selection7

It's probably already too late to have both McCown and Cutler next year. If we give Cutler a big contract, McCown won't accept being guaranteed to never be a starter for the rest of his career, because he doesn't have to. With a QB rating of 101 in five games, he's consistently played great...and being a tall, strong-armed, athletic guy, he's even got the measurables. Meanwhile, Cutler has never posted a QB rating for the year in the 90's in his whole career (including this year). Of course, Cutler's significantly younger and more experienced. But what happens if this season ends without any solid evidence that Cutler should be considered an elite QB? And then what if Cutler get's it in his mind that he won't accept anything less than the major bank he probably planned on getting before this season, regardless of what his bargaining position actually is? In short, everything depends on Cutler. When Cutler plays again, how will he play? If he doesn't play his best ball of his career, will he accept reality and be happy with a contract befitting a talented, veteran QB? or will it be 14 million/yr or bust? I have no idea on any of those counts. But effectively, Cutler will decide his fate, not Emery.

Wasn't McCown brought in under Angelo? JA didn't get results soon enough to save his own job, but I think most would agree we can feel comfortable with both our starter and our backup, and that's saying something since the Bears organization has historically had QB woes.

I pretty much assumed at the time that he wasn't calling the timeouts because he wanted the Ravens to be rushed...for at least one play. To suggest there'd only be 19s left, though, is to assume the Ravens wouldn't have scored a TD and done it on 3rd down or sooner. In that case, they don't have time to run the clock down to 19s if Trestman is calling timouts. There was 1:21 on the clock when Ray Rice did that 11 yard gain to the 5. Of course, that would mean we'd have maybe 60 seconds on the clock at most, a whole field to drive, and only a TD can win it...with no timeouts.

I'm glad I'm not the only one who noticed that. WRs are taught to never slow down unless they are going to sit in the soft spot of a zone. That pass was mostly likely perfect but Marshall slowed up because he felt the safety coming on (that safety would not have gotten there in time though). It saved Marshall from being hit, but may have been the difference in the game. My memory fails me now, but I know I saw a receiver slow up earlier in the game too, causing an incompletion. I think it was Jeffery or Bennett and the pass still would have been low but catchable rather than out of his reach.

And the NFL wants to extend the season and shorten the pre-season, making things even worse.

I think he's gonna sign with the Texas State Penitentiary "Mean Machine" for one pack of smokes per week.

Friday! That's even worse Actually, I wanted McCown to start before the game too, but after seeing Jay out there, I realized he was plenty mobile enough to be a pocket QB. At that point, if McCown is better than your starter, that doesn't say much for Jay.

I would go so far as to say that pick six was a well-thrown ball. Cutler put it where only Alshon could catch it. Now, it was risky, but the chances of a tipped pass falling right into the DB's hands and he doesn't even have to slow down from a full speed run...is pretty low, so it was just bad luck, IMO.

I'm gonna say the whole "should'a put McCown in" is major Monday morning quarterbacking". Brett Favre played and won for years with all sorts of ailments. Cutler's arm never looked better, and he was only sacked once. And had McCown played mediocre (rather than taking our team right down the field for a TD), just as many people would be irritated with Trestman for panicking. And I imagine I like McCown more than most of you...which is why I feel confident saying this.

However, he's our best corner, regardless of what Father Time tries to say about it. That makes a difference.

Let's put it another way if you really don't see it as conventional wisdom... Before I ever heard a pundit or fan mention it, I noticed that McCown was performing as good or better than Cutler and thought "well, I wouldn't be too quick to put my trust in someone who's had so much experience being mediocre (talking about McCown), but I'm certainly feeling less desperate to keep Cutler if success in Trestman's system can be had much easier than I initially thought." Now, if that thought occurred to me, I guarantee you it occurred to the Bears, and probably Cutler, and there you go. I'm only arguing the obvious, not that Cutler is somehow now expendable because of McCown.

