badfish211
Footballguy
I get the sense that Fox/Pace are leaning towards jettisoning Cutty, but the hire of Loggains and Gase contradict that notion. The mixed messages worry me a bit because it feels like dissension could creep into Halas Hall. As far as Fox, we have only heard him speak twice since being hired. His non-committal attitude about Cutty during the pre-Combine presser has been well documented over the last week. However, what really stood out to me was something he said in his introductory presser. I will admit that I am digging deep here but bear with me. Here is an excerpt from Fox's introductory presser:
[SIZE=10pt]Question:[/SIZE]
[SIZE=9.5pt]HOW MUCH AUTHORITY DO YOU NEED OVER A ROSTER? IF YOU’VE GOT GUYS YOU CAN’T WIN WITH, CAN YOU ENACT THAT CHANGE?[/SIZE]
[SIZE=10pt]Answer:[/SIZE]
[SIZE=9.5pt]That’s a great question. Because in today’s deal, contractually, I just know in 1989 we didn’t have all that. To me, I don’t think you need all that in 2015. I think, just like I talked about with the team, I believe that to be true with the decision makers. If we have a building full of good evaluators, if we work at it very hard, I’ve been places where we never even had in writing what and who and all that. Typically you come to the same agreement, and I predict that’s the way it’s going to be here moving forward.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=10pt]Granted, he is doing a fair share of meaningless rambling here. However, I believe that coaches and GMs come into these pressers with a lot of information based on meetings and research, but are willing to speak on about 5% of those thoughts. Good questions can force them to say a little more than they may want to. I believe that is the case here. My take of this quote is that John Fox is old school (1989 reference) and does not care how much someone is being paid ("contractually...I don't think you need all that in 2015"). He will play the player that he believes will help his team win, period. This is obviously directed at Cutty since the narrative on him has been almost exclusively contract based lately. People love bashing the Bears for Cutty's contract but Fox doesn't give a rip. Much like Carrol/Schneider did by playing Wilson over the overpaid Matt Flynn, I believe Fox wants a gritty, team first player at QB rather than the overpaid Cutty. Furthermore, he also said:[/SIZE]
On Urlacher's criticism of Cutty:
"what he says is not wrong. ...it’s not always about talent,"
When asked what he looks for in a QB:
"One that wins. I’ve had different ones. They’re just like any other position, from the standpoint of what you’re looking for: decision-making, executing their job, what to do, how to do it and execute it under pressure. That’s what we do. And that translates to every position, in my opinion, whether you’re talking about a kicker, a long snapper. Everybody’s got a job. That’s why this is the ultimate of team games. Relying on the guy next to you to do his job; 11 guys at once doing it, you’re usually successful. I know everybody makes a big deal about the quarterback — and I get that — but it’s still a team game. We all have to do it for our teammates and for something bigger than ourselves. I look for that in any position, to be honest with you."
Well, Cutty doesn't win and Fox did not use the word "talent" once when describing his ideal QB.
[SIZE=10pt]Unfortunately, this brings us to the two roadblocks with getting rid of Cutty. [/SIZE]
[SIZE=10pt]1) Who is our Russel Wilson? [/SIZE]
[SIZE=10pt]2) Why hire Gase/Loggains, who are well known for being very close to Cutty if your head coach is not enamored with your pricey QB?[/SIZE]
[SIZE=10pt]1) Could it be Mariota? I prefer Winston by a lot, but he will be gone by #7. I'm concerned about Mariota leading a locker room of grown men as well as the obvious concern of him being a system QB only asked to throw to wide open targets in college. We'll let the scouts and time figure that one out. The rest of the QBs in this draft don't amount to much. Some "backup with potential to start" type guys, but chances are low of finding a gem. Do they bring back McCown while waiting to draft a QB next year? Trade for Bradford? Dare I say Jimmy Clausen? I don't know. What I do know is that Cutty has proven to be venomous. In one breath people insult the Bears because of Cutty, then turn around and say cutting him would be dumb because the Bears have no other option. Well, if you are convinced you can't win with him (as has been proven), isn't keeping him just because he is more "talented" than any potential alternatives a bit more dumb?[/SIZE]
