NFL: Jay Cutler and Bears likely parting ways

[ISUFan22]

I agree but comparing him against a list of awful QB's doesn't make him great. The other thing is Cutler (with better WR's, Marshall tilts that argument every time) has done less than some of those names. There are guys on there who won playoff games, even went to a Super Bowl. That says investing money in a QB didn't get the Franchise any further than putting money into other positions. The bottom line is even though Cutler is better than that list you gave, bringing him in hasn't moved the franchise any further forward than before he got here. I think thats how I think the Bears need to evaluate it, the bad thing is, Trestman is there for Cutler, he was brought in for Cutler.

One guy does not make a champion team. One guy can help push a team to that - but not do it themselves.

FACT is - Bear defense was pathetic. North was very week. With a better defense, Bears clearly win that division. That has nothing to do with Cutler or the QB position. I laugh at all Bear fans that make fun of this guy or wish they could get rid of him. Completely comical.

No different than the fools that put all the blame for ISU's woes this season on the QB.

 

[ISUFan22]

No, he's had ONE year. Lovie's teams never paid any attention whatsoever to the offense. Every year before this one, Cutler was trying to throw TDs from under a pile of defensive linemen and linebackers.

This is the first season Jay hasn't been absolutely murdered every game by pathetic offensive line play and he had receivers to catch the ball. No wonder the offense was solid. And that line still let him get killed a few times this year.

It's laughable Bear fans think they'll immediately do better than Jay. Fix that defense and improve the line - that team wins that North division. Solid QB, RB, playmaking receivers. Just need that defense not to suck - all other parts there for success.

 

[heitclone]

One guy does not make a champion team. One guy can help push a team to that - but not do it themselves.

FACT is - Bear defense was pathetic. North was very week. With a better defense, Bears clearly win that division. That has nothing to do with Cutler or the QB position. I laugh at all Bear fans that make fun of this guy or wish they could get rid of him. Completely comical.

No different than the fools that put all the blame for ISU's woes this season on the QB.

You're spot on, I never said I want Cutler out and never put the blame on him. Just pointing out that they haven't made any major strides since he's been here. This year could have been it but injuries and such just didn't allow it to happen. FWIW Cutler is my favorite Bears player. I don't want him gone but I don't think its going to far to say he hasn't been a great QB in Chicago, yet. I also pointed out that he shouldn't be judged on just this year.

There are two other teams in our division who can say the same thing about defense, look at the teams in the playoffs, plenty of teams with bad defenses still alive. The NFL is just starting to catch up with college in terms of video game stats on offense, don't expect to see defensive numbers getting any better.

 

[tm3308]

No, he's had ONE year. Lovie's teams never paid any attention whatsoever to the offense. Every year before this one, Cutler was trying to throw TDs from under a pile of defensive linemen and linebackers.

His numbers this year were roughly in line with his career averages, even when he was working with a better supporting cast.

Seriously, how many guys suddenly stop making poor decisions as a quarterback in their ninth year in the league? He wasn't any better this year than he's been over the course of his career, and while he's got the tools, he's not likely to put things together and become an elite QB.

 

[tm3308]

Who are these other above average QB available? Vick?

Even if Cutler won't go for the Bears deal, they'll tag him, mark it down.

Tagging Cutler would be downright stupid. He is not a top 5 QB and does not deserve Manning/Brady/Brees type money.

As for other options, the FA pool isn't very deep but there are plenty of guys out there they could try and trade for. A guy like Ryan Fitzpatrick has put up some pretty similar numbers over the last four years, and he's been working with worse supporting casts than Cutler. Matt Schaub had an awful year this year, but the guy had been a top 10 QB in the league for the five years before this one. If he gets released, he likely could be brought in for a pretty reasonable price and a change of scenery would do him good.

Both of those guys have posted numbers very similar to Cutler's over the course of their careers. Only Cutler is set to make way more money than either of them, for no other reason than people still look at his potential. He's almost Andrew Bynum-like in that regard.

 

[drlove]

I don't ever remember a time where he has whined about his play.

The only time he has ever "whined" is when he found out his head coach in Denver preferred Matt Cassel over him. As it turns out, he was right for being ****** for someone wanting Cassel over him.

This whiny reputation Cutler has been given is unfair and unjust.

Living in Denver, it is somewhat warranted based on how he carried himself and interacted with people around town and at work. He had a lot of growing up to do, but who didn't at that age.

Note, I would have been upset if my boss tried to shop me to another team.