Does fell flat mean they didn't devalue their starter? I literally don't know what you're talking about bringing up those guys. To give you some credit, I think you may arguing something different than me (based on previous posts), because you can't rationalize away the common-sense statement I made. EDIT: Oh, I get it. Brady and Kap supplanted their starter. Flynn didn't. I'm going to have to roll my eyes a bit at pointing out that Flynn did not have a clear effect on the standing of one of the best QBs to ever play in the NFL (who wasn't in a contract year). As for Brady and Kap, they both devalued their starter in the most extreme way, and I still don't understand Kolb's significance.

No one should make it more complicated than it is. If a backup journeyman QB can have as much success as your pedigreed starter, that devalues the starter. Simple enough. Whether or not you think that has happened already or would continue to happen is opinion and conjecture, respectively, and beside the point.

Our O was better with McCown than it was with Cutler last week. I mean, 41 points is supposed to be enough to win. Just a fluke probably, but it proves when McCown is having a good week that we can be competitive. From there, it just depends on what kind of day the team we're facing is having.

I feel bad for McCown losing that game after playing like he did without the benefit of starter reps. Don't know what to say about our D with half of them sitting on the sideline or at home.

We've been pretty lucky with kickers over time. 12 in-a-row from 50+ is amazing! If I remember correctly, his distance used to be an issue and one offseason he fixed that. From then on he's perennially been on the NFL's best.

You aren't confused.

I'm not going to repeat what's been made obvious. If you don't know, then it's only because you don't want to or you haven't been on these forums much lately, in which case...ok then. But I'm still not going to play that game! I can't help it if knowingly spreading lies is a pet-peeve of mine. Seems like it's a good one to have.

Do me a favor and stop saying this. You know it's not true. Urlacher has said it plainly and this conversation has been had on here before where it was ponited out. You can be glad he's gone all you want, but at least don't be dishonest.

Actually, he pressured Eli for what could have ended up a safety after a beautiful spin move got him past the first guy then knifed past a double-team. It was his best play of the night that I saw. Otherwise, my impression of his play in general is that the lineman he faces have to worry zero about being bull rushed, so they just ride him out whichever way he goes. Eventually Shea realizes he's too far in one direction and cuts back the other direction, either immediately stopping to hold his lane and maybe swat a ball (presumably, unless that's just him giving up) or the lineman just rides him out the other direction. If Shea just had the strength to lean into his blockers as he turns a corner to keep from going so wide, that would be enough, even without the threat of a bullrush. Also, one time I saw Brandon Jacobs run right by him it didn't have anything to do with Shea's arm length. Shea was so busy 'wrastling' with the OL, he didn't even know the runningback was there until it was too late. Also, Shea's rush style means he's not much good for pinning either the RB or QB in the pocket. Sometimes the guy with the ball squeaks free in the area Shea vacated. I would've liked to have seen him put on 20 pounds of muscle in his rookie year, and I don't think that happened. That's asking a lot, but he's getting paid 1st round pick money.

I'm going to pile on and say 26 points to NO is far from "shit rotten awful" (7 of which were set up by a short field on yet another Cutler strip). Before Cutler's goal line incompletions in the 3rd quarter he was 16 for 20, yet we still only had 7 points. No running game until late and no clue what to do on a blitz kept us from sustaining anything.

I haven't posted since the game but I want to add that I love how the Bears hung in there and were one onside kick and one hail mary from tying the game. You can't win every game, but you can try your hardest every game...and there's especially no excuses when you consider what these guys are being paid. Mistakes can be coached up (apologies to Uncle Buck), but with heart, either you have it or you don't.

I'm not sure what Shea has been up to, but I don't see why you'd all care that much. He's not even a starter. Does he play more than 10 snaps a game?

Not all games are all that exciting, but yesterday's game was a doozy. Crazy game.

Here's what I mean...my comments in bold. This guy has meant an incredible amount to the Chicago Bears, playing as many seasons as Walter Payton, all with the Bears, and always with his utmost dedication and respect from his teammates...and no one seems to be saying otherwise, either. It seems downright odd that you all would go out of your way to twist his words so you can insult him when this one contract thing is such a tiny, tiny part of his legacy here. Upon his retirement, the guys on ESPN, most of whom aren't even Bear fans, went to far more extent to celebrate that legacy than all but a tiny handful on this particular forum. I can't help but feel that there's been some serious perspective lost.