TishLover
Well-known member
- Joined:
- Aug 24, 2012
- Posts:
- 1,078
- Liked Posts:
- 1,151
Very good news. Maybe someone will take a chance on Jay and make the trade 
ray:
ray:
Demand for Josh McCown an indicator of NFL quarterback market in 2015
- Thread starter botfly10
- Start date
- Joined:
- Aug 20, 2012
- Posts:
- 39,861
- Liked Posts:
- 45,703
Not that it matters.... but that 16.5 is his cap value. Cash spent is 15.5 which I think puts him at 6th this year.
- Joined:
- Jun 19, 2011
- Posts:
- 32,888
- Liked Posts:
- 25,700
That would be a poor assumption cause thats not how averages work.
- Joined:
- Jun 19, 2011
- Posts:
- 32,888
- Liked Posts:
- 25,700
Well, not its everyone except for like 3 people.
- Joined:
- Aug 20, 2012
- Posts:
- 39,861
- Liked Posts:
- 45,703
Thanks dickhead.
- Joined:
- Sep 15, 2012
- Posts:
- 58,235
- Liked Posts:
- 35,298
Sorry I would gladly take McCown at 5 million a year and drafting No 1 in the draft over Cutler at 22.5 million a year so we could have the privilege of drafting 7th.
It has nothing to do with biblical hatred of Cutler. It has to do with the simple fact he is not worth his salary. It's not even close right now. I get why Trestman and Emery gambled on Cutler but it fucking cost them their jobs so let's not pretend like there isn't ample justification for McCown over Cutler unless you like paying 22.5 million to miss the playoffs and getting everyone fired.
- Joined:
- Jun 20, 2010
- Posts:
- 38,608
- Liked Posts:
- 26,997
- Location:
- In the mod forum planning your ban
It was more than Cutler that got those two fired and if you want to pay Mccown just to lose and gamble on the first pick (because they always work out) then im happy you are no where near the bears
- Joined:
- Sep 15, 2012
- Posts:
- 58,235
- Liked Posts:
- 35,298
Yes it was more than Cutler but to pretend he wasn't a large part of the reason is stupid.
McCown ran Trestman's offense better than Cutler. That is the simple reality. Whether that means he would have done so last year or not is open for debate but you are pretending like it was a guarantee that he would have been worse. Furthermore, McCown at 6 million a year would have meant we would have had 16 million or so to spend on other players without Cutler's salary.
Look, I get it, you want to support Cutler that is fine. Like I said, I get why Trestman and Emery gambled on Cutler. But you are completely misrepresenting the other side of the debate to try and prop up your argument.
Cutler currently was a horrifically bad investment. That is a fact. So much so that the people that made the decision are no where near the Bears currently.
McCown ran Trestman's offense better than Cutler. That is the simple reality. Whether that means he would have done so last year or not is open for debate but you are pretending like it was a guarantee that he would have been worse. Furthermore, McCown at 6 million a year would have meant we would have had 16 million or so to spend on other players without Cutler's salary.
Look, I get it, you want to support Cutler that is fine. Like I said, I get why Trestman and Emery gambled on Cutler. But you are completely misrepresenting the other side of the debate to try and prop up your argument.
Cutler currently was a horrifically bad investment. That is a fact. So much so that the people that made the decision are no where near the Bears currently.
Les Grossman
Well-known member
- Joined:
- Jun 22, 2011
- Posts:
- 14,015
- Liked Posts:
- 11,992
McCown sucks. The stars aligned for his hot streak. That'll never happen again for him, and certainly not for a whole season.
- Joined:
- Sep 15, 2012
- Posts:
- 58,235
- Liked Posts:
- 35,298
That's not really the issue though. The issue last year was whether McCown at 6 million with 16 million to spend on other improvements for the team was better than Cutler at 22.5 million. There were arguments for both sides of that debate and all we know for sure is the Cutler outcome was an unmitigated fucking disaster for the Bears and the people that made the decision.
Les Grossman
Well-known member
- Joined:
- Jun 22, 2011
- Posts:
- 14,015
- Liked Posts:
- 11,992
Hindsight arguments are fucking stupid.
