted to note that I didn't say he can't become winner. I said it's yet to be seen if he will at the NFL level. Didn't say he can't, just that he hasn't yet. I also did a follow-up to say he was a winner in High School. The Broncos had a better record (9-7) before Cutler took over (at 5-6 the next year, he went 2-3) and they never got over the .500 hump (7-9 and 8-8 with Ed Hocoli) with Cutler at the helm. NFL teams can change it around pretty quick and perhaps he'll contribute to that happening for the Bears. But I'm not so sure he's the missing piece or the savior they are seeking. They were able to get to the Super Bowl with Rex Grossman after all.

 

[Banger]

That is a great point. It is very similar to the Vikings bringing in Favre. With the type of running game and defense those teams have, the QBs just have to manage the games, and make a few key plays throughout the game. The Vikings had 22 pass plays, the Bears 36 - in a game that was always within one score. That is too many - and lends itself to poor throws.The Bears were a better team with Orton, and the Bronco's were a better team with Cutler, because those QBs fit the style of play for their teams better. Now that they have switched teams, they each have to adapt to a new style. I think Orton, because of his offensive weapons and demeanor, will adapt easier.

Vikes def >>> Bears (Vikes were 6th vs. 21st for Bears)Vikes running game >>> Bears (Vikes were 5th vs. 24th for Bears)The comparison is apples and oranges...The Vikes did need a game manager but the Bears need someone to help win games. It's not like they didn't run the ball last night, they ran 25 times but they were just ineffective.

Which do you think was more effective last night - the running game, or the passing game?

what running game? If they would've relied on the run game they wouldn't have got a point.

 

[ericttspikes]

The stat that jumped out last night for me was that the Bears only completed 2 passes for over 30 yards last year. Cutler had 2 last night. It will take time to find the right players at receiver and for this team to gel, but I have no doubt that Cutler will be fine.

Not sure where the bolded statement comes from. Orton had a 51 yard TD to Booker, a 65 yard TD to Hester, and a 52 yard completion to Olsen last year, and he completed a total of 13 passes for 30 or more yards. That doesn't sound like a lot, but you do have to consider that he only attempted 465 passes. As a point of comparison, Manning only had 14 completions of 30+ yards in 555 attempts. And Manning had better receiving targets than Orton had.Maybe the point was that they only completed two passes all season where the ball traveled 30+ yards in the air...? But I find that hard to believe with a total of 13 30+ yard completions. And it wasn't just Orton. Grossman played a few games and attempted 62 passes, but had no completions of 30 yards or more (he did have a 29 yard completion).

Regardless, it seems very likely they will have more long completions this season with Cutler (and with improved play from Hester), which was presumably your point here.

Not sure what they were talking about then. It was a graphic that NBC put up and Collinsworth and Al talked about. It amazed me. I unfortunately deleted the game. Wish I could go back and see what that was about. I think it was up in the second half, a few possessions after the Hester TD.

 

[schooner44]

I loved watching him throw all those picks last night, especially the one to Jolley. It was about the only thing I enjoyed in the game since Rodgers is my QB and he just didn't produce anything until the Jennings TD.

 

[shredhead]

The biggest negative I found in total with Chicago is that they fell in love with the shiny new toy, and forgot their best player on offense.

I assume you are talking about Matt Forte, right? The same Matt Forte who carried the ball 25 times for 55 yards? 25 carries is forgetting about him?

If you saw the game - most of those carries came later in the game. They weren't using the run to set anything up, and looked absolutely horrid on offense early on. They had fallen in love with the shiny new toy early on, and got back to basics later.He was targeted on 1 pass, I think, which was a screen that ended up being picked. He's a good receiver out of the backfield, and using him on a swing pass or two would've forced the Packers to defend that area in ways that would've been better than the awful quick passes to the WR's they were using.

Turner, Smith and Cutler have all fallen in love with Cutler. They need to stop and remember this is a TEAM game and not just to display Cutlers gun slinging ways. A year ago they would have never allowed Orton to play the way Cutler played last nigth

Cutler has always been in love with Cutler, that is his biggest problem. If he ever grows up, and realizes he is not bigger than the game, he could possibly be mentioned in the same breath as Brady, Manning, and Brees, etc.