 

[cycloneworld]

I agree but comparing him against a list of awful QB's doesn't make him great. The other thing is Cutler (with better WR's, Marshall tilts that argument every time) has done less than some of those names. There are guys on there who won playoff games, even went to a Super Bowl. That says investing money in a QB didn't get the Franchise any further than putting money into other positions. The bottom line is even though Cutler is better than that list you gave, bringing him in hasn't moved the franchise any further forward than before he got here. I think thats how I think the Bears need to evaluate it, the bad thing is, Trestman is there for Cutler, he was brought in for Cutler.

Fair enough. So let's compare him against other franchise QBs. QB rating among starting QBs:

1. Foles
2. Manning
3. Rivers
4. Rodgers
5. Brees
6. Wilson
7. Romo
8. Roethlisberger
9. Kaepernick
10. Bradford
11. Ryan
12. Cutler
13. Smith
14. Dalton
15. Newton
16. Brady
17. Luck
....
23. Stafford
27. RGII

I'm not saying Cutler is a top 5 QB (maybe around #10-12) but to act like the Bears can transform McCown or a college QB into the next franchise QB is laughable based on history.

With weapons around him and a good offensive line for the first time in his Bears career, I'm all for signing him to a long term deal.

 

[KidSilverhair]

Cutler to the Vikings? Not sure he's old enough, given Minnesota's penchant for old free agent QBs on the verge of retirement (Cunningham, Moon, McMahon, George, Favre - some worked out, some didn't, none of them lasted long there).

 

[tm3308]

Fair enough. So let's compare him against other franchise QBs. QB rating among starting QBs:

1. Foles
2. Manning
3. Rivers
4. Rodgers
5. Brees
6. Wilson
7. Romo
8. Roethlisberger
9. Kaepernick
10. Bradford
11. Ryan
12. Cutler
13. Smith
14. Dalton
15. Newton
16. Brady
17. Luck
....
23. Stafford
27. RGII

I'm not saying Cutler is a top 5 QB (maybe around #10-12) but to act like the Bears can transform McCown or a college QB into the next franchise QB is laughable based on history.

With weapons around him and a good offensive line for the first time in his Bears career, I'm all for signing him to a long term deal.

Just remember that he wasn't really better this season than he's been over the course of his career, when he signs that deal. Even with all the weapons and improved offensive line, he wasn't significantly better than he was before.

If Cutler is willing to sign at a price that's well below market value, the Bears should go ahead and keep him. But if he's going to want big money, the Bears would be wise to let him walk. They're better off losing a year without Cutler and then bringing someone in who can produce at that level or better, than they are by signing him to a bad contract that they're stuck with for years.

He just isn't worth elite money. You look at the guys who are widely accepted as elite QB's (Brady, Manning, Brees, Rodgers), and you find that all of them started producing at an elite level within a couple years of taking over as starters. Then you've got the guys like Romo, Roethlisberger, McNabb, etc., who weren't quite elite (IMO) but were very good (and reached that level pretty early in their careers). Then there's the middle tier guys like Cutler, who has never produced at anywhere near an elite level during an 8-year career. That's not a guy you pay big bucks for.

 

[mcblogerson]

Tagging Cutler would be downright stupid. He is not a top 5 QB and does not deserve Manning/Brady/Brees type money.

As for other options, the FA pool isn't very deep but there are plenty of guys out there they could try and trade for. A guy like Ryan Fitzpatrick has put up some pretty similar numbers over the last four years, and he's been working with worse supporting casts than Cutler. Matt Schaub had an awful year this year, but the guy had been a top 10 QB in the league for the five years before this one. If he gets released, he likely could be brought in for a pretty reasonable price and a change of scenery would do him good.

Both of those guys have posted numbers very similar to Cutler's over the course of their careers. Only Cutler is set to make way more money than either of them, for no other reason than people still look at his potential. He's almost Andrew Bynum-like in that regard.

If they tag Cutler it'll cost them around $16-17 mil, which is only $2 mil more than Schaub will make. Fitzpatrick is a backup QB like Mccown. I don't think he deserves top 5 money, but if you're great ideas to replace him are Schaub and Fitzpatrick then you have no idea what you're talking about. I think the Bears will offer him something in the $15 mil/yr range, so tagging him only costs them an extra 2mil thus making it a smart move.

