Is Cutler a Franchise QB?

[nfoligno]

CNNSI has a small piece where they question whether Cutler is a franchise QB. I have no issue with this question in general. I have my opinion, but it is a fair question. The issue I have is with their reasoning. They say a franchise QB is one who makes those around him better, and goes on to say Cutler did not do this.

 

Hester may not have had the big leap in stats many hoped, but he did continue to improve with more catches, yards and average.

 

Bennett barely saw the field his rookie year, but managed over 50 catches and over 700 yards.

 

Olsen is another, like Hester, who many hoped for big things, but while that didn't happen, he increased his number of catches, yards and scores.

 

DA has been in the league a while and done nothing, yet in a short period, he has 24-300-4.

 

Knox, a rookie from a small school, has 45-527-5.

 

Can you really argue Cutler didn't improve the play of these players. Would DA, Bennett and Knox have had half their numbers w/o Cutler?

 

How about in Denver?

 

Marshall, Sheffler and Stokleys numbers all took a hit with the loss of Cutler. Royal's numbers dropped off the face of the Earth w/o Cutler. Sure seems Cutler elevated the play of those receivers.

 

There are plenty of reasons to question Cutler, and even question whether he is a franchise QB, but I question trying to say he doesn't elevate the play of those around him.

 

[madlithuanian]

Bottom line, it's too early to make that call...

 

One "interim" (w/ Turner as OC) season should not be what his career is Chi should be solely based on.

 

But stories are limitied right now...so why not harp on pick-boy!?

 

CNNSI has a small piece where they question whether Cutler is a franchise QB. I have no issue with this question in general. I have my opinion, but it is a fair question. The issue I have is with their reasoning. They say a franchise QB is one who makes those around him better, and goes on to say Cutler did not do this.

 

Hester may not have had the big leap in stats many hoped, but he did continue to improve with more catches, yards and average.

 

Bennett barely saw the field his rookie year, but managed over 50 catches and over 700 yards.

 

Olsen is another, like Hester, who many hoped for big things, but while that didn't happen, he increased his number of catches, yards and scores.

 

DA has been in the league a while and done nothing, yet in a short period, he has 24-300-4.

 

Knox, a rookie from a small school, has 45-527-5.

 

Can you really argue Cutler didn't improve the play of these players. Would DA, Bennett and Knox have had half their numbers w/o Cutler?

 

How about in Denver?

 

Marshall, Sheffler and Stokleys numbers all took a hit with the loss of Cutler. Royal's numbers dropped off the face of the Earth w/o Cutler. Sure seems Cutler elevated the play of those receivers.

 

There are plenty of reasons to question Cutler, and even question whether he is a franchise QB, but I question trying to say he doesn't elevate the play of those around him.

 

[nfoligno]

I have no issue with questioning Cutler. Despite all the potential reasons for his high pick season, plenty of blame is on him, and there are plenty of questions. My issue was with the one angle they took, flat saying Cutler did not elevate the play of those around him. I don't see that argument at all. Question his decision making, vision, leadership, whatever, but when I look at the group of receivers we had, and that they all had better numbers than previous, how can you say Cutler didn't elevate their play. And again, for further evidence, look at what the Denver receiver did with him and w/o.

 

Bottom line, it's too early to make that call...

 

One "interim" (w/ Turner as OC) season should not be what his career is Chi should be solely based on.

 

But stories are limitied right now...so why not harp on pick-boy!?

 

[madlithuanian]

Seriously, nor do I. His poor decision making (while I think due to frustrations on many levels) deserves criticism.

 

I could see their argument. No one Bear player appeared drastically better than the year before with an assumption that players should progress positively naturally. Thus, one could expect, with a top tier QB, they should be improving not just marginally, but significantly.

 

We all know there are numerous factors involved, chiefly that of a poor O-line... But, the criticism is warranted.

 

Just for me personally, I'm not basing my opinion on Jay after just last year. I want to see more, and I really feel he will be the stud we've all been waiting for... Of course, once Smith finally is ousted.

 

I have no issue with questioning Cutler. Despite all the potential reasons for his high pick season, plenty of blame is on him, and there are plenty of questions. My issue was with the one angle they took, flat saying Cutler did not elevate the play of those around him. I don't see that argument at all. Question his decision making, vision, leadership, whatever, but when I look at the group of receivers we had, and that they all had better numbers than previous, how can you say Cutler didn't elevate their play. And again, for further evidence, look at what the Denver receiver did with him and w/o.