[SIZE=10pt]2) I'm stumped here. Bringing in "Cutler Guys" seems very, very dangerous to me. Hopefully the staff is all on the same page and I am reading way too deeply, but when it comes to a lightning rod like Cutty, problems can easily arise. How many staffs have to been dismantled by Cutty-led teams before people realize that this horse can't be saved and needs to be put out to pasture? My hopes are that Loggains and Gase are professionals with an open mind who just so happen to have a relationship with Cutty rather than feeling a sense of loyalty towards him. Again, only time will tell.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=10pt]Question:[/SIZE]
[SIZE=9.5pt]HOW MUCH AUTHORITY DO YOU NEED OVER A ROSTER? IF YOU’VE GOT GUYS YOU CAN’T WIN WITH, CAN YOU ENACT THAT CHANGE?[/SIZE]
[SIZE=10pt]Answer:[/SIZE]
[SIZE=9.5pt]That’s a great question. Because in today’s deal, contractually, I just know in 1989 we didn’t have all that. To me, I don’t think you need all that in 2015. I think, just like I talked about with the team, I believe that to be true with the decision makers. If we have a building full of good evaluators, if we work at it very hard, I’ve been places where we never even had in writing what and who and all that. Typically you come to the same agreement, and I predict that’s the way it’s going to be here moving forward.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=10pt]Granted, he is doing a fair share of meaningless rambling here. However, I believe that coaches and GMs come into these pressers with a lot of information based on meetings and research, but are willing to speak on about 5% of those thoughts. Good questions can force them to say a little more than they may want to. I believe that is the case here. My take of this quote is that John Fox is old school (1989 reference) and does not care how much someone is being paid ("contractually...I don't think you need all that in 2015"). He will play the player that he believes will help his team win, period. This is obviously directed at Cutty since the narrative on him has been almost exclusively contract based lately. People love bashing the Bears for Cutty's contract but Fox doesn't give a rip. Much like Carrol/Schneider did by playing Wilson over the overpaid Matt Flynn, I believe Fox wants a gritty, team first player at QB rather than the overpaid Cutty. Furthermore, he also said:[/SIZE]
On Urlacher's criticism of Cutty:
"what he says is not wrong. ...it’s not always about talent,"
When asked what he looks for in a QB:
"One that wins. I’ve had different ones. They’re just like any other position, from the standpoint of what you’re looking for: decision-making, executing their job, what to do, how to do it and execute it under pressure. That’s what we do. And that translates to every position, in my opinion, whether you’re talking about a kicker, a long snapper. Everybody’s got a job. That’s why this is the ultimate of team games. Relying on the guy next to you to do his job; 11 guys at once doing it, you’re usually successful. I know everybody makes a big deal about the quarterback — and I get that — but it’s still a team game. We all have to do it for our teammates and for something bigger than ourselves. I look for that in any position, to be honest with you."
Well, Cutty doesn't win and Fox did not use the word "talent" once when describing his ideal QB.
[SIZE=10pt]Unfortunately, this brings us to the two roadblocks with getting rid of Cutty. [/SIZE]
[SIZE=10pt]1) Who is our Russel Wilson? [/SIZE]
[SIZE=10pt]2) Why hire Gase/Loggains, who are well known for being very close to Cutty if your head coach is not enamored with your pricey QB?[/SIZE]
[SIZE=10pt]1) Could it be Mariota? I prefer Winston by a lot, but he will be gone by #7. I'm concerned about Mariota leading a locker room of grown men as well as the obvious concern of him being a system QB only asked to throw to wide open targets in college. We'll let the scouts and time figure that one out. The rest of the QBs in this draft don't amount to much. Some "backup with potential to start" type guys, but chances are low of finding a gem. Do they bring back McCown while waiting to draft a QB next year? Trade for Bradford? Dare I say Jimmy Clausen? I don't know. What I do know is that Cutty has proven to be venomous. In one breath people insult the Bears because of Cutty, then turn around and say cutting him would be dumb because the Bears have no other option. Well, if you are convinced you can't win with him (as has been proven), isn't keeping him just because he is more "talented" than any potential alternatives a bit more dumb?[/SIZE]
[SIZE=10pt]2) I'm stumped here. Bringing in "Cutler Guys" seems very, very dangerous to me. Hopefully the staff is all on the same page and I am reading way too deeply, but when it comes to a lightning rod like Cutty, problems can easily arise. How many staffs have to been dismantled by Cutty-led teams before people realize that this horse can't be saved and needs to be put out to pasture? My hopes are that Loggains and Gase are professionals with an open mind who just so happen to have a relationship with Cutty rather than feeling a sense of loyalty towards him. Again, only time will tell.[/SIZE]
we're in agreement that Cutler is overpaid.