 

[tm3308]

If they tag Cutler it'll cost them around $16-17 mil, which is only $2 mil more than Schaub will make. Fitzpatrick is a backup QB like Mccown. I don't think he deserves top 5 money, but if you're great ideas to replace him are Schaub and Fitzpatrick then you have no idea what you're talking about. I think the Bears will offer him something in the $15 mil/yr range, so tagging him only costs them an extra 2mil thus making it a smart move.

I never said Fitzpatrick or Schaub would be better than Cutler. But the Bears could definitely get better bang for their buck with those guys, since they haven't put up numbers that are all that dissimilar from Cutler's, and both would likely come at a better price.

Fitzpatrick has plenty of starting experience, and look at his numbers over the last four years (Bearing in mind that he was playing for the Bills and Titans, both of whom have far worse supporting casts than what Chicago has offered Cutler):

12,686 yards
85 touchdowns (4.6% TD rate)
66 interceptions (3.5% INT rate)
60.6% completion percentage (1,131/1,865)
6.8 yards per attempt
11.2 yards per completion
97 sacks
56 games played/53 games started

QB Rating: 81.4

Cutler (over same span):

11,247 yards
74 touchdowns (4.8% TD rate)
49 interceptions (3.2% INT rate)
61% completion percentage (922/1,535)
7.3 yards per attempt
12.2 yards per completion
132 sacks (granted, his O-line sucked, but he also had a penchant for holding onto the ball for far too long; not a good combo)
51 games played/started

QB Rating: 85.4



Huh, not a very big disparity there. But, since Fitzpatrick is just a backup QB, let's compare Cutler to a guy like Romo (since I think we can all agree Cutler isn't on the Manning/Rodgers level).

Tony Romo

14,520 yards
101 TD (5.3% TD rate)
46 interceptions (2.4% INT rate)
66% completion percentage (1,261/1,918)
7.6 yards per attempt
11.5 yards per completion
114 sacks
53 games played/started

QB Rating: 96.0 (rounded from 95.97)



Cutler is much, much closer to Fitzpatrick than he is to Romo in nearly every category over the last four years. And Romo isn't one of the league's elite QB's. He's in the next tier of guys that are very good, but not elite. And Fitzpatrick is due $2.75 million next season, while Cutler is going to get $15 million per year or more on his next deal. He's paid roughly what he should be, based on performance, right now (roughly $10 million). But to pay a guy, who's never shown himself to be even close to elite, top 5 money (which is what a franchise tag would do and your projected offer isn't far off from) is just dumb. The Bears might not get better on-field performance, but they can get similar performance for a lower cost. Considering that quarterback play wasn't the problem, that's a good thing for Chicago.

 

[klamath632]

Just remember that he wasn't really better this season than he's been over the course of his career, when he signs that deal. Even with all the weapons and improved offensive line, he wasn't significantly better than he was before.

You keep repeating this, but I don't believe it's true. His average QBR for the years prior to this one: 51.2. His QBR this year? 66.4

 

[cycloneworld]

Cutler's also played for 4 different OCs and has been sack an ungodly amount of times. Given a good oline and some weapons around him, he made some pretty good improvement this year. He had a QB rating this year of 89.2.

Compare that to other franchise QBs this year, Stafford (84.2), Flacco (73.1), Matt Ryan (89.6), Cam (88.8), Kaepernick (91.6), and Roethlisberger (92.0).

Like I said earlier, Cutler is not a top 5-6 QB. But I believe with an oline and some talent around him, he can be in the next group. That said, the injuries do concern me.

 

[CyJack13]

I don't think TM has any idea how terrible the Bears offensive lines have been prior to this year. Fitzpatrick would have been horrible if he had to play with the line Cutler did.

 

[tm3308]

You keep repeating this, but I don't believe it's true. His average QBR for the years prior to this one: 51.2. His QBR this year? 66.4

His average passer rating in his first seven seasons was 84.7, and his rating this year was 89.2. It was better, but still only slightly above average.

Cutler's also played for 4 different OCs and has been sack an ungodly amount of times. Given a good oline and some weapons around him, he made some pretty good improvement this year. He had a QB rating this year of 89.2.

Compare that to other franchise QBs this year, Stafford (84.2), Flacco (73.1), Matt Ryan (89.6), Cam (88.8), Kaepernick (91.6), and Roethlisberger (92.0).

Like I said earlier, Cutler is not a top 5-6 QB. But I believe with an oline and some talent around him, he can be in the next group. That said, the injuries do concern me.

