If You Can Win A Championship With McMahon Vs Cutler

[-Cago34-]

Is it really Rodney?!?!

Wait, let me check...Rodgers is 2-4 in his last 6 starts!

lololololol

 

[onebud34]

Honestly I have no answer other what I can recall which is that the guy was crazy and reckless. I can't really say I remember if he was a statue back there or what, either that or we need to revise our opinions of how good our Oline was.

the other QB's mustve played the same way considering how often QB's were injured during the McMahon years.

I remember Greg Landry coming out of retirement to start one game because the Bears had 0 healthy QB's. If Landry got hurt it would be Payton again

 

[onebud34]

Was too old even back in 85...

The question would be...could McMahon beat the Packers in 2010? His career record was 12-1.

 

[onebud34]

This is probably true. Imagine an athlete like Cutler playing in that era... WIN!

Same era according to the OP

 

[Xplosive]

Anger at your own ignorance.



Admission of ignorance despite me giving you the tools to fix it.





... and 2010 112 TD% is better than 108% that McMahon had in 85. How about the 66/95/85% Sack rate Cutler had to deal with while McMahon was like 110/103/123. Is there any chance that being sacked over and over had something do with those extra INTs from Cutty???

Of course not, you and Piss & Mold fudge packers can go to hell cause you have made no points with me. Worry about you weak Oline when we come to decapitate ARod.

So let me get this straight....
You took this statement by me:
"Another thing to keep in mind, relative to the leagues each played in, Jim McMahon's 1985 was better than any season Cutler has ever had to this point. "

And decided that it would be intellectually acceptable to Take only numbers from Jim McMahons 1985, while being able to parse together various numbers from various Cutler years?

Stupendous!

Cutlers peak overall Rate+ 108(2007..full season)

McMahon's 1985 Rate+ 111[/QUOTE]

First: dont mistake me taking shots at the Packers as anger, I really know you make alot of posts on here and don't come off like a jerk or anything, so its not really personal Im just giving you a hard time.

2nd: The topic of the thread is If the Bears can win a Championship with McMahon then they can also win with Cutler. The only reason I dwell on 1985 is because its the year the Bears won the SB. It also happened to be McMahons best year but if he hadnt been always injured they would have won more especially the 1986 team should have won.

3rd. All the other points are to show that many other Superbowl winning QBs have had average to mediocre even in this so called "new era" of football. People saying you have to have a once in a lifetime defense or HOF RB are somehow missing this point.

I believe that Cutler is better than McMahon and your advanced stats dont change that because even outside of the stats the facts that McMahon is always injured and threw alot of INTs with less sacks and more offensive talent. Best QB is not only based on stats because if you are always injured you cant help your team. Being a "better leader" is not tangible so I cant argue if McMahon was better as a leader (really the defense and Payton were the leaders not McMahon).

At the end of the day Cutler has the abilty to take this team to the superbowl based BOTH on McMahon and the fact that many QBs have had numbers almost identical to what Cutler has proven capable of putting up in this ERA. So there is no fail, flaw, or error in my logic.

BEARS

 

[FirstTimer]

So let me get this straight....
You took this statement by me:
"Another thing to keep in mind, relative to the leagues each played in, Jim McMahon's 1985 was better than any season Cutler has ever had to this point. "

And decided that it would be intellectually acceptable to Take only numbers from Jim McMahons 1985, while being able to parse together various numbers from various Cutler years?

Stupendous!

Cutlers peak overall Rate+ 108(2007..full season)

McMahon's 1985 Rate+ 111

First: dont mistake me taking shots at the Packers as anger, I really know you make alot of posts on here and don't come off like a jerk or anything, so its not really personal Im just giving you a hard time.

2nd: The topic of the thread is If the Bears can win a Championship with McMahon then they can also win with Cutler. The only reason I dwell on 1985 is because its the year the Bears won the SB. It also happened to be McMahons best year but if he hadnt been always injured they would have won more especially the 1986 team should have won.

Actually it wasn't.