 

[CravenM]

Somewhere in Texas, Rex Grossman is laughing

 

[GreenNGold]

Cutler is usually worse when he's in an away game. Look back at the stats while he was with the Bronco's. He's not consistant, so if you have a decent QB2, use him when Cutler is not at home.

Maybe the Bears should do that

 

[Ghost Rider]

Cutler has always been in love with Cutler, that is his biggest problem. If he ever grows up, and realizes he is not bigger than the game, he could possibly be mentioned in the same breath as Brady, Manning, and Brees, etc.

I agree with this. My hope was that the whole McDaniels fiasco humbled him a bit, but we'll see. Don't get me wrong, you want your QB playing with the supreme confidence that Cutler plays with, but you don't want that turning into arrogance, which results in playing with reckless abandon. That seems to be the case with Cutler a bit too often. Right now, his biggest concern should be getting himself on the same page with his receivers. There was way too much miscommunication last night.

 

[Banger]

this s/b a good thread to bump all year....

 

[DrJ]

Oh and just for perspective guys, you do realize that there's only been a 2 seasons in Tom Brady's career where he didn't have a 4 Int game right? Like that 2003 game against Buffalo where he came out with a 22.5 rating to get them buried 31-0? Just saying...

 

[switz]

Cutler>>>>>>Orton

Broncos O outside of Cutler>>>>>>>>Bears O outside of Orton

Second part is incorrect due to Matt Forte. Clearly Marshall, Royal, Stokely, etc. are better than the DREK at WR in Chicago, but Forte is an elite talent and was under-utilized last night (more screens and dumpoff's please).

No, he's not. He's not even a GOOD talent. He is an average talent that went to a talent starved team least year, and they fed him the ball because they had no one else to use. He averaged 3.9 last year, and 2.2 with a reportedly better QB to open up running lanes for him. Forte will be replaced within a few years with a better RB.

 

[SSOG]

The stat that jumped out last night for me was that the Bears only completed 2 passes for over 30 yards last year. Cutler had 2 last night. It will take time to find the right players at receiver and for this team to gel, but I have no doubt that Cutler will be fine. If the Bears have a losing season maybe they'll sack Lovie and bring in Shanny. One can dream. And for the Donkey fans lovin the moment, I guarantee that Orton will never be holding a Lombardi over his head so I don't really see the point in all the glee. For as bad as the Bears looked, Denver looked worse against a bad team. Have a fun season!

Neither will Cutler my friend, neither will Cutler. At least us Denver fans can hold our heads high and realize that Orton will only be our fill in QB for a season or two. Bears fans will be fustrated with the Cutler roller coaster ride for the next 10 years or so. Sure you'll be better than average with Cutler, but last I checked there isn't a better than average bowl scheduled in the next 10 years.

Agreed. And neither will Peyton Manning, Tony Dungy, Bill Cowher, John Elway, Steve Young, Tom Coughlin, or Eli Manning. Some guys just aren't winners.

The biggest negative I found in total with Chicago is that they fell in love with the shiny new toy, and forgot their best player on offense.

I assume you are talking about Matt Forte, right? The same Matt Forte who carried the ball 25 times for 55 yards? 25 carries is forgetting about him?

Agreed. Everyone keeps mentioning how Chicago got away from Forte, and I don't understand it at all. Forte was a drive killer last night in the second half. The typical drive involved Forte getting 2 yards a carry, leaving Cutler in 3rd-and-long, and forcing him to bail them out. By the end of the game, the only time they moved the ball at all was through the air with Cutler. If anything, they used Forte TOO MUCH, not too little.

 

[boubucarow]

I blame Cutler for two of the picks. The last one, Knox wasn't open, and was falling down.

It was a pass to a spot. The ball was thrown by the time he fell down. This makes no sense.

My take on it is that you shouldn't throw the ball to a spot if your receiver is that covered. I understand the difference in opinions.Cutler threw plenty of balls into the hands & chests of players on both teams that got dropped. The biggest negative I found in total with Chicago is that they fell in love with the shiny new toy, and forgot their best player on offense. I'm not sure how much that was Cutler audibilizing to passes or simply tossing the script - but it wasn't due to game situation.

That is a great point. It is very similar to the Vikings bringing in Favre. With the type of running game and defense those teams have, the QBs just have to manage the games, and make a few key plays throughout the game. The Vikings had 22 pass plays, the Bears 36 - in a game that was always within one score. That is too many - and lends itself to poor throws.The Bears were a better team with Orton, and the Bronco's were a better team with Cutler, because those QBs fit the style of play for their teams better. Now that they have switched teams, they each have to adapt to a new style. I think Orton, because of his offensive weapons and demeanor, will adapt easier.

