Mongo3451

Gotta take the points. Not happy with Trestman on that one.

Cutler will draw interest, but I don't think he'll be able to write his own ticket. What you have stated regarding injuries and erratic play will come into play. Also, teams will also note the things others have been critical of like attitude, leadership and coachability before handing out a ton of cash. Add in the fact, that only a handful of teams are looking for a QB and a very deep draft class. (Jags, Texans, Raiders, Bucs, Cards and Vikes) So, I'm guessing a hometown discount may be possible.

Yes and that is within the rules. My issue with the refs, is that one guy saw it correctly and was convinced to pick the flag up with no explanation. I really wish John Brinkus would do a "Sports Science" segment on the catch-ability of that pass. My eyes did not play tricks on me...or did they...?

The only thing I would trust Hester with is to play center field in a dime package.

I'm not buying that the ball was uncatchable. Gronk was not moving so quickly that he could not have stopped and made a move for the ball. What was clear was that the defender had solid position to squash the play, as the ball was well underthrown. However, the ball had at least a chance of being caught. Uncatchable is an absolute by English standards. Not sure what the definition in the NFL rulebook is.

I agree with this and the last post from AZ54. I'm thinking about that roughing the passer call in the SF/Saints game. If I'm Harbaugh, I would have loved to challenge that or any other bogus flag.

I think it was a bad call. Gronk was contacted 4 yards deep in the end-zone and the ball was intercepted 4 yards deep. Sure it was a low 4 yards, but Gronk could have planted and tried to go over/around the defender to at least make a play. It would have been a miracle, but it was possibly catchable. And "not catchable" was the likely reason the flag was picked up. So, by definition the refs got it right. But, their interpretation of the factors that make that decision were flawed. In the future, all picked up flags need explained, at a minimum.

That's irrelevant to the rule. It has to be controlled all the way to the ground. The key part was the was the out of bounds line, as the ball was moving between that time period.

The ball was moving. Not even the Bears disagree with the call. No conspiracy on it.

Remember also that Emery did a really good job of signing quality players to the vet minimum. Those contracts do not apply to the cap. I never knew of that loophole until it was pointed out by Emery this spring. I saw at least 12 players on the list that are expendable to the point we could offer that as an option.

He should retire then.

Ahh, thanks. That makes the rest of my post irrelevant.

Isn't the franchise tag around 22 mil? If they are going to do that, offer him about 4 years/60 mil with the 1st 2 years guaranteed.

Trestman had a day yesterday. IMO - coaches coach and players play and usually blame losses on the players not executing. This one I have place squarely on Trestman. To begin, I was screaming for us to take the points. You get what you can when you can, unless the game dictates otherwise. Total offensive minded coach having too much confidence in himself. Secondly, the call on the 2 pt conversion was a clusterf**k. We have the biggest receiving corps in the NFL and their strengths were not given a chance to be utilized. Lastly and mainly, the Cutler decision. Not only should Cutler have been pulled, he should not have been playing. When the injury was 1st reported, Trestman stated the minimum for this type of injury was 4 weeks and that's where they would start. Where did that go? In another post I expressed concern that Cutler would try to be tough and potentially hurt the team. That's on Trestman for not physically evaluating Cutler enough to leaving him in the game far too long. The ankle excuse, we all know, is pure bullshit. All said, I love Trestman and hope he will use this as a learning tool. Most of all, I don't want Cutler to see the field until his ,cough cough, sigh, ankle is completely healed.

So true...

Yup!

And you based this on 6 quarters of football, plus future hypothetical games. You are far too advanced for my dumb logic. I'm not even on your level enough to agree with anything you said. I guess that's why you have the right to be condescending.

Matt Flynn and Kevin Kolb kinda made some noise like that, but fell flat. Brady and Kaepernick took it ran. The common trend was that they were young and unproven. McCown is neither. Not buying it.

I don't think that is the reality of the situation. I think the brass has a price in mind already. It could wiggle a little higher, but can really go down. I simply think McCown has less to do with that.

Yes. McCown has played well, but do has the incumbent starter. And Cutler is more proven, younger and more talented. If the Bears want to hardball him in contract negotiations, there is a team in our division that would love to pay him right now. I think the brass already knows how they value him. He won't go way up from where they have him, but they can become "not interested".

Not true. Cutler, his agent and everyone around him knows he has more to lose coming back too early than he has to gain. Too early and he lays an egg lets Trestman know he can't trust Cutler's ability to do what's in the best interest of the team. Too early and a relapse ruins the remainder of the audition and costs him millions and we don't have our QB for the playoff push. This is not the 49er situation from last season.

Does anyone have an idea of the dollars Cutler and McCown would command on the open market? This may be a great continuing debate. Money vs talent. Manager vs gunslinger. Age vs youth. Personality, coachability, team chemistry and projected success will all come into play.

Talk of Cutler coming back early is encouraging, but I'd prefer they error to the side of caution. Let McCown take the reigns a couple more weeks to ensure no lingering issues arise. I'd prefer he come back with a vengeance vs limping in to be tough.

I get what you all are saying about the safeties, but I think it's a little deeper than them sucking. Last year, we were mostly optimistic at the future of our safeties. Conte looked like an up and coming FS, being able to play centerfield and make timely decisions. Wright was a guy we said, "if he can only stay healthy. We love the way he plays run support." My thought is that they have been asked to play differently than last year and it hasn't worked yet due to injuries, scheme, effectiveness of others or they just plain suck. I don't know, but definitely don't think we should cut bait on young guys that have upside. They are both cheap enough to get rid of anytime.(even if we re-sign Wright)

Dilfer and Ray Lewis chimed in on the system as well as Young. Trestman is making his impression on me. Love it.