Alaskan Grizzly

The grip is firm. I have seen a few people use thiis "...there is no film..." arguement and don't understand it. McCown's not a rookie in his first year, he's been playing for 10 years now and a multitude of teams. What is he doing that is any different than before where he's playing different than Josh McCown of the last number of years? If your answer is 'the system' then perhaps its that and not the operator that is different. I would go further and say the operator (in this case McCown) is better than Cutler at running the system(?) "Hyperbole" or fact? That remains to be seen. So how many turnovers has McCown committed...so far? This was more 'food for thought' than anything but as you pointed out, Jay isn't going to change. His arrogance will get in the way, that much is true. So if not a back up, he (Cutler) either becomes a FA or trade bait after this year.

Throughout last night's game there were several references to Rich Gannon and Josh McCown. Most of which equated to the term Jon Gruden made that "McCown has travelled a hard road to get where he is, much like Rich Gannon". Of course Gruden would have some insight since Gannon was his QB during much his tenure in Oakland before going to TB. As was quoted in news sources: "Gannon thrived in Gruden's West Coast offense" (Wikipedia). Coincidently, Marc Trestman was the OC for Oakland during their Super Bowl run of 2004 and a year removed from Gannon's NFL MVP win. The thought now is, could McCown be the newest version of Gannon? I think that a legitimate question. Not that many weeks ago I proposed the idea of replacing Cutler (although be it during the height of one of Cutler's turnover laden games) with McCown only to be told how ridiculous the thought was. McCown shows better poise as does Cutler with pcoket presence and is much more accurate in the regard of a 'true pocket passer'. Watching the WCO as it is supposed to be played, was demonstrated by McCown's play last night. And for that matter during the Washington game. So, what to do with Cutler? IF McCown continues to display a better hand at playing this scheme better than Cutler than the team really has little choice of going away from him for next year. Would he (Cutler) accept a contract as a back-up QB? In that role, could he be able to learn from a player like McCown on really how to properly play in an WCO type offense? Maybe after one year under a player like McCown return as the starter with a better grasp of the offense that Trestman is utilizing? All that being said, it is obvious that Cutler knows his time is now, hence his push to start next week. What will the team do if Cutler comes in and 'loses' against Detroit? What if they win and Cutler doesn't put up the same numbers as McCown? Will the team jeapordize its forward momentun just to give Cutler the chance to prove himself?

Yes but how about that SMC?

Just because... What if the team decided to pull Jay during that first game (of two) with multiple turnovers? Hmmm...

He doesn't need to talk to each player. I agree that before the play starts the coordinator sends in the play based on what more than likely is going to happen on the offense. These "guesses" are predicated on the previous week's film study (of the opposition), scouting and percentage of what they will do. IE: 3rd and long means probably a pass play of some sort. In this case you would probably do a nickel or dime formation. Or if it were 3rd and short you'd stack for the run. Once the play is called into the 'defensive QB' (this case Briggs) he tells the team what it is during the huddle. Oncd they break huddle he's reading the offensive line up to see where shifts are needed, if any. IE: Two wide, one tight, two Back set might mean shift LBs to strong side and bring a corner or safety for the weak side blitz. This type of adjustment is made on the fly (audible if you will) and called out by what the defensive play caller recognizes. These are the things I don't think Briggs is as good as Urlacher was at. The recognition and timeliness of getting the right people in the right spot. If a player is saying 'they need to learn the position' that's true but probably because they recognize Briggs isn't Urlacher.

There actually is some (although beit small) validity to it. In fact a few years ago when Urlacher was lost for most if the season it was observed that the D not only underperformed in Urls absence, but the positioning was not as good. There is no doubt the team misses Url for a variety of reasons, one of them was his ability to recognize and properly align the D. So that being said, what are the alternatives? The other "veteran" LBs have only been with the team for this year and of those one is out for the remainder of it. Bostic and Greene are rookies and Costanzo has been a ST player for most of his stint. The only other 'viable' option might be Tillman (given his seniority and familiarity) but obviously being a CB takes him out of consideration.

Never mind.....

Yeah not a probability especially given his talent. But you never know, teams like AZ are in more 'need' mode than the Bears are so sometimes you can thread something worthwhile together. It was just a thought. Long week until next Monday. I'll be spending mine (week) in SC. Long travel day ahead. Ugh!