He was "better" statistically in 1984 and 1987

3rd. All the other points are to show that many other Superbowl winning QBs have had average to mediocre even in this so called "new era" of football. People saying you have to have a once in a lifetime defense or HOF RB are somehow missing this point.

No one was seriously saying that. They were making fun of you.

I believe that Cutler is better than McMahon and your advanced stats dont change that because even outside of the stats the facts that McMahon is always injured and threw alot of INTs with less sacks and more offensive talent. Best QB is not only based on stats because if you are always injured you cant help your team. Being a "better leader" is not tangible so I cant argue if McMahon was better as a leader (really the defense and Payton were the leaders not McMahon).

I loved the hedged bet here. I can't say if McMahon was a better leader....but even if he was...he wasn't THE leader. LOL ok. Whatever.

Cutler is better than McMahon regardless of what stats show!

Ok fine. We get it.

At the end of the day Cutler has the abilty to take this team to the superbowl based BOTH on McMahon and the fact that many QBs have had numbers almost identical to what Cutler has proven capable of putting up in this ERA. So there is no fail, flaw, or error in my logic.

Except for this:


I think another issue is people are using outlier seasons(in Big Ben's case, Brady's case, and Eli's case) to excuse the typical Cutler year. Can the Bears win a SB with Cutler playing average football? Sure. But I don't think that's a real reason to be hopeful or defend Cutler's mediocre play

 

[onebud34]

I believe that Cutler is better than McMahon and your advanced stats dont change that because even outside of the stats the facts that McMahon is always injured and threw alot of INTs with less sacks and more offensive talent. Best QB is not only based on stats because if you are always injured you cant help your team. Being a "better leader" is not tangible so I cant argue if McMahon was better as a leader (really the defense and Payton were the leaders not McMahon).

So basically Cutler durability is the reason you feel he's better. Cause stats prove otherwise. That...and you never watched McMahon play. They are quite similar as it relates to playing style...although I think the team rallied around McMahon better than they do Cutler. And that was with a team divided

 

[Xplosive]

So it's settled 2010 Jay should've beaten the 1985 Pats 68-3 in the 2011 Super Bowl

No its the other way around according to you guys, the 85 Bears wouldn't make the playoffs because Cutlers terrible stats are actually inflated. If Cutler went back and played back then he would really be Henry Burris....

:gary:

 

[gpphat]

No its the other way around according to you guys, the 85 Bears wouldn't make the playoffs because Cutlers terrible stats are actually inflated. If Cutler went back and played back then he would really be Henry Burris....

:gary:

considering this whole time me and others have pointed out that the defense, oline, and RB were the biggest reasons for the super bowl win...not so much the QB but go ahead and believe what you want

 

[onebud34]

No its the other way around according to you guys, the 85 Bears wouldn't make the playoffs because Cutlers terrible stats are actually inflated. If Cutler went back and played back then he would really be Henry Burris....

:gary:

you forgot to use the green font

 

[gpphat]

Is it really Rodney?!?!

Wait, let me check...Rodgers is 2-4 in his last 6 starts!

lololololol

here's the real test:

Forte is a top 5 RB #Rodgers>Cutler

 

[Xplosive]

I loved the hedged bet here. I can't say if McMahon was a better leader....but even if he was...he wasn't THE leader. LOL ok. Whatever.

HEDGE???
I guess you are just grasping at straws now, did you even watch the Bears back then? How does one quantify leadership? Can you really say Cutler is not a leader when B. Marsh says he is and other team mates say he is. Meanwhile McMahon was more of a rebel and "do what I want to do" type guy than Cutler is so who can say he was a "great leader"... Give me a break with your arrogance.

Cutler is better than McMahon regardless of what stats show!
Ok fine. We get it.



Who told you that stats alone are some infallible proof of truth, stats are just one part of the equation and I like Cutlers stats better but I also like his athletic ability and durability better than McMahons. The fact that I know how terrible the Bears offensive line has been and lack of talent seal the deal, there are no stats for what my eyes can see and mind can process outside of stats.

