What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Josh McCown v. Jay Cutler (1 Viewer)

Soulfly3 said:
CHI is tied for the division lead... what's with all this "CHI has no shot at the playoffs BS"?
I, for one, never said they had no shot AT the playoffs.

I said they have no shot IN the playoffs. Setting yourself back for the future to maximize your chances of getting your brains beat if you juuuuust squeak into the post-season is not a good idea.
With that offense, they will always have a shot
Did you see the Saints in Seattle? Think the Bears offense outstrips the Saints?
so why bother even trying to make the playoffs....just fold up the tents now and head home :loco:

 
Let me put this in my context- if you sit Cutler down when he can play, you are saying goodbye to Cutler. Cutler is pissy, there is no way he is going to be cool with that, and you better believe it will effect the contract negotiations. Much less his attitude if you franchise him.

Now if you decide you're settled on Cutler leaving town, ok thats fine.

My point is if you expect to keep Cutler (for the year or long term) and you sit him down for McCown to try to backdoor your way into the playoffs with an awful defense... you are making a huge mistake. The heavy odds are you either dont make the playoffs or youre one and done... and meanwhile you've poisoned the well with the guy you're trying to resign.

So- play Cutler and go for broke, or sit Cutler and dont expect a reasonable future with him, but anything else is not realistic imo.

 
The bears staff has probably not even discussed sitting a healthy cutler. It's all external speculation. It's not a possibility. It's just a big waste of time to even discuss it.

 
The bears staff has probably not even discussed sitting a healthy cutler. It's all external speculation. It's not a possibility. It's just a big waste of time to even discuss it.
i doubt the staff expected Josh to play lights out like he has....that has to give them pause

 
FWIW McCown could have thrown 3-4 ints vs Dal. I get killed here for boxscore scouting, but I don't see it with McCown. Alshon is bailing him out. He's smart for throwing those jumpballs to Alshon when needed, unlike Cutler. You have to watch out when some backups get hot, especially during primetime. I don't think he's a Nick Foles per say. This is more Case Keenum. He's a good backup, not someone with franchise potential. That's not really a bad thing for da Bears, i'm just saying...
Bingo. As well as Josh has played he has been really fortunate with some of his passes, instead of 1800/13/1 he could realistically have 1800/13/8. Would this debate be going on if that was the case.
Which would put him exactly where Jay Cutler is on the season, ironically. I'll take the Ints McCown could have thrown over the ints that Cutler did throw.
Everyone would take the "would be" int's. It's just a matter of doing your due diligence to know if you buy the numbers or not. McCown will come back down to earth. Teams are already baiting him into "would be" ints. Eventually the numbers even out over enough of a sample size. With all things being equal you go back to Cutler this season if you buy that theory. My first statement in this thread was how I don't see how you can unload a brinks truck on Cutler if a career backup can come in cold and perform at/above his level of play in this retooled offense. I wouldn't even tag Cutler to be honest. Let him walk and spend the money elsewhere until you land on a franchise guy.

 
after last game how can you not let Josh Mccown start at least the next game @Cle......
well we will find out officially on thursday who will start...if its Cutler im going to start Rivers...if its McCown then he will start...no way i start a rusty and not a 100% Cutler in FF a playoff game

 
CHI is tied for the division lead... what's with all this "CHI has no shot at the playoffs BS"?
I, for one, never said they had no shot AT the playoffs.

I said they have no shot IN the playoffs. Setting yourself back for the future to maximize your chances of getting your brains beat if you juuuuust squeak into the post-season is not a good idea.
With that offense, they will always have a shot
Did you see the Saints in Seattle? Think the Bears offense outstrips the Saints?
I didn't say they could win, but I'd rather have the Bears offense right now.
 
Trestman making announcement shortly but Cutler looked good in practice and is expected to start.
And I just got an NFL alert confirming Cutler is the guy this week. McCown went from propelling me (and many others, I'm sure)to the playoffs one week, and to the WW the very next.

 
what a blunder by the bears
The one when they signed a quality backup that kept them in the division hunt? Or the one when they hired a competent offensive coach?

If the bears lose to the browns, a bunch of haters are going to try to stir up more drama. Mccown did his job. The reality is mccown faced the cowboys (mostly without Sean lee), the hapless Vikings - a loss by the way - lost to the rams in which the offense could only score 7 second half points. He played his butt off. Great. So has cutler. Get over it.

 
what a blunder by the bears
The one when they signed a quality backup that kept them in the division hunt? Or the one when they hired a competent offensive coach?

If the bears lose to the browns, a bunch of haters are going to try to stir up more drama. Mccown did his job. The reality is mccown faced the cowboys (mostly without Sean lee), the hapless Vikings - a loss by the way - lost to the rams in which the offense could only score 7 second half points. He played his butt off. Great. So has cutler. Get over it.
:goodposting:

 
what a blunder by the bears
The one when they signed a quality backup that kept them in the division hunt? Or the one when they hired a competent offensive coach?