That's exactly the concern. He wants to prove himself, which is admirable, but at what cost? He should know if the team would like to keep him around that they can franchise him and give him one more shot at it, or as mentioned previous, give the team a sweetheart deal of an extension. As Daventry pointed out at some point he needs to consider his long term health. He resumed (in my opinion haphazardly) his career after gettting his most recent of concussions so I don't doubt he'll try again here. And Adam hear you on the injury. I had a grade 2 tear of my quad about 2-3 years ago and it slowed me down something fierce. Wasn't really painful but leg was lame for all intents and purposes. From what I hear groin pulls/tears are brutal. Can only imagine.

More or less just throwing it our there but ok, move Peanut to Safety then Peterson to CB. He's multi-dimensional (can do ST returns) and as you said "can get better" at coverage and is "better than our [current] corners". All the more reason to try and make a deal. And I wouldn't think youd need to give up "picks" per se, just one. Most here are suggesting draft a CB anyhow ....

Peanut is the answer. If not I'd like them to entertain the idea of getting a veteran in the backfield. Not really sure why other than having this eery feeling that the rest of the D is going to get young fast. Maybe one of the Cromarties or Rolles? Or make a blockbuster trade for Patrick Peterson and convert him? Also addresss the return duties to replace Hester?

In the spirit of some of the discussions here regarding whether McCown can 'carry the team' (long term - this season) or otherwise. McCown and the playoffs? So if I understand it, the burden is more on Trestman at this point than McCown to produce. Again, the 'operator vs scheme' discussion.

Fair enough. I actually like your anaology better. Especially given the "off" comment. Think of it as a clogged carb type of off.

Lucky, as before its been a pleasure. To see you flummoxed because of a little adversity always humors me. I was all set to continue the back and forth and discuss the rationale of our opposite views, but since "you are done with me". So be it.

First I would like to say how thrilled I am at seeing Jason egging you on. That makes my day. Anyhow, you really don't support your arguement because I was discussing the injury (pulled groin) in particular with this particular player. The history of other players with this injury, even as of late, has proven difficult to rebound from. Throw in the fact that Cutler is 30, has been 'abused' and considered "mobile" could all correlate to him not being the same as he was before. I appreciate that all these other illustrious QB's suffered their varied maladies but that isn't pertinent to the discussion here. The common head cold will affect you and I differrently and assuming we did the same job, perhaps affect how we performed in that job. If you have the flu and I rhumatoid arthritis, again our performances would be affected differently. For the sake of this discussion I am speaking specifically to this injury, that is the point. Emphasis on the bold: Yet Cutler has a HISTORY of concussions. In some cases moreso than do several RB's, TE's and other players. As far as concern in signing Marshall or Jefferies, not part of this discussion and totally different subject. Stay focused. You almost support my point of our earlier discussion by bringing these statements to light. I wouldn't go as far as categorizing it as "criminal" but whatever floats your boat. Ironically, Jason and I have disussed many a times on whether the Oline was deficient in protection or was it Cutler's need for being mobile that caused him to be hit so much. I said that he has always been a mobile QB (Vanderbilt, Denver and Chicago). His point; the oline was always garbage. I will say Cutler has talent, there is no devaluing that. Unfortunately I think time is now his enemy. Oddly enough this very thing (line rating) was discussed in another thread. And from my recollection, the current line didn't fare well. And there is a discussion that the current line is progressively backsliding, to which I would agree. But again, not the point of this discussion. Cutler is regressing. Or at least times he is. Two games this year he had mutliple turnovers (I think at least three minimum). In those two games, against Minnesota and NO(?) two of those turonvers resulted in direct points. The other turnovers were interceptions where in most instances the teams have been inept to convert the turnover to points. But the fact that Cutler continues to have these "Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde" games make him unpredicitable and unstable to stake long term trust in. That paired with what is clearly a history of injury, could result in his not returning.

