Lucky Luciano

i'm sorry but if you are looking at the injury aspect of cutler you don't know what you are talking about. these injuries can happen to ANY quarterback at any time and any age. we are not talking about a recurring shoulder injury or back problems that will not get better or contribute to the end of a qb's career. if you really want to look at just how tough cutler really is then look at the time he has been in chicago up to this year. there is not many if any qb's in the nfl that could have taken that kind of punishment for that long. to say he only had the problems he has had is to me amazing. so please... stop yourself if you are suggesting his injury history is any problem. as far as his record? look at the previous imbeciles that ran this team including the mighty angelo who in essence bought a ferarri in cutler and used him to pull hay wagons. it all leads to the perfect recipe for failure of any qb including the likes of brady or manning/s.

if we can't get a cap friendly contract structured with cutler then i agree you franchise him. if trestman can't judge the talent level of cutler by now he isn't even close to the qb guru we have hoped he was. what ever happens we do NOT need to draft a qb high this year unless it is as sure a thing as you can get in the top 10 of the draft and trestman wants to dump cutler anyway. otherwise we are shooting at the moon yet again with a low 1st rd pick or later. it is just way too risky while the rest of the team is defunct of talent. with cutler in the fold, even for one year, it gives us breathing room to either get a long term contract worked out or dump him with at least some time to look for the replacement.

that sounds like i am saying exactly what? i would tell you if i could figure out what you are talking about. i will contact a cryptographer and get back with you on it. you don't seem to understand the concept of a "quote" when replying on this message board. my post WAS NOT replying to your specific post otherwise it would have had your name and the text body of your quote in a box. in fact i had no problem with your stating that if cutler WAS GONE going after an option like cousins. i am not saying he is even close to what i would do as i know nearly nothing of his NFL skills but hey it's your opinion. what i do have a problem with is anyone who thinks cutler has no value to this franchise and we could plug any qb into this system (which is a system we know hardly ANYTHING about at this time) and never miss a beat. that is complete bullshit and any chicago fan after watching the dregs of the nfl walk across the chalk for nearly THIRTY YEARS and give us the performances we have watched at QB and believes this is true is completely delusional. wipe the hammer when done? with you? LOL

did i SAY you said that??? it was a freaking COMMENT on those that have stated that or implied that trestman can somehow make chicken salad out of any pile of chickenshit in the yard!!!!! maybe it's YOU who can't seem to comprehend what you are reading!!! next time DUCK when the hammer comes down!!

let me get this straight.... we are talking about not signing a pro-bowl qb in cutler who has years left on his career to do what? i have heard talk on here of drafting a QB for his replacement in the 3rd round? is that right? so it appears that mark trestman is not just a good qb coach but can actually perform heavenly miracles? hmmm.... how many years will that project take before we know if this 3rd round pick can really play the position? 3 years or more? and then what? draft another one and get onboard the qb merry-go-round or is it by that time trestman gets fired after 4-5 years of failure and we can start all over again? or how about this 4th round draft pick in kirk cousins to replace cutler? lets see, what is his nfl accomplishments? 2012 season game 14: skins vs ravens - limited play - 2 for 2 - 26 yds - 1 td game 15: skins vs browns - started - 26 and 37 for 329 yds - 2 td and 1 int yea, lets get rid of cutler and bet the franchise on a qb with one start in the nfl against the freaking cleveland browns.

i agree. it is good news even if it goes the full 6.

this season is toast. i wouldn't give up ANY draft picks for anyone unless it is a player in his prime with an up future and not a QB. we will need them for next season.