If the bears lose to the browns, a bunch of haters are going to try to stir up more drama. Mccown did his job. The reality is mccown faced the cowboys (mostly without Sean lee), the hapless Vikings - a loss by the way - lost to the rams in which the offense could only score 7 second half points. He played his butt off. Great. So has cutler. Get over it.
Easy Jay. :clyde:

 
what a blunder by the bears
The one when they signed a quality backup that kept them in the division hunt? Or the one when they hired a competent offensive coach?

If the bears lose to the browns, a bunch of haters are going to try to stir up more drama. Mccown did his job. The reality is mccown faced the cowboys (mostly without Sean lee), the hapless Vikings - a loss by the way - lost to the rams in which the offense could only score 7 second half points. He played his butt off. Great. So has cutler. Get over it.
Easy Jay. :clyde:
Dude does this Cutler dooche have an ego or what?

But this is good for Marshall owners.

While both Marshall and Jeffery have always been productive over the year, the big games will go to Marshall now with Cutler under center. Remember those two are boys, Jeffery will still get his but Marshall will explode this week.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
take the over ...

culter is gonna force feed the ball to his boys..

bears defense is swiss and campbell is a chucker

expect this game to run till 5 o clock on sunday afternoon

 
take the over ...

culter is gonna force feed the ball to his boys..

bears defense is swiss and campbell is a chucker

expect this game to run till 5 o clock on sunday afternoon
I own Cutler, Jeffery and Gordon - would kill for a shootout...........tempted to go with the higher floor though and start Roethlisberger.

 
They had better hope Cutler plays well because to bench a guy playing as well as McCown is could be a tragic mistake. They already lost one game because they put Cutler back in over a hot McCown (the 2nd Lions), and if this costs them a playoff spot, it will be bad.

 
Ghost Rider said:
They had better hope Cutler plays well because to bench a guy playing as well as McCown is could be a tragic mistake. They already lost one game because they put Cutler back in over a hot McCown (the 2nd Lions), and if this costs them a playoff spot, it will be bad.
What will be bad?

If cutler leads them to the division title, that's good.

If he doesn't and plays well, then that's not good. But the blame will be on the awful defense.

If he plays bad, it will be bad for his contract negotiations. And that's not all bad for the bears, if they can get him re-signed at a discount. If that's what they still want to do.

No respectable writer is going to truly denigrate Trestman for choosing to start his starting quarterback (as long as he's truly healthy this time).

 
Ghost Rider said:
They had better hope Cutler plays well because to bench a guy playing as well as McCown is could be a tragic mistake. They already lost one game because they put Cutler back in over a hot McCown (the 2nd Lions), and if this costs them a playoff spot, it will be bad.
What will be bad?

If cutler leads them to the division title, that's good.

If he doesn't and plays well, then that's not good. But the blame will be on the awful defense.

If he plays bad, it will be bad for his contract negotiations. And that's not all bad for the bears, if they can get him re-signed at a discount. If that's what they still want to do.

No respectable writer is going to truly denigrate Trestman for choosing to start his starting quarterback (as long as he's truly healthy this time).
great

 
Ghost Rider said:
They had better hope Cutler plays well because to bench a guy playing as well as McCown is could be a tragic mistake. They already lost one game because they put Cutler back in over a hot McCown (the 2nd Lions), and if this costs them a playoff spot, it will be bad.
What will be bad?If cutler leads them to the division title, that's good.

If he doesn't and plays well, then that's not good. But the blame will be on the awful defense.

If he plays bad, it will be bad for his contract negotiations. And that's not all bad for the bears, if they can get him re-signed at a discount. If that's what they still want to do.

No respectable writer is going to truly denigrate Trestman for choosing to start his starting quarterback (as long as he's truly healthy this time).
great
As I said, either gives them a discount or reason to let him walk and go another direction. So, yes, starting their starter in a contract year is a wise choice.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ghost Rider said:
They had better hope Cutler plays well because to bench a guy playing as well as McCown is could be a tragic mistake. They already lost one game because they put Cutler back in over a hot McCown (the 2nd Lions), and if this costs them a playoff spot, it will be bad.
What will be bad?

If cutler leads them to the division title, that's good.

If he doesn't and plays well, then that's not good. But the blame will be on the awful defense.

If he plays bad, it will be bad for his contract negotiations. And that's not all bad for the bears, if they can get him re-signed at a discount. If that's what they still want to do.

No respectable writer is going to truly denigrate Trestman for choosing to start his starting quarterback (as long as he's truly healthy this time).
This.

Has it sunk in that the Bears playoffs hopes are tightly pinned to the question of whether they will be able to beat the Cleveland Browns? What does that tell you about their overall prospects? The Eagles are going to bury them and if Rodgers gets back, so will the Packers (possibly even without Rodgers). I assume the dreams of 2013 glory revolve around somehow getting passed the Browns and the Lions losing-out?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ghost Rider said:
They had better hope Cutler plays well because to bench a guy playing as well as McCown is could be a tragic mistake. They already lost one game because they put Cutler back in over a hot McCown (the 2nd Lions), and if this costs them a playoff spot, it will be bad.
What will be bad?If cutler leads them to the division title, that's good.

