jason

Aside from the one throw, Cutler has looked very good. But hasn't that been the issue the entire time he's been in Chicago?

Look, I'm a huge Cutler backer, but that's 100% on him. When the WR grouping split, the safety cheated towards Marshall and Cutler threw to the double coverage. Meanwhile, Martellus broke towards the corner with his defender trailing him.

1. Big contract extension 2. Tag 3. FA Market

I still say the Bears should go HaHa Clinton Dix in RD1. He's easily the best FS available and is potentially going to be there when the Bears pick. Sure, if Jadaveon Clowney, you get him. But that ain't happening. And where the Bears are selecting, HHCD is a much better value than any other DE/DT.

Not so fast... A good safety allows the defense to be better at the LOS run stuffing because the LBs don't have to worry so much about dropping into coverage. The DBs can cheat. No doubt DT and DE are needs - MLB is not a need, there is just a youth at the position - but FS is another huge need. The Bears talent at Safety is not comparable to the talent on the DL.

Oh, you want sinister? I thought of that one, but there's an evil more insidious concept: The brass feels confident enough to move forward with McCown, and they figure Cutler, coming off of injury, will be rusty. They figure he won't put up McCown's stats and will make the off-season decision easier. They're putting him on the field purposely because they think he'll do worse than McCown. Do I think that's happening? No. But it's mad scientist stuff that could potentially happen. Particularly for a guy who's known as a QB guru, and didn't get to choose his own QB. Much like a new GM coming in and being handed a head coach, the supervisor doesn't typically like being told whom to hire.

Yeah, I don't think that's the point at all. There is a minor comparison, but the point to the original 2011 gripe held by many is that there was nothing to play for. The season was over. You can't even compare that to an early enough in the season that no team had even clinched a playoff spot.

Good catch. I forgot about that one.

Regardless of whether you think it's wrong, it's inescapably something people will do. At that point it's just about figuring a fair ratio between performances. If McCown goes for 300 & 2 TDs against the 20th defense, what should Cutler get? 325 & 2TDs? 350 and 3TDs? That's how I think of it. And in regards to the Cleveland game, I think Cutler - if he's so much better than McCown - should do as good against a top ten defense as McCown does against a defense in the teens, or something similar. Cutler Production vs. 1-10 Defense = McCown Production vs. 11-21 Defense Cutler Production vs. 11-21 Defense = McCown Production vs 21-32 Defense (Cutler Production vs. Similar Defense * 1.5) = McCown Production vs Similar Defense

On one hand, it scares me. He's the first franchise guy we've seen in a long while. On top of that, the money the Bears would save would be for free agency, presumably for a DE, which appears to be a position with average FA availability. So, money saved for FAs is good, but only if there are FAs. On the other hand, McCown has done unfathomably well. Enough that this discussion is even a discussion. And it lends to the concept that Trestman is the "QB Whisperer." Maybe with him it's like Denver RBs for that stretch of ten years or so? Plug anyone in and the system works? We might soon see that.

The point is, if McCown was able to do what he did against "bad" defenses, then Cutler should be able to do similarly against "good" defenses since he's so much better than McCown. The other logical inference is that if Cutler were healthy, he would have done much better than McCown against the previously played teams with "bad" defenses. I don't believe he would have done better against those defenses, to be quite honest.

2011 is the year being referenced. And while Urlacher could have demanded to play by his own volition, a good HC would have said, "You know, Brian, it's not getting any easier. Your getting up there in years and you've had several injuries. Let the young guys play, get some experience, and it will help us next year. That will help the team more than you playing in a meaningless game. We're mathematically eliminated from the playoffs, and you have nothing to prove since you're one of the best defensive players in the league. On top of that, if we happen to lose with the younger guys - it's more likely - we get a higher draft pick, which will also help us more." Or something like that. BTW - That potential loss would have had three positives or potential positives: 1) Urlacher doesn't get injured 2) The Bears move up about 10 spots in the draft 3) The Bears probably don't select SMC that early (my guess because of how bad of a reach it would have been)

That was every bit his fault, from beginning to end. We saw in his last year that he held significant sway when it came to the draft; so, if he wanted better offenses he should have drafted accordingly. The fact is, he didn't. He focused nearly all effort on defense, eschewing any offensive progression through the draft. And he was obviously instrumental in the decision-making process regarding offensive coordinators. Gameplan as well. I'm sure he told every one of his coordinators to play it close to the vest and not to try anything too fancy. I still don't think it was easy for him to do what he did. There were multiple times during his tenure where the Bears were beating a team soundly, and once they got the lead he shut things down. He played the clock when all he had to do was keep playing as they were. That's why I like what Trestman did this week against the Cowgirls.