 

['TD']

The Bears paid the Bronco's like he was one, they gave him a contract like he is one, but he is far from proving he is even close to one imo.

 

When you can't run, your receivers will have more catches. When they are in their second year, and catching their first catch (bennett) or 3rd year as WR and slow catching on like Hester, or other teams casts offs like Aromashadu that just might be good, or even a tall TE catching TD's when you can't punch it in, then yes you are going to look better as a receiver with cutler with out a running game, than Orton with one. It was one of the weaker choices to pick for the argument, but it's not like the players on the Bears looked great with him.

 

On the Bronco's their best WR looked just as dominant, minus missing time for suspension with out him, even tho their second best looked worst, it's probably due to change of scheme. He was a deep threat the year before and it went to an offense that doesn't look for that nearly as much.

[brletich]

In my opinion a franchise QB is one that the franchise makes a large investment in...meaning that he is the franchise's QB for years or his failure sets the franchise up for hard times for years...based on that view of things Cutler is indeed a franchise QB...

[jason]

I honestly think it's an ignorant question. The irrefutable answer in my mind is YES.

 

Before last year, the question would not have been answered. It's just an ignorant writer going on the stats column and poking holes in Cutler's game because of the interceptions. The only thing is, the writer didn't do the homework, and didn't review the tape, because we have conclusively seen that about 10 of the interceptions weren't even on Cutler. Take those ten away, and this discussion doesn't get started because of the improvements nearly every receiver had last year.

[BigDaddy]

I agree Jason. Not that it was an ignorant question but I agree with your take on Cutler. Of course Cutler's a franchise QB. He absolutely improved the play around him with Knox, Hester, DA and Bennett. What everyone forgets is that our o line sucked, our RB was hurt, as improved as the WRs might have been, they did NOT often get the separation needed, we had an OC who was a freakin idiot, we haven't had a FB who can get that tough 1 yd on 3rd and 1 since forever. On top of that, our defense folded like a cheap suit.;

 

If Cutler were still in Denver he would have been a premier QB. The REAL question people should be asking is will ANY of these WRs EVER amount to anything close to a Brandon Marshall? Will our o line actually help our RB put up numbers that make defenses key on him? Will Greg Olsen distinguish himself as a premier TE? Will Martz put this offense in a position to do some damage in this league or will he whimp out and become Lovie Smiths' whipping boy? Will this defense be able to hold teams to a reasonable number to allow the offense to have a more diverse gameplan?

 

 

I honestly think it's an ignorant question. The irrefutable answer in my mind is YES.

 

Before last year, the question would not have been answered. It's just an ignorant writer going on the stats column and poking holes in Cutler's game because of the interceptions. The only thing is, the writer didn't do the homework, and didn't review the tape, because we have conclusively seen that about 10 of the interceptions weren't even on Cutler. Take those ten away, and this discussion doesn't get started because of the improvements nearly every receiver had last year.

[Daventry]

I agree Jason. Not that it was an ignorant question but I agree with your take on Cutler. Of course Cutler's a franchise QB. He absolutely improved the play around him with Knox, Hester, DA and Bennett. What everyone forgets is that our o line sucked, our RB was hurt, as improved as the WRs might have been, they did NOT often get the separation needed, we had an OC who was a freakin idiot, we haven't had a FB who can get that tough 1 yd on 3rd and 1 since forever. On top of that, our defense folded like a cheap suit.;

 

If Cutler were still in Denver he would have been a premier QB. The REAL question people should be asking is will ANY of these WRs EVER amount to anything close to a Brandon Marshall? Will our o line actually help our RB put up numbers that make defenses key on him? Will Greg Olsen distinguish himself as a premier TE? Will Martz put this offense in a position to do some damage in this league or will he whimp out and become Lovie Smiths' whipping boy? Will this defense be able to hold teams to a reasonable number to allow the offense to have a more diverse gameplan?

 

Absolutey agree with your identification of the real questions....spot on. I might add in as relatively minor questions whether Forte will look better this year and will Peppers be a superstar for us.