OT - PHI Extends Fletcher Cox, Most Guaranteed $$ In The NFL For A Non-QB

Bronze65

Active member
Joined:
Sep 16, 2014
Posts:
400
Liked Posts:
396
Just so you know, based on the link you provided, Cutler's total contract is the highest by over 12.5 million.

Right. His contact was front loaded. He also has the "going rate" of average per year, middle of the pack total guaranteed and one of the lowest percent guaranteed per year. So it may be the highest, but it doesn't average out that way.
 

Packer Fan

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Aug 21, 2012
Posts:
6,865
Liked Posts:
2,232
Location:
J'Marcus Webb's Face. His Fac
Its like...you have no brain. None whatsoever.

So, according to you, these are duplicate statements:

Kirk Cousins will regress from his +18 TD/INT ratio

Kirk Cousins will throw as many INTs as TDs


Makes sense. Thanks.

Ratio involves division, not subtraction. Or maybe I'm missing something.
 

FirstTimer

v. 2.0: Fully Modded
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '19
Joined:
May 4, 2010
Posts:
27,077
Liked Posts:
15,145
And as far as I can tell, he is the only QB to ever be benched for Clausen...

DemetriusJones.jpg
 

FirstTimer

v. 2.0: Fully Modded
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '19
Joined:
May 4, 2010
Posts:
27,077
Liked Posts:
15,145
Agreed. Trestman was horrible at making personnel decisions.

It didn't help Cutler wasn't overly great at football either.

Really, the most damning part of the Cutler for Clausen benching is that it wasn't out of left field and could be logically argued. IMO it made more sense if they had benched him for Fales at that point but I digress.

Even more so, some players in the locker room were in favor of it per media reports at the time.
 

didshereallysaythat

Well-known member
Joined:
Aug 14, 2011
Posts:
20,858
Liked Posts:
9,781
It didn't help Cutler wasn't overly great at football either.

Really, the most damning part of the Cutler for Clausen benching is that it wasn't out of left field and could be logically argued. IMO it made more sense if they had benched him for Fales at that point but I digress.

Even more so, some players in the locker room were in favor of it per media reports at the time.

Also, Trestman was trying to do something radical because he knew he job was in jeopardy after the back to back 50 point debacles with a bye week inbetween.
 

Woods

Chicago Bears Fan
Joined:
Sep 25, 2012
Posts:
2,501
Liked Posts:
1,443
Really, the most damning part of the Cutler for Clausen benching is that it wasn't out of left field and could be logically argued. IMO it made more sense if they had benched him for Fales at that point but I digress.

There's probably a good Lifetime made for TV drama somewhere inside that whole fiasco. At that point in the season, it made no sense why Fales didnt get a shot to show what he could do.
 

Mongo_76

Well-known member
Joined:
Dec 2, 2013
Posts:
9,959
Liked Posts:
5,233
Also, Trestman was trying to do something radical because he knew he job was in jeopardy after the back to back 50 point debacles with a bye week inbetween.

LOL

A coach in jeopardy wouldn't bench his QB if he felt that QB was his best chance at winning. Clearly, he was tired of Cutlers shit play.

The only mistake he made was not benching him sooner.
 

didshereallysaythat

Well-known member
Joined:
Aug 14, 2011
Posts:
20,858
Liked Posts:
9,781
LOL

A coach in jeopardy wouldn't bench his QB if he felt that QB was his best chance at winning. Clearly, he was tired of Cutlers shit play.

The only mistake he made was not benching him