Too bad Lovie Smith never understood that. Multiple years the Bears were out of it, yet he was bound and determined to get meaningless wins that ultimately hurt draft position.

He had the luxury, but that didn't mean he had to play it safe that way over and over again. There were many he lost which were directly related to him shutting things down. Which was crazy because if he kept coaching the team the way that got the lead, there was a very good possibility the lead would increase. I've always thought that was nonsense, and couldn't wait to see what would happen with an offensive minded coach in Chicago. I hated the ground-and-pound, try to squeeze out a 3 point win that Lovie Smith lived by. It's purely defensive and a play-it-safe attitude. I bet when Lovie played basketball in HS he was the guy who tried to talk his coach into running the four-corner offense and holding the ball for the final 5 minutes of the game instead of taking the shot. He probably climbed five feet of rope in gym class and decided to hang out, not wanting to take the risk of of a long fall if he tried climbing to the top. I'm just glad we both got the opportunity to see and offensive mind come to Chicago to see whether either of us were right.

I don't like that approach because it's dirty pool, and future FAs may not sign as a result. Players talk. If it played out that way, you keep Cutler for the year on the tag, and then let him walk the following year if confidence in McCown and the rookie are high.

But that's not really coaching. That's only partially coaching. Lovie could be in Chicago this year and the D would still suck. You can't lose the starting DE to FA, your starting DT and backup DT to injury, two starting LBs to FA/retirement, another two starting LBs to injury, and the starting CB to injury, and still expect a good defense. Not to mention the fact that two replacement LBs are rookies, one currently starting DT was obtained off the street, one DE is aging and hampered by injuries all year, and both safeties - the weakest point of the defense - are the only guys who've been able to stay on the field. Lovie being in Chicago would have virtually zero impact on the defense this year.

I love Trestman. Last night is what I've wanted to see for years. Get up on a team with an offensive scheme? KEEP RUNNING THAT SCHEME! Step on their throat! Do not let them breathe! That's exactly what the offense did last night under Trestman. He did not change, get conservative, let off the gas. He said, "Let's run our offense and try to score." I loved every second of it. We all know Lovie would have let off the gas when the Bears got about 28. A two touchdown lead may as well be 100 points to Lovie Smith. That would have guaranteed a bunch of three-and-out drives because of conservative play-calling, followed by an elastic defense more worried about eating time than stopping the opponent. It's nice to have an offensive minded coach for a change.

The silver lining is that if the Bears do miss the playoffs, it's probably what they really need. This team is not a super bowl team. It's a "get beat in the first or second round of the playoffs"-team. One more year of draft picks that are a little higher would help out quite a bit.

As a 7th rounder, I think he'd be an outstanding pick. Most of those guys are throwaways anyway, and the level of talent he brings at that late in the draft would be great. Not to mention the fact that I've long said the Bears should do what the Packers have done so well for so long: cultivate QB talent. If the Bears keeps Cutler and McCown, Franklin is a perfect #3 QB that sits, learns, improves, and potentially takes over a few years down the line. If the Bears go with McCown and let Cutler go, then Franklin most likely would be a luxury as a 7th round pick, because there is no doubt the Bears would draft a QB early. I still wouldn't mind it though. Maybe it drives him to prove his worth in the NFL? Maybe he beats out the other rookie? I can't think of a situation where I would dislike the Franklin pick.

That post is as succinct as possible in terms of supporting the move away from Cutler. BTW - I have friends in Nashville who often see Cutler during the offseason. So there is no doubt he either calls that place home or likes to hang out there.

At this point I think it makes more financial sense than ever to go forward with McCown and a highly drafted rookie from this year's deep QB class. The real question is whether the Bears can tender Cutler and get a draft pick from someone. If they try that, and nobody bites, then it's a win-win situation and the Bears have two good QBs. The only downside is the financial aspect of it all.

I posted when he fell down after the fly landed on him. It was before he got the receiving TD with absolutely perfect blocking where nobody touched him.

What are the cap ramifications of cutting Bush after the game? Dude sucks. No power, no vision, no purpose. Cut him please.

I can't cheer for him because he's absolutely ruining fantasy football this year.