muscle tear in groin per the score

i agree. we resign him to a good contract, not an elite contract. he is a good enough qb to win a superbowl and still has about 5 years of solid play, age wise, in the NFL. we DON'T need to start the qb merry-go-round again with or without a high draft pick considering the quality of players on this team and depth. and injury prone? he is a qb. so what if he has had a knee injury. so what if he has had a groin injury. he is not a running back or a wide receiver. if you were talking about rotator cuff or other shoulder injuries then it may have had some merit but those are nothing injuries that will not effect a qb's game in the long run. i just can't believe anyone would want to flush cutler after only 6 games in a completely new system. i do say draft a qb in the lower rounds. i have wanted the bears to do this for years even if they have a real starting qb in the fold. to me here is how we draft next season and a qb isn't even close in the first 3 rounds. round 1: cornerback - if there is a shutdown cover corner you take him. we have needed one of these for decades. it improves our defense on every level. this is how you beat teams like the pats and packers - shut down their main passing attack and play aggressive in-your-face defense. not the read and react 10 + yard cushion bull shit we have played since lovie arrived. peanut is on his last leg (literally) as a cb. if they really wanted to extend his career he goes to free safety. if we draft CB in the first we move him and gain a ton in both positions. win/win round 2: defensive tackle round 3: safety, offensive guard, or center. the best bang for your buck round 4: center, guard, or tackle round 5: linebacker

guys, we need patience. this season is going to be a rollercoaster ride with lots of ups and downs. this is a complete revamp of our team and especially the offense. we have all new coaches and all new systems. we are starting 2 rookies on our offensive line. cutler is starting out with a whole new system and that in itself is a challenge (not to mention culter is going to throw int's, it's the way he is). he will also bring you the chance to win every game with stellar play. there are going to be many miscommunications and players unsure what there assignments are throughout this season. we have many problems on defense and everyone here can personally thank jerry angelo and lovie smith for the complete lack of any drafted talent on both sides of the ball. it is going to take 2 more drafts just to get this team with quality players. this year is going to be a shakedown season. don't think superbowl, just think improvement over the long haul with a solid team that can take us to the promised land in the near future.

1987 washington redskins superbowl winner jay shroeder starting qb for all but 6 games during the regular season doug williams backup qb - played in 5 games that season and started 2 prior to the playoffs. was starting qb in superbowl XXII. skins won the superbowl that year with williams as the starter. i believe willams was the MVP of superbowl XXII.

i have been watching NFL football for 40+ years. i have seen the touch rule applied a number of times over that period but in all of that time i have never seen or even heard of a situation where the ball was "touched" and batted back out of the endzone and the receiving team player was tackled in the endzone after an attempt to advance the ball with or without any penalty. it is extremely rare (at least to me). the only estimated conclusion i can come up with is that like i stated in the past post that whatever "post-punt" penalty was enforced on the receiving team would not constitute a turnover (a safety is the only result i could see that could possibly be called in this instance), but would result in any penalty of holding or a block in the back would be enforced from the spot of the touch. in other words if the officials considered the "touch" in the endzone as a touchback then the resulting penalty that happened IN the endzone by the receiving team after a touch rule possession would be enforced from the 20 yard line... ball spotted on the 10. if it was determined the ball was to be spotted on the 2 where it was tried by the receiving team to advance the ball it would be half the distance to the goal with the penalty enforced (i agree with crackerdogs estimation of it being a touchback but am just playing the devils advocate if the ball was considered "touched" on the 2. so this all leads back to whether any penalty can result in a change of possession for the kicking team once the ball leaves the LOS cleanly on a "touch". i am not saying you are wrong about this but would like to read the rule that was stated in the "NOTE" portion of your copy of an actual rule. as i don't have a rule book i can't judge what the "NOTE" ruling pertains to in context with your post. in essence you may be spot on. but... without reading this or an official interpretation to me it seems more logical to assume a change of possession is not warranted once the ball is cleanly punted past the LOS with or without any penalty on the receiving team.

i agree that is how i would think it would stand also but as strange as it was, the first touch player was never on the ground. so does it relate to his position in the EZ or where the ball actually was put into play on the turf? as we both surmise i believe it would have been a touchback but with some very unusual circumstances.