If he doesn't and plays well, then that's not good. But the blame will be on the awful defense.

If he plays bad, it will be bad for his contract negotiations. And that's not all bad for the bears, if they can get him re-signed at a discount. If that's what they still want to do.

No respectable writer is going to truly denigrate Trestman for choosing to start his starting quarterback (as long as he's truly healthy this time).
This.

Has it sunk in that the Bears playoffs hopes are tightly pinned to the question of whether they will be able to beat the Cleveland Browns? What does that tell you about their overall prospects? The Eagles are going to bury them and if Rodgers gets back, so will the Packers (possibly even without Rodgers). I assume the dreams of 2013 glory revolve around somehow getting passed the Browns and the Lions losing-out?
The Eagles and Rodgers-less Packers are going to bury them? How many times have the Bears been buried this year?
 
Ghost Rider said:
They had better hope Cutler plays well because to bench a guy playing as well as McCown is could be a tragic mistake. They already lost one game because they put Cutler back in over a hot McCown (the 2nd Lions), and if this costs them a playoff spot, it will be bad.
What will be bad?If cutler leads them to the division title, that's good.

If he doesn't and plays well, then that's not good. But the blame will be on the awful defense.

If he plays bad, it will be bad for his contract negotiations. And that's not all bad for the bears, if they can get him re-signed at a discount. If that's what they still want to do.

No respectable writer is going to truly denigrate Trestman for choosing to start his starting quarterback (as long as he's truly healthy this time).
This.

Has it sunk in that the Bears playoffs hopes are tightly pinned to the question of whether they will be able to beat the Cleveland Browns? What does that tell you about their overall prospects? The Eagles are going to bury them and if Rodgers gets back, so will the Packers (possibly even without Rodgers). I assume the dreams of 2013 glory revolve around somehow getting passed the Browns and the Lions losing-out?
The Eagles and Rodgers-less Packers are going to bury them? How many times have the Bears been buried this year?
The Rams buried em. 3 weeks ago.

 
Ghost Rider said:
They had better hope Cutler plays well because to bench a guy playing as well as McCown is could be a tragic mistake. They already lost one game because they put Cutler back in over a hot McCown (the 2nd Lions), and if this costs them a playoff spot, it will be bad.
What will be bad?If cutler leads them to the division title, that's good.

If he doesn't and plays well, then that's not good. But the blame will be on the awful defense.

If he plays bad, it will be bad for his contract negotiations. And that's not all bad for the bears, if they can get him re-signed at a discount. If that's what they still want to do.

No respectable writer is going to truly denigrate Trestman for choosing to start his starting quarterback (as long as he's truly healthy this time).
This.

Has it sunk in that the Bears playoffs hopes are tightly pinned to the question of whether they will be able to beat the Cleveland Browns? What does that tell you about their overall prospects? The Eagles are going to bury them and if Rodgers gets back, so will the Packers (possibly even without Rodgers). I assume the dreams of 2013 glory revolve around somehow getting passed the Browns and the Lions losing-out?
The Eagles and Rodgers-less Packers are going to bury them? How many times have the Bears been buried this year?
The Rams buried em. 3 weeks ago.
So your answer is once then? Out of 13? Chicago's other five losses are by an average of 5 ppg. The 49ers and Colts (once to the Rams) have lost twice by 20 or more. It's the NFL, it happens. Doesn't mean the odds are good that the Eagles or Packers are going to do it. The only team the Eagles have buried is the Raiders.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ok, regardless, the theory is we HOPE the Bears can beat the browns so they can go on to beat the eagles, packers, all in order to play the 49ers in playoff game?

 
Mccown lost to the redskins, rams, and vikings. What makes you think he wouldve won these two games? Mccown was awesome but people forget he lost a lot of games too. Their defense was miserable no matter who the qb was.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
looking forward to the Bears fans who were pining for Cutler's return... for god knows what reason
I am still pining for his return. He did not lose the game today.

Cutler is still the best QB that the Bears have had in my lifetime (and I was alive in the 80's so yes that includes better than McMahon). He did not get it done with 30 seconds left today but he played a solid game today.

 
This Bears team was not good. Doesnt matter who QB is. If Cutler is your future you certainly play Cutler. Worrying about the playoffs with this team as opposed to future was ludicrous.

 
Marshall did drop that pass that couldve made the last play more realistic...Im no fan of Cutler, he is too carefree at times and his body language sucks at times (for a so-called leadership position)......guy certainly has his bad points but I cant pin their failures on him......McCown as good as he was lost to the Redskins, Rams, and Vikes.....that defense is utterly pathetic and the real Achilles heel of that team

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top