As I suspected, you didn't answer my question. Too much hypothesis on my part and the situation at hand. All the rest of your answer is fluff because I won't argue the point that he is a BACK UP QB. I never said he is a starting QB, although he will be when the Bears play next against the Packers. But he's not a true starter....again, I will agree this point. I also never said that I think the team should invest in him as the starter, your words...not mine. The bolded above, are your words. Don't know that I've seen anyone here say what you suggested. I know I didn't. Again though, the fact is he is now the starter.

The injury history HAS to be considered. He is 30 years old and just suffered a relatively significant injury. An injury to other players that has proven debilitating. Maybe not to the point of being an invalid but less capable in their profession. Concussion history is what it is. Cutler has a history, one more hit to the noggin could be the calling card for his career. Some of his other injuries; finger, knee etc by themselves are not factors. But they do add up. And you're right, he has taken a pretty good lickin since playing in Chicago. But what has that done to his overall health? If he pulls an Adrian Peterson-esque return then history (and i) will be flat wrong. And to be frank, id be happy to in this case. Lastly and in regards to his skills. Plain and simple, he's degraded. I dont necessarily agree with the thought of his gradual progression this year. He's turned over the ball a few times in critical moments. A few of them resulting in direct scores for the opposition. That is a problem. He's never been a "Ferrari" per se but more like an Accord with the upper end trim line.

What say you IF McCown has as much if not better success for the time he fills in?

Wow, if that doesn't take me back. I might have had one or two of these, right next to my Princess Leia (with the buns on the side of her head) pic. A few observations. I was just doing the "ickey shuffle" for my kids the other day to demonstrate a TD dance that even I could do. "The Bermuda Triangle" - really? Why are Otis, Mike and Wilbur all in their pajamas? Man, Randall Cunnigham was more magical than was Majikowski. Talk about an escape artist. THE NIGERIAN NIGHTMARE!!! I love me some heavy hitting and Okoye did that. I did have the "Chicago Vice" poster. "Bo knows football, Bo knows baseball" Bo knows dislocated hip. Ouch. Is that a cocaine cloud in LT's poster? The Land of Boz....'nuff said. Ronnie Lott...see the Okoye comment. Awesome and wicked.

Exactly right.... "that's why they play the game.".

First thought and in response to bold. I don't think the team would have won every game if Cutler continued as starting QB. So really what is the difference? To analyze that we need to ask the question you posed. What really is the back up QB's job? The answer is what exactly do what McCown did. Put our team in a position to win the game...offensively. Unfortuantely our defense wasn't able to hold up its end of the deal...hence why our team lost by 3 pts. Not because of what McCown DIDN'T do, but beause of what the D didn't do. Remember, before the final drive by Washington our team was ahead by 4. The other part to consider is if they are not a back up QB, they are starting somewhere else or out of the league. McCown is better than our previous and recent back up situations mostly due to the cast that surrounds him. Hanie and Campbell did not have the combinations of Marshall, Jeffery, M. Bennet and Forte along with the Oline that has been constructed. As another here pointed out, if McCown can come in and produce as quickly as he did, with limited reps and playing time, then its the operator not the scheme that is the problem. And one last point I'd like to address. There has been much discussion about "tape on McCown" and how teams will have an opportunity to prepare for him and blunt his performance. I think we need to remember that there is already evidence out there, he's been in the league for 11 years and played for 5 other NFL teams. The 'tape' is already out there.

"Crazy". But not really a bad idea. Cousins is a better player than where he was drafted at. It's almost like Washington has two starting QB's...just with different skills sets.

I like most of what you laid out here but the question regarding the bolded area. With both Melton and Collins presumably returning from ACL injuries, is there a risk to signing both back? Chances are they won't have issues but you're talking about two sizable dudes that are in the trenches needing mass leverage. I fear one or both will have another blow out.

Doesn't the team have to make room for Palmer and I suspect another player they'll need to cover for Briggs' loss?

Yes Costanzo was. He looked and played horrible. The one play that Greene was out, to relieve Costanzo for some unkown malady, he committed a penalty. But from what I saw (taking into account his preseason play) he (Greene) will probably be the better option. This bye couldn't of had come at a better time. Will give the team some prepartion time to learn play calls (McCown and Bostic) a few others to heal (Peanut) and others to learn their roles (Palmer, Greene...etc). And next on the sched....Green Bay on a Monday night. Sheesh.