i am not sure of how your statement relates to an actual instance (not saying you are wrong just that i don't understand the context of the situation you are stating from this rule). i will try and clarify my thoughts on this. lets call the punting team A and the receiving team B. 1. if there is any foul that is called on team B *prior to the ball actually being punted, team A has the 'option' to accept that penalty and replay that down no matter what happens from that point forward (unless there would be offset penalties on both teams prior to the punt and in that case the down would be replayed). this would negate the touch rule we have been discussing due to a *pre-punt penalty if team A accepted the penalty. just a few examples: more players on the field than legal by team B, offsides by team B prior to the snap, *roughing the kicker by team B, personal foul on a player from team B prior to the punt etc. if the roles were reversed and team A caused a foul pre-punt then team B would have the option in most instances of either accepting the penalty and replaying the down or refusing the penalty and accepting the results of what happened post punt. 2. post punt: if there is no roughing the kicker penalty (or infraction by team B pre-punt) and the punt was clean past the LOS the touch rule should be in effect from that point forward. once the ball is past the LOS and is touched by anyone on team A first it becomes a live ball for anyone on team B to pick up the ball, unless it is downed by team A, and try to advance it without any loss of yardage or possession from that spot of the touch. there is no downside for team B to do so. at the worst team B will retain possession from the spot of the touched ball by team A even if he loses yardage or fumbles the ball to be recovered by team A. i have seen this rule in effect over the years play out as i have described. in regards to penalties on team B that occur once the punt is past the LOS... as in all instances the penalty invoked will be enforced upon team B either from the spot of initial possession (where touched by team A if the ball is not advanced by team OR the spot of the infraction if the penalty dictates and the ball was advanced past this point by team B. unless there are new rules in effect, there should be no post-punt possession by team A once the touch rule is in effect due to any turnover regardless of rule infractions by team B. it was a smart play by weems in my opinion and trestman was correct in his statement although... i have to say i have never seen a player from team A actually knock the ball out of the endzone into the field of play and create a touch rule scenario that ended up as a team B possession in the endzone and knocked out by a player from team A. it certainly had me scratching my head on what would have happened if weems had retained possession in the endzone. the player from team A actually first touched the ball in the endzone and knocked it out. where would the ball have been spotted? where weems touched it or where it was actually first touched by a player from team A which would have been a touchback? wow, there is something to think about.

i do not believe you are interpreting this correctly. PUNT ONLY - the reason for this rule is to prevent the kicking team from purposely knocking the ball into a receiver (NOT downing it) thus making it a live ball or knocking the ball further down the field making the spot of the ball into the advantage of the kicking team. in other words they could virtually keep knocking the ball until it rested on the receiving teams goal line. that is the intent of this rule. if there is a foul on the receiving team prior to the ball being downed then the penalty (if it is post kick) is enforced from the point of either where the foul occurred or at the spot of possession by the receiving team. in any case the ball is a free play for the receiving team with no penalty for fumble/turnover or loss of yardage. with loss of yardage the ball returns to the spot of first touch by the kicking team and the same is true on a turnover. now having said that... i do not have a copy of the rules. the rules have changed so much over the years maybe there is merit to your suggestion. please post the rule in reference to your "Note" to give it context.

you are right. but... the DB's did a 'reasonable' job considering that there was no pass rush at all against some of the best receivers in the nfl. to me, the pass rush is a serious concern. we will have to see what happens in that area from here on, but it's something to watch. if meltons game doesn't improve a lot this season, it may be a blessing we tagged him instead of a major cap hit contract for years.

yea i can almost see it now.... new system and culter makes 5 7 step drop passes in a row and gets dropped himself for the season. it's a breath of fresh air he is gone.

to me i did see some change and in my opinion for the better. our corners were playing up on the LOS a hell of a lot more than any of lovies 10 yard cushion and back pedal at the snap. that in itself is going to pay dividends in the long run in my opinion. i have been waiting for that for 10 years.

what i like is the 'apparent' ability of the offensive coaching staff to actually coach players and make them as good as they can be. trestman seems like a cerebral type of coach which reminds me of a joe gibbs or john madden (football smarts) type of coach. i'll take that type coach any day of the week. i'm certainly not putting trestman in that category yet but for the first time in bears modern history we MAY have a real head coach that can think offensively with the best of them. what a refreshing idea.

it was played close to the vest as it should have been by an offensive coaching system that had any semblance of talent. you WANT to see what your linemen and TE's can and can't do in your blocking schemes before you just throw the qb to the wolves and screw him up yet again. this is not the last of your conservative play this season. expect some more until everyone on board feels comfortable, including the coaches, without putting your franchise player on IR. it was SMART football even if we would have taken the loss in the first game.