If I had to choose between Jay Cutler and Jim McMahon as rookies in the same draft, Im taking Cutler everytime and hiring Lovie for DC with MT for OC, with Ditka as HC LOL

Except for this:

I think another issue is people are using outlier seasons(in Big Ben's case, Brady's case, and Eli's case) to excuse the typical Cutler year. Can the Bears win a SB with Cutler playing average football? Sure. But I don't think that's a real reason to be hopeful or defend Cutler's mediocre play

Outlier implies that something rarely happens, meanwhile you just named 3 times in the last decade that teams with average at best QBs have won the Superbowl, thats not an outlier. Just because the players went on to have great seasons later in their life doesn't change the fact that they were mediocre when they won.

 

[Xplosive]

here's the real test:

Forte is a top 5 RB #Rodgers>Cutler

I don't get it.

 

[Xplosive]

considering this whole time me and others have pointed out that the defense, oline, and RB were the biggest reasons for the super bowl win...not so much the QB but go ahead and believe what you want

Right, and I guess I didn't know that already...

Point is alot of teams win the superbowl with a strong defense, solid running game, and average QB play, please dont make me give you multiple examples again.

2013 Bears..
Strong defense "very most likely check"
Solid Running game "very most likely check"
Can Jay Cutler be equal to McMahon and other average QBs that put up 23 TDs and 20 INTs like Eli or 15TDs and 11INT like McMahon???

"CHECK" and mate with you persistent negativity, all you have being doing is trying to hang on to your little petty little whining ways... Get over it Cutler is the best we have had just embrace the guy and lets enjoy the season like fans that actually support the team instead of waiting for the next interception to piss and moan about.

 

[Willis1524]

Right, and I guess I didn't know that already...

Point is alot of teams win the superbowl with a strong defense, solid running game, and average QB play, please dont make me give you multiple examples again.

2013 Bears..
Strong defense "very most likely check"
Solid Running game "very most likely check"
Can Jay Cutler be equal to McMahon and other average QBs that put up 23 TDs and 20 INTs like Eli or 15TDs and 11INT like McMahon???

"CHECK" and mate with you persistent negativity, all you have being doing is trying to hang on to your little petty little whining ways... Get over it Cutler is the best we have had just embrace the guy and lets enjoy the season like fans that actually support the team instead of waiting for the next interception to piss and moan about.

Has anyone in this thread said the it wasn't *possible* for the Bears to win a Superbowl?

 

[Xplosive]

you forgot to use the green font

You already keep calling me "newbie" please explain why I need a green font...?

 

[-Cago34-]

I don't get it.

that confirms it

 

[Willis1524]

that confirms it

I didn't get it at first either, but now I do.

 

[onebud34]

HEDGE???
I guess you are just grasping at straws now, did you even watch the Bears back then? How does one quantify leadership? Can you really say Cutler is not a leader when B. Marsh says he is and other team mates say he is. Meanwhile McMahon was more of a rebel and "do what I want to do" type guy than Cutler is so who can say he was a "great leader"... Give me a break with your arrogance.

Cutler is better than McMahon regardless of what stats show!
Ok fine. We get it.



Who told you that stats alone are some infallible proof of truth, stats are just one part of the equation and I like Cutlers stats better but I also like his athletic ability and durability better than McMahons. The fact that I know how terrible the Bears offensive line has been and lack of talent seal the deal, there are no stats for what my eyes can see and mind can process outside of stats.

If I had to choose between Jay Cutler and Jim McMahon as rookies in the same draft, Im taking Cutler everytime and hiring Lovie for DC with MT for OC, with Ditka as HC LOL

Except for this:

I think another issue is people are using outlier seasons(in Big Ben's case, Brady's case, and Eli's case) to excuse the typical Cutler year. Can the Bears win a SB with Cutler playing average football? Sure. But I don't think that's a real reason to be hopeful or defend Cutler's mediocre play

Outlier implies that something rarely happens, meanwhile you just named 3 times in the last decade that teams with average at best QBs have won the Superbowl, thats not an outlier. Just because the players went on to have great seasons later in their life doesn't change the fact that they were mediocre when they won.

Ha...Brady "average at best"

 

[onebud34]

Bears Super Bowl key-mediocre year from Cutler