Vikes def >>> Bears (Vikes were 6th vs. 21st for Bears)Vikes running game >>> Bears (Vikes were 5th vs. 24th for Bears)

The comparison is apples and oranges...The Vikes did need a game manager but the Bears need someone to help win games. It's not like they didn't run the ball last night, they ran 25 times but they were just ineffective.

Yard given up per play - Vikings 4.9 Bears 4.9 Turnovers caused - Vikings 25 Bears 32

You are right about the Vikings running game being better last year. But the defenses were essentially even. I wish everyone will stop looking at yards per game stats. They are meaningless in isolation.

 

[tdmills]

Cutler>>>>>>Orton

Broncos O outside of Cutler>>>>>>>>Bears O outside of Orton

Second part is incorrect due to Matt Forte. Clearly Marshall, Royal, Stokely, etc. are better than the DREK at WR in Chicago, but Forte is an elite talent and was under-utilized last night (more screens and dumpoff's please).

No, he's not. He's not even a GOOD talent. He is an average talent that went to a talent starved team least year, and they fed him the ball because they had no one else to use. He averaged 3.9 last year, and 2.2 with a reportedly better QB to open up running lanes for him. Forte will be replaced within a few years with a better RB.

Good talent? Catching 63 passes and rushing for 1200 yards has to be at least a definition of good. If that is YOUR average....I wonder how Felix Jones can be rated so high.

 

[stevegamer]

The stat that jumped out last night for me was that the Bears only completed 2 passes for over 30 yards last year. Cutler had 2 last night. It will take time to find the right players at receiver and for this team to gel, but I have no doubt that Cutler will be fine.

Not sure where the bolded statement comes from. Orton had a 51 yard TD to Booker, a 65 yard TD to Hester, and a 52 yard completion to Olsen last year, and he completed a total of 13 passes for 30 or more yards. That doesn't sound like a lot, but you do have to consider that he only attempted 465 passes. As a point of comparison, Manning only had 14 completions of 30+ yards in 555 attempts. And Manning had better receiving targets than Orton had.Maybe the point was that they only completed two passes all season where the ball traveled 30+ yards in the air...? But I find that hard to believe with a total of 13 30+ yard completions. And it wasn't just Orton. Grossman played a few games and attempted 62 passes, but had no completions of 30 yards or more (he did have a 29 yard completion).

Regardless, it seems very likely they will have more long completions this season with Cutler (and with improved play from Hester), which was presumably your point here.

Not sure what they were talking about then. It was a graphic that NBC put up and Collinsworth and Al talked about. It amazed me. I unfortunately deleted the game. Wish I could go back and see what that was about. I think it was up in the second half, a few possessions after the Hester TD.

It was a graphic about passes completed where the ball was thrown 30+ yards.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

Cutler is usually worse when he's in an away game. Look back at the stats while he was with the Bronco's. He's not consistant, so if you have a decent QB2, use him when Cutler is not at home.

Cutler was better on the road last year than at home.An explanation I heard is that there's a curfew the night before away games.

 

[twistd]

over rated QB -looks terrible tonightWho would have thought Orton looked better?

Just so I can be on the record, regardless of the outcome of this game tonight, you are a major tool.

 

[DrJ]

Cutler is usually worse when he's in an away game. Look back at the stats while he was with the Bronco's. He's not consistant, so if you have a decent QB2, use him when Cutler is not at home.

Cutler was better on the road last year than at home.An explanation I heard is that there's a curfew the night before away games.

Exactly, this was being used to substantiate that he had a drinking problem.

 

[Banger]

bump...

 

[Hooper31]

this s/b a good thread to bump all year....

Thanks, bro. If you didn't do stuff like this we wouldn't know who all the tools were, but you're kind enough to self-identify.

 

[Banger]

this s/b a good thread to bump all year....

Thanks, bro. If you didn't do stuff like this we wouldn't know who all the tools were, but you're kind enough to self-identify.

tool?

 

[Iwannabeacowboybaby!]

over rated QB -looks terrible tonightWho would have thought Orton looked better?