i flat out disagree. this was the shakedown game with a brand new everything. if anyone believed the bears would look like the patriots offense this soon in the season they are delusional. it is going to take at least half a season to bring all the players together on one page with any consistency. the offensive line... we flat out had one of, if not THE, worst OL's in the entire NFL last season. we are sporting a complete revamp and starting 2 rookies and yet this line looked like a pro unit on the field instead of the semi-pro garbage we have seen for umpteen years. our linemen have a serious attitude and actual talent which is miles beyond anything we have seen for years. they can only get better with experience and continuity. if long continues to improve we will have a perennial all-pro lineman (think a hutchinson caliber player in our future). mills looks exceptional so far for a 5th round rookie. probably the weakest link so far was slausen our LG and with time this could change when our line starts to gel. CONCLUSION: this may not be the final end game for the years to come with this personnel but there is just so much you can do in one season and i like what i see. coaches that can really evaluate talent and put them in a position to win and cut the dead wood and players with real potential instead of the wait until next year. QB... you seriously did not see cutler start to gain confidence as the game went on? for how many years has he taken a beating in chicago? it's going to take time for him to come out of his shell, reset the clock in his head and trust the offensive line enough to play up to his potential. there is no WAY our staff is going to hang cutler out to dry without real game experience on the OL unless they were imbeciles. they appear not to be. i just have to chime in on the INT... it's a 50/50 chance it was cutlers fault. watch the tape if you have it (i don't), he is getting pulled on by the DE just before he released the ball. it changed the trajectory. that said, this is cutlers M.O. he is going to give you a few INT's and make up for it with good play in most instances. i know i will accept that instead of the humps we have had over the last 25 years. finally: believe me this game did NOT look like a shoop offense. in fact this was really the first time i looked at our offense for a very, very long time and thought it finally looks like it is run by professionals instead of a bunch of semi-pro hacks. it's only going to get better.

ANYBODY can make short yardage throws in the NFL if you are playing against a PREVENT DEFENSE that puts little or no pressure on the qb and leaves him a wide open zone for short 5-10 yard passes!!!!!!! also, you tell me after looking at those statistics in the bears game wasn't nearly EVERY throw he made a short yardage pass?? my god man we have seen this CRAP play (inaccuracy, slow release, inaccuracy, sacks. poor decisions AND inaccuracy) from nearly every qb we have fielded in 40 FREAKING YEARS and you want another one with the media baggage this guy brings????!!! bring back cade mcnown... he fits the bill perfectly. what freaking EVER!!! this guy doesn't show up for 3 1/2 quarters and scrapes together a couple of cheap scores in a low scoring game >>>LOW SCORING GAME does quinn sound familiar? cade mcnown, caleb hanie, chad hutchinson, kordell stewart, chris chandler, henry burris, shane mathews, steve stenstrom, moses moreno, rick mirer, and on and on and on? yea right. the packers and ANY team that can score a normal amount of points in a game during those previous 3.5 quarters would eat us alive!! they could give him 20 in a row completed short passes and never even blink. ok i'm not that familiar with mccown's abilities. so tell me how much better little timmy is and all the amazing upside he has more than mccown. other than mobility is it on field EXPERIENCE, age? arm strength? smarts, interplanetary carrisma? mccown: http://www.nfl.com/player/joshmccown/2505076/careerstats