Of the guys you listed, three of them (Stafford, Newton and Kaep) are all still pretty young. And Kaep is not paid like a franchise guy yet; he's still got something left to prove before he's a bonafide franchise guy. Most people laughed the Ravens out of town for signing Flacco to such an insane deal.

So Cutler, in his eighth year, posted arguably his best season and was comparable to three guys who are 25 or younger and a pair of guys who had seasons that weren't their best (Ryan and Roethlisberger). I'd take Roethlisberger and Ryan over Cutler any day of the week. The other three guys have potential and youth on their side. But Cutler is going to be on the wrong side of 30 years old next season. Expecting him to suddenly blossom into a Romo/Roethlisberger/Rivers-type QB at 31 is unrealistic. It'd be one thing to have him under contract for the next couple years and be hoping to see that improvement. But to offer him a big FA deal when you don't have any evidence to suggest he's going to perform at that level? That's not a wise business decision.

 

[Sigmapolis]

I guess it all boils down to...

Would you rather have Cutler at $15 million/year?

TQBR of 66.4, good enough for #8 in the league last year (behind Kaepernick and ahead of Luck) at age 30 for 4-5 years

Or would you rather have Ryan Fitzpatrick (just one example) at, say, $3 million/year with a TQBR of 55.4, which was #16 in the league behind Andy Dalton and ahead of Big Ben for 2-3 years to compete with McCown for the starting job and enough money in free agency ($12 million) for 2-3 quality guys to fill holes on defense

Either way, you probably draft heavy on defense this year, though it would not surprise me for Tressman to grab a developmental quarterback in Rounds 3-5 if they go away from Cutler, given a veteran is probably intended as a bridge to a new era in a few years

Make your own assumptions about Tressman's coaching getting more out of Cutler, McCown, Schaub, Fitzpatrick, or anybody else

They're going to have to (at least) slightly overpay Cutler if they keep him--that much is clear
Is the difference between Cutler and a truly average starter worth giving up $12 million of help for the defense?

 

[cycloneworld]

Of the guys you listed, three of them (Stafford, Newton and Kaep) are all still pretty young. And Kaep is not paid like a franchise guy yet; he's still got something left to prove before he's a bonafide franchise guy. Most people laughed the Ravens out of town for signing Flacco to such an insane deal.

Fair point. But you are saying you wouldn't sign Cutler for anything less than "well below market value". I disagree with my point being, I would sign him AT market value. Should he get top 5 QB money? No. Should he get top 10 QB money? Yes, in my opinion.

I don't want the Bears to overpay him but I also don't understand the people who think he is on Ryan Fitzpatrick's level.

 

[tm3308]

I don't think TM has any idea how terrible the Bears offensive lines have been prior to this year. Fitzpatrick would have been horrible if he had to play with the line Cutler did.

I'm aware Chicago's lines were terrible. But even with improved line play and a great supporting cast, Cutler didn't put up outstanding numbers. He's not worth paying $15+ million a year.

 

[Rhoadhoused]

Depends on what your goal is. Do you want to win the super bowl or just be a decent team who can make the playoffs every couple years.

Nobody is winning the super bowl with a discount QB.

 

[tm3308]

I guess it all boils down to...

Would you rather have Cutler at $15 million/year?

TQBR of 66.4, good enough for #8 in the league last year (behind Kaepernick and ahead of Luck) at age 30 for 4-5 years

Or would you rather have Ryan Fitzpatrick (just one example) at, say, $3 million/year with a TQBR of 55.4, which was #16 in the league behind Andy Dalton and ahead of Big Ben for 2-3 years to compete with McCown for the starting job and enough money in free agency ($12 million) for 2-3 quality guys to fill holes on defense

Either way, you probably draft heavy on defense this year, though it would not surprise me for Tressman to grab a developmental quarterback in Rounds 3-5 if they go away from Cutler, given a veteran is probably intended as a bridge to a new era in a few years

Make your own assumptions about Tressman's coaching getting more out of Cutler, McCown, Schaub, Fitzpatrick, or anybody else

They're going to have to (at least) slightly overpay Cutler if they keep him--that much is clear
Is the difference between Cutler and a truly average starter worth giving up $12 million of help for the defense?

If the supporting cast were what it once was, I'd say no. But with Marshall, Jeffery, Bennett and Forte, a truly average starter can produce at a pretty solid level. They can upgrade at QB down the road, either through the draft or by signing someone. But without major defensive help, they aren't going to win anything -- with or without Cutler.