No way the Bears win against Pittsburgh with Orton at QB, so I guess we saw the bad Jay Cutler last week and the good Jay Cutler this week.I'd take Jay Cutler over Kyle Orton every day of the week.

 

[Hooper31]

this s/b a good thread to bump all year....

Thanks, bro. If you didn't do stuff like this we wouldn't know who all the tools were, but you're kind enough to self-identify.

tool?

Well, sure. Just like the tool that started the thread. You're engaging in a debate that's not worth the time or the effort. You're debating with someone that screams at his TV "You suck ###!" everytime Culter throws an incomplete pass and somehow feels justified in his bizarre hatred of a guy he's never met. You would choose to encourage more of those inane rants and help publicize it further. Next week when Cutler throws a pick to lose the game the original tool will likely take his turn bumping the thread. So, yeah. Tool.

 

[ForteWillLeadTheWay]

Was the real Roethlisberger out there today?

 

[Touchdown Syndrome]

over rated QB -looks terrible tonightWho would have thought Orton looked better?

No way the Bears win against Pittsburgh with Orton at QB, so I guess we saw the bad Jay Cutler last week and the good Jay Cutler this week.I'd take Jay Cutler over Kyle Orton every day of the week.

Good call.On a related note, I'll take a steak over a can of SPAM every day of the week, as well.

 

[ForteWillLeadTheWay]

this s/b a good thread to bump all year....

Thanks, bro. If you didn't do stuff like this we wouldn't know who all the tools were, but you're kind enough to self-identify.

tool?

Well, sure. Just like the tool that started the thread. You're engaging in a debate that's not worth the time or the effort. You're debating with someone that screams at his TV "You suck ###!" everytime Culter throws an incomplete pass and somehow feels justified in his bizarre hatred of a guy he's never met. You would choose to encourage more of those inane rants and help publicize it further. Next week when Cutler throws a pick to lose the game the original tool will likely take his turn bumping the thread. So, yeah. Tool.

 

[runner06]

So that must have been the imposter Jay Cutler out there today?

 

[thehornet]

this s/b a good thread to bump all year....

Thanks, bro. If you didn't do stuff like this we wouldn't know who all the tools were, but you're kind enough to self-identify.

tool?

Well, sure. Just like the tool that started the thread. You're engaging in a debate that's not worth the time or the effort. You're debating with someone that screams at his TV "You suck ###!" everytime Culter throws an incomplete pass and somehow feels justified in his bizarre hatred of a guy he's never met. You would choose to encourage more of those inane rants and help publicize it further. Next week when Cutler throws a pick to lose the game the original tool will likely take his turn bumping the thread. So, yeah. Tool.

Bump.

 

[Iwannabeacowboybaby!]

over rated QB -looks terrible tonightWho would have thought Orton looked better?

No way the Bears win against Pittsburgh with Orton at QB, so I guess we saw the bad Jay Cutler last week and the good Jay Cutler this week.I'd take Jay Cutler over Kyle Orton every day of the week.

Good call.On a related note, I'll take a steak over a can of SPAM every day of the week, as well.

I'm not sure Cutler's a steak, but he's better than Orton. Maybe he's a cube steak or a round steak, but certainly not a New York Strip.

 

[gigantor]

goooooo Stillers!!!

 

[Hooper31]

this s/b a good thread to bump all year....

Thanks, bro. If you didn't do stuff like this we wouldn't know who all the tools were, but you're kind enough to self-identify.

tool?

Well, sure. Just like the tool that started the thread. You're engaging in a debate that's not worth the time or the effort. You're debating with someone that screams at his TV "You suck ###!" everytime Culter throws an incomplete pass and somehow feels justified in his bizarre hatred of a guy he's never met. You would choose to encourage more of those inane rants and help publicize it further. Next week when Cutler throws a pick to lose the game the original tool will likely take his turn bumping the thread. So, yeah. Tool.

Bump.

Atta shooter. Ya know, I remember a day when a mod would have just axed this waste of space thread. Ahhhhh, the good ole days. I guess I'm not helping either by lifting it to the top of page 1.sigh.

 

[flapgreen]

he's no Gould

 

[SmoovySmoov]

20 User(s) are reading this topic (7 Guests and 2 Anonymous Users)

11 Members: SmoovySmoov, Soaring Eagle, simmonjm, T. Bagger, kOOk, runner06, BigA, Incog, CBower4545, Johnny Ice, destro