hmmmm.... his intangibles. you mean like these? FIRST QUARTER 1st drive 3 and out - 1 pass attempt - sacked 2nd drive 3 and out - 2 pass attempts - tebow minus 3 yds rushing - 1 short pass for 10 yds - incomplete pass - punt 3rd drive - 6 pass attempts - 1 short left for 12 yds - incomplete - delay of game - 1 pass complete deep left 23 yds - incomplete with roughing penalty on bears - incomplete - incomplete and intercepted by bears SECOND QUARTER 1st drive sacked - run for 16 yds - sacked - incomplete with roughing the passer bears - run for 9 yds - incomplete - incomplete - 20 yd field goal blocked by bears 2nd drive 3 and out - 1 pass attempt - incomplete - tebow run for 5 yds then punt 3rd drive 2 pass attempts - incomplete - incomplete - spiked ball end of half THIRD QUARTER 1st drive 3 and out - 2 pass attempts - incomplete - incomplete 2nd drive 3 and out - tebow run for 9 yds - tebow run for no gain 3rd drive 3 and out - 1 pass attempt - incomplete - tebow run for 6 yds FOURTH QUARTER 1st drive 3 and out - no pass attempts - tebow run for 3 yds 2nd drive 4 pass attempts - tebow run for minus 1 yd - pass short left 14 yds - pass short left 9 yds - short left for 14 yds - tebow run minus 2 yds - sacked and fumbled bears recover 3rd drive 4 pass attempts - complete deep left 23 yds - incomplete - incomplete - complete 1 yd - punt 4th drive 7 pass attempts - complete short right 7 yds - complete short right 10 yds - complete middle 8 yds - complete short left 3 yds - complete deep middle 19 yds - complete short right 10 yds - complete short right 10 yds touchdown 5th drive 5 pass attempts - complete short left 9 yds - complete short left 11 yds - complete short right 19 yds - incomplete - incomplete - tebow rush no yds - field goal ties game and sends into OT OT 5 pass attempts - incomplete - pass short right 2 yds - pass short right 10 yds - sacked - pass deep right 16 yds - tebow run 5 yds - tebow run 1 yd - 51 yard field goal END OF GAME you want to hang your hat on that kind of qb play?? this wasn't some end of the rainbow finish from a HOF qb it was just another idiotic display of lovie smith's soft prevent (a win) defense and one of the worst offenses in the entire NFL. tell ya what… take a long look at cade mcnowns rookie season highlights. in fact take a look at mcnowns career – they are like siamese twins separated at birth. i’m sure he is available too and probably cheaper LOL. cade mcnown: http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/stats/_/id/1763/cade-mcnown timmy tebow: http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/stats/_/id/13200/tim-tebow one final question. if anyone believes that trestman can turn this lump of qb sewage tebow into a starting quarterback why can’t he do it with mccown the guy we already HAVE on our roster?

have any of you tebow supporters watched this guy play?? the only thing i see is that this guy fits perfectly in the GIANT laundry list of worthless qb's we have fielded for 40+ YEARS!! so yea - a perfect fit for chicago's tradition of qb's from the stone age. that said... why would you want a ham-and-egger, at his very best, qb in chicago now that we have the makings of a real offensive minded coach calling the shots? you DON'T want to bring in some guy that will take 10+ years to become average (quinn ring any bells?). you want to bring in some young talent that you can mold and develop into a good qb and use him as trade bait (if your #1 is STILL a #1) and garner some 1st and 2nd round picks in your future like the packers and patriots do. it's mindboggling anyone would want this guy to waste a roster spot on with no future gains out of it.

i'm sorry but you are wrong. this has NOTHING to do with population size or venue locations. it has to do with 'X' amount of large school programs that support this very expensive sport. the amount of these schools are nearly the same as they were half a century ago. the amount of players on EACH of these large A class schools is the same and it has nothing to do with student body size or population. every college is recruiting HIGH SCHOOL players to fill these limited roles, example... there are still eleven players on each side of the ball that start. so the talent pool depth is nearly the SAME as it was in 1960. the difference in how the NFL drafts? they NOW out of necessity are drafting from lower tier schools who are smaller or less funded just to fill the ranks. think about it... over a 10 year period there are 2,600 players who were not good enough to even get drafted in the first seven rounds 30 years ago and are now drafted by teams in the NFL. the smaller schools USUALLY have poorer quality talented kids in their system to a degree. there are always exceptions now and there were exceptions to this rule 50 years ago. walter payton is one example. but the reality is that there is just so many quality players available in high school. so many quality players who transgress into the college ranks. and finally there is just so many quality players who are worthy to play in the NFL. so in this instance, more is less. this is just one reason why the quality of play in the NFL has suffered and instead of doing something about the cause they just change the rules to try and mask the actual problems that are faced in NFL play in this century for the sake of money.