This whole 'you and me agreeing thing' has been going on FAR too long. It's starting to creep me out.

 

It IS odd, but the main difference is I don't think the majority of Cutler's problems are his. If the Bears ever fixed the OL and had offensive weapons in the same season, there might be something to it. As it stands, they've only had a decent OL one year he's been in Chicago. No QB can survive under that duress, especially if it's compounded by a revolving door at varying stages of coaching/management.

 

As for QBs, we agree because it makes the most sense to pay Hoyer less money than Glennon more money. Hoyer did well last season, bridges the gap, and would cost a bunch less. His unknowns are known. Glennon's unknowns could end up royally screwing the team's salary cap. Both are stop-gaps at best, so it doesn't make sense to pay a ton for a guy you don't view as a franchise QB. Hoyer and a rookie is the only option that makes sense in regards to money, salary cap usage, and team future.

It IS odd, but the main difference is I don't think the majority of Cutler's problems are his. If the Bears ever fixed the OL and had offensive weapons in the same season, there might be something to it. As it stands, they've only had a decent OL one year he's been in Chicago. No QB can survive under that duress, especially if it's compounded by a revolving door at varying stages of coaching/management.

 

Rather than rehash the last 10(?) years of this topic I'll say; 'tomato / toMAHto' and I mean that as we pinpoint problems on the team for different reasons yet knowing there are (were) in fact, problems.

http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/1885557...francisco-49ers

 

Hoyer to 49'ers

 

Buffalo Bills, agreed to a new deal with Tyrod Taylor,

http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/1885557...francisco-49ers

 

Hoyer to 49'ers

 

Buffalo Bills, agreed to a new deal with Tyrod Taylor,

 

Well crap (about Hoyer not Taylor).

 

They must not be having any luck in dislodging Cousins from Wash. Read they were looking at getting Garçon too.

Shanahan was Hoyer's OC at Cleveland in 2014 and has offered him a chance to start because of his familiarity with the system.

Also means they might draft QB 2nd...

 

Shanahan was Hoyer's OC at Cleveland in 2014 and has offered him a chance to start because of his familiarity with the system.

 

Also means they might draft QB 2nd...

 

I agree and as I posted on the poll thread, that will allow them to take the best player at 2 and come back and take a look at QB at 34.

It IS odd, but the main difference is I don't think the majority of Cutler's problems are his. If the Bears ever fixed the OL and had offensive weapons in the same season, there might be something to it. As it stands, they've only had a decent OL one year he's been in Chicago. No QB can survive under that duress, especially if it's compounded by a revolving door at varying stages of coaching/management.

 

As for QBs, we agree because it makes the most sense to pay Hoyer less money than Glennon more money. Hoyer did well last season, bridges the gap, and would cost a bunch less. His unknowns are known. Glennon's unknowns could end up royally screwing the team's salary cap. Both are stop-gaps at best, so it doesn't make sense to pay a ton for a guy you don't view as a franchise QB. Hoyer and a rookie is the only option that makes sense in regards to money, salary cap usage, and team future.

 

Ya know who also had an equally, if not worse OL in his time as a starter? Mike Glennon.

Ya know who also had an equally, if not worse OL in his time as a starter? Mike Glennon.

 

Big difference is, Cutler proved he has stud potential when he was with Denver.

Big difference is, Cutler proved he has stud potential when he was with Denver.

I would think a stud performance would equal a playoff appearance and in Cutler's case it did not. Looks like it was a fluke. Other QBs have had less weapons or just as bad of an O-Line and weren't as bad as Cutler has been. We are now conditioned to giving him an excuse.

 

Big difference is, Cutler proved he has stud potential when he was with Denver.

 

So give Glennon, a guy who the Saints(Pace), liked coming out of the draft a shot to play with a better OL.

 

Adam, you're gonna be hard pressed to find a QB who has ad an awful OL and succeeded. Don't give me Rodgers either. The reason he gets sacked so much is because he tries to extend plays and holds onto the ball forever.

Looking back at some advanced stats on Glennon from his rookie year... He had the 10th highest completion percentage on throws over 20 yards while also having the best TD/INT ratio of any QB in the top 10 of that category(7/1). He graded 2nd overall in throws between 21-30 yards. He was also "Among the league best" at throwing to the tight end.

 

 

Looking back at some advanced stats on Glennon from his rookie year... He had the 10th highest completion percentage on throws over 20 yards while also having the best TD/INT ratio of any QB in the top 10 of that category(7/1). He graded 2nd overall in throws between 21-30 yards. He was also "Among the league best" at throwing to the tight end.

So, this being a great year forTE, paired with Glennon being efficient with said weapon, I see us drafting two. What I don't see is what elite talent we will draft at 3. Again, looking like trade down is the best option.

So give Glennon, a guy who the Saints(Pace), liked coming out of the draft a shot to play with a better OL.

