- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Cutler: 7 years, $126 Million, $54 Guaranteed
Posted on 1/2/14 at 6:03 pm to DelU249
Posted on 1/2/14 at 6:03 pm to DelU249
quote:Sample size? I think that Jelly dude linked every 35+ year old QB EVER, didn't he?
That is so irrelevant especially considering you are hell bent on "sample size" and "statistics" it is absurd
quote:Not even remotely close, unless your definition of manage a game is to be a pretty terrible QB. To "manage" a game, I'd assume you'd have to be an average QB, at worst. Name those 20 average QBs.
, there are 20 guys who the bears could sign for nothing that could "manage" the game
quote:To my understanding, the Bears could be done with the deal in 3 years. Your all caught up on 7 years and $126million. Some teams spend 10-15 years before they get a QB as good as Cutler, and I'm not even saying he's THAT good, just pointing out how hard it is to find a QB, but you make it seem like there are a dime a doze and easy to find.
again, final time, tell me at length why signing jay cutler to this contract is such a great decision for the bears
I think it's a good move if I'm understanding the makeup of the deal, Cutler is capable of doing the same things Flacco has done, there is virtually zero difference between the 2 statistically speaking.
1
Posted on 1/2/14 at 6:08 pm to DelU249
quote:He had Boldin all 3 years McCown got a little playing time, and Fitz 2 of those 3 years. In those 3 seasons, Fitz caught 100 balls once, and Boldin did twice, and probably would have 3 times if not for only playing 9 games in 1 of those seasons.
mccown played with absolute nobodies...I think in 04 he may have had a rookie Larry Fitzgerald.
Posted on 1/2/14 at 6:13 pm to DelU249
OK.
I'm going to explain to you why this is a good deal for both the Bears and Cutler.
1) Cutler is a FA this off season. The Bears had a choice, either keep him or let him go.
2) If they let him go, who will replace him? This year's draft class is less than inspiring, and the free agent crop is pretty bad. McCown is a journeyman who has hinted at retirement.
3) If they decided to keep him, they could either franchise him for a 20+ million dollar hit, apply the transition tag for a 15+ million dollar hit PLUS still have him exposed to other teams with whom they would have to match--which would likely be ~20 million per.
So in the end they agree to what is essentially a three year deal at 18 million per. This is a better deal for the team than other contracts for comparable QBs, and Cutler gets paid well.
Your obsession with McCown's very limited sample of good games this season clouds your judgment regarding the realities of this situation.
I'm going to explain to you why this is a good deal for both the Bears and Cutler.
1) Cutler is a FA this off season. The Bears had a choice, either keep him or let him go.
2) If they let him go, who will replace him? This year's draft class is less than inspiring, and the free agent crop is pretty bad. McCown is a journeyman who has hinted at retirement.
3) If they decided to keep him, they could either franchise him for a 20+ million dollar hit, apply the transition tag for a 15+ million dollar hit PLUS still have him exposed to other teams with whom they would have to match--which would likely be ~20 million per.
So in the end they agree to what is essentially a three year deal at 18 million per. This is a better deal for the team than other contracts for comparable QBs, and Cutler gets paid well.
Your obsession with McCown's very limited sample of good games this season clouds your judgment regarding the realities of this situation.
Posted on 1/2/14 at 6:16 pm to Sophandros
quote:That and the 7/$126mil, and the McCown Arizona years with no WRs around him being playing well compared to Cutler being average in Chicago.
Your obsession with McCown's very limited sample of good games this season clouds your judgment regarding the realities of this situation
I don't really understand the argument at all, or more to the important, it just seems like all the supporting reasons are incorrect, IMO of course.
This post was edited on 1/2/14 at 6:21 pm
Posted on 1/2/14 at 6:17 pm to shel311
quote:
Lucky for me, I didn't assume that.
Never said you did.
quote:
He's not a top 5 QB, but he's good enough right now to QB a Super Bowl team
Well, the bar for that argument is set at "Trent Dilfer".
Posted on 1/2/14 at 6:20 pm to brgfather129
quote:Meh, I could have worded it better, but I thought it would be understood that I meant good enough to play well and be part of the reason a team wins a Super Bowl, considering I made the Flacco comparison lol.
Well, the bar for that argument is set at "Trent Dilfer".
quote:If you reread it, it's not that clear at all given the context, much like my post you missed my point on lol.
Never said you did.
This post was edited on 1/2/14 at 6:27 pm
Posted on 1/3/14 at 12:42 am to shel311
Flacco did what he did while not hamstringing the team with his salary. The ravens will not, can not, win a title with flacco's contract on the books
Secondly, $54 million over 3 years does the damage. I don't care that it's 7 years. In those 3 years they will only sign bottom of the barrell FAs and not be able to resign guys around cutler. They're fricked, no other way around it
He's just paid like one. Smart move. Trestman, whether this was his decision or not, might as well hand in his papers. He won't make it past year 4. Bookmark it. No playoff appearances for the bears under trestman and he won't make it past year 4
Secondly, $54 million over 3 years does the damage. I don't care that it's 7 years. In those 3 years they will only sign bottom of the barrell FAs and not be able to resign guys around cutler. They're fricked, no other way around it
quote:
He is not a top 5 QB
He's just paid like one. Smart move. Trestman, whether this was his decision or not, might as well hand in his papers. He won't make it past year 4. Bookmark it. No playoff appearances for the bears under trestman and he won't make it past year 4
Posted on 1/3/14 at 3:39 am to DelU249
Posted on 1/3/14 at 7:09 am to Sophandros
From that link:
This notion that McCown will be as good as last year, or even average or a "manager" without any doubt is just not so, it's nowhere near a guarantee.
quote:
Of course, the Bears could have played hardball with Cutler and found out how their great defense/custodial quarterback business model works without the great defense. Chances are, several Grossman-to Harbaugh types would go 5-11 while the Bears searched for their next George-Butkus-Singletary-Urlacher. Cutler gives the Bears the chance to win with ordinary defense, something that has not happened in the age of color television.
This notion that McCown will be as good as last year, or even average or a "manager" without any doubt is just not so, it's nowhere near a guarantee.
Posted on 1/3/14 at 8:06 am to shel311
Exactly. And again, given the lack of a sure thing in the draft and the lack of any good talent in the FA market, Chicago did the right thing. Lost in this story is that they signed several other key free agents yesterday, making their offseason go more smoothly.
Posted on 1/3/14 at 9:52 am to Hugo Stiglitz
Looks like bears just locked themselves into mediocrity for another 7 years.
Posted on 1/3/14 at 1:31 pm to QJenk
quote:
Looks like bears just locked themselves into mediocrity for another 7 years.
Posted on 1/4/14 at 10:49 pm to shel311
per yahoo
Posted on 1/5/14 at 3:30 am to QJenk
quote:
Looks like bears just locked themselves into mediocrity for another 7 years.
This. As far as what the options were… how about not locking yourself in to a QB who isn't going to take you anywhere in the postseason? They're better off with no one at quarterback and making a move year after next if nothing pans out. This move, however, is guaranteed to keep them mediocre for the next 3-5 years.
This post was edited on 1/5/14 at 3:32 am
Posted on 1/5/14 at 7:51 am to Unknown_Poster
quote:
This. As far as what the options were… how about not locking yourself in to a QB who isn't going to take you anywhere in the postseason? They're better off with no one at quarterback and making a move year after next if nothing pans out. This move, however, is guaranteed to keep them mediocre for the next 3-5 years.
Yep. Good stats (although his are strewn with ill timed interceptions), do not make up for playoff success. See Romo.
Page 4 of 4
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News