- Joined:
- Sep 15, 2012
- Posts:
- 58,235
- Liked Posts:
- 35,298
Except it is not hindsight when people made the argument at the time and now the Cutler option has been proven to be an unmitigated fucking disaster this past year.
It would be hindsight if no one advocated McCown over Cutler last year but you and I both know that's not true. Furthermore, it's absurd to tell people in favor of McCown last year, they can't use the disaster of this past year as evidence yet you guys want to use some hypothetical of "McCown would have sucked last year too," as evidence.
What actually happened under Cutler is more concrete evidence than what you guys imagined would have happened last year under McCown.
It would be hindsight if no one advocated McCown over Cutler last year but you and I both know that's not true. Furthermore, it's absurd to tell people in favor of McCown last year, they can't use the disaster of this past year as evidence yet you guys want to use some hypothetical of "McCown would have sucked last year too," as evidence.
What actually happened under Cutler is more concrete evidence than what you guys imagined would have happened last year under McCown.
Les Grossman
Well-known member
- Joined:
- Jun 22, 2011
- Posts:
- 14,015
- Liked Posts:
- 11,992
There was no better move removing hindsight from the equation. We had the No. 2 offense in the NFL last year, completely ditching Cutler would have been borderline moronic. Chi could have and probably should have franchised tagged Cutler, but chi wouldn't have been able to keep McCown under those circumstances either.
Chi was put in a pretty shitty position.
Chi was put in a pretty shitty position.
- Joined:
- Sep 15, 2012
- Posts:
- 58,235
- Liked Posts:
- 35,298
We had the No 2 offense in part because of McCown though. His stats were in fact better running the offense than Cutler's were. Remove the games McCown started and the Bears would not have had the No 2 offense.
So it was completely reasonable to sign McCown instead, franchise and trade Cutler while he was coming off a good year, and then using the 16 million saved to sign better free agents.
Again, people made that argument last year so don't think it's legit to say after we saw what happened with Cutler, that they can't use that to support what they said a year ago.
So it was completely reasonable to sign McCown instead, franchise and trade Cutler while he was coming off a good year, and then using the 16 million saved to sign better free agents.
Again, people made that argument last year so don't think it's legit to say after we saw what happened with Cutler, that they can't use that to support what they said a year ago.
Mongo_76
Well-known member
- Joined:
- Dec 2, 2013
- Posts:
- 9,959
- Liked Posts:
- 4,733
Why not? The Franchise tag for Cutler would have been 16.9 million. McCown was paid 5.
Cutler was, instead, paid 22.5.
We could have had both QB's on the roster for less than what we paid Cutler.
Emery was a fucktard.
Mongo_76
Well-known member
- Joined:
- Dec 2, 2013
- Posts:
- 9,959
- Liked Posts:
- 4,733
9th to be exact...
- Joined:
- Jun 19, 2011
- Posts:
- 32,888
- Liked Posts:
- 25,700
I was with you until the McCown part. There are a lot of QBs I would take over McCown, unless you are trying to mentor a rookie.
- Joined:
- Jun 19, 2011
- Posts:
- 32,888
- Liked Posts:
- 25,700
Agreed. Trestman was the first coach to finally put the team on Cutler's back and find out what he was made of. It was about time someone settled the question. In hindsight, Cutler failed and continued to fail even as they scaled the O back week to week to week. So in hindsight, it was stupid. And yeah, it would have been less stupid, again in hindsight, if Cutler was on the tag. But Emery and Trestman gambled on Cutler and they had the balls to go all in. It was about time.
- Joined:
- Sep 15, 2012
- Posts:
- 58,235
- Liked Posts:
- 35,298
Well sure there are a lot of guys I would take over McCown but I am talking about who was available last year. That and the success he had in the offense last year and the dearth of QB options made him a viable option.
PAPABEAR77
Well-known member
- Joined:
- Aug 20, 2012
- Posts:
- 3,575
- Liked Posts:
- 1,004
- Location:
- texas
I think McCown is a sceme QB his career sucked before 2013.I like what he did who he is as a person but he isn't the bears answer he would have just be a bridge to the bears next answer at QB. The thing is we already have a bridge QB in cutty( unless he gets traded by the 10th). I really like the idea of letting Jimmy Clausen take over if jay gets traded he has the fire to succeed that's all we can ask for in a rebuilding year.