 

Adam, you're gonna be hard pressed to find a QB who has ad an awful OL and succeeded. Don't give me Rodgers either. The reason he gets sacked so much is because he tries to extend plays and holds onto the ball forever.

 

Here we go again, the ongoing 'it's everything but Jays fault' argument. Just because I'm curious I looked up "good Qbs with bad olines" and found this: http://ftw.usatoday.com/2016/06/ranking-nf...-patriots-brady

 

Here are a few names from this article with their particular olines and where they ranked going into last season. With each name I put up I would add not always are they (QB) successful but the team, despite their Oline ranking.

 

Brady - 26th, A. Smith - 20th, Tannehill/Dolphins - 27th, J. Winston - 21st, R. Wilson - 30th, E. Manning - 25th, Mariota - 32nd, Luck - 28th.

 

So you see, it isn't so difficult to find a successful QB/team after all. (and I didn't add Rodgers).

 

If Jay signs on with another team and LEADS that team to the playoffs and the Super Bowl, I'll eat crow. Until then I wish him the best in whatever he does next.

So, this being a great year forTE, paired with Glennon being efficient with said weapon, I see us drafting two. What I don't see is what elite talent we will draft at 3. Again, looking like trade down is the best option.

There are 3 worthy of that pick, Jamal Adams--Marshon Lattimore--Solomon Thomas

 

Allen has dropped out of that spot due to future injury potential.

 

I would be satisfied with any of those 3 names.

So, this being a great year forTE, paired with Glennon being efficient with said weapon, I see us drafting two. What I don't see is what elite talent we will draft at 3. Again, looking like trade down is the best option.

 

I don't know about drafting 2 with all the other needs, but I would absolutely draft one.

 

I wouldn't mind taking a waiver on Tim Wright who was sadly Tampa's 2nd best pass catcher in Glennons rookie year....Which isn't saying much considering he only had 500 yards. Shows you the type of situation he was in his rookie year as far as receivers go.

I don't know about drafting 2 with all the other needs, but I would absolutely draft one.

 

I wouldn't mind taking a waiver on Tim Wright who was sadly Tampa's 2nd best pass catcher in Glennons rookie year....Which isn't saying much considering he only had 500 yards. Shows you the type of situation he was in his rookie year as far as receivers go.

TE's are freaks this year. I'm in for getting 2.

Here we go again, the ongoing 'it's everything but Jays fault' argument. Just because I'm curious I looked up "good Qbs with bad olines" and found this: http://ftw.usatoday.com/2016/06/ranking-nf...-patriots-brady

 

Here are a few names from this article with their particular olines and where they ranked going into last season. With each name I put up I would add not always are they (QB) successful but the team, despite their Oline ranking.

 

Brady - 26th, A. Smith - 20th, Tannehill/Dolphins - 27th, J. Winston - 21st, R. Wilson - 30th, E. Manning - 25th, Mariota - 32nd, Luck - 28th.

 

So you see, it isn't so difficult to find a successful QB/team after all. (and I didn't add Rodgers).

 

If Jay signs on with another team and LEADS that team to the playoffs and the Super Bowl, I'll eat crow. Until then I wish him the best in whatever he does next.

 

OL Rankings are BS, especially if from PFF. There is no way all their OLs were wise collectively than the mess the Bears have had.

ODB and Marshall is going to be a scary combo.

There are 3 worthy of that pick, Jamal Adams--Marshon Lattimore--Solomon Thomas

 

Allen has dropped out of that spot due to future injury potential.

 

I would be satisfied with any of those 3 names.

 

I agree with those 3 but we should add Hooker to the list as he offers something in coverage that is rare to find in the deep middle of the field.

 

My concern with Lattimore is his injury history, and then of course he runs at the combine and gets injured. Right now I'd say Adams is the likely pick.

I agree with those 3 but we should add Hooker to the list as he offers something in coverage that is rare to find in the deep middle of the field.

 

My concern with Lattimore is his injury history, and then of course he runs at the combine and gets injured. Right now I'd say Adams is the likely pick.

 

I'm with you. Torn between Adams and Hooker but leaning towards Adams.

OL Rankings are BS, especially if from PFF. There is no way all their OLs were wise collectively than the mess the Bears have had.

 

I'm done with it. Sorry to have added to the hijacking of this thread. We're past it now and onto a new era. The Mike Glennon era...?

I agree with those 3 but we should add Hooker to the list as he offers something in coverage that is rare to find in the deep middle of the field.

 

My concern with Lattimore is his injury history, and then of course he runs at the combine and gets injured. Right now I'd say Adams is the likely pick.

 

Isn't Hooker currently recovering from surgery?

I agree with those 3 but we should add Hooker to the list as he offers something in coverage that is rare to find in the deep middle of the field.

 

My concern with Lattimore is his injury history, and then of course he runs at the combine and gets injured. Right now I'd say Adams is the likely pick.

Hooker would be on that list but has the injury history also.

Are the 49ers cheating again? Remember when they got in trouble years back for circumventing the salary cap? They are signing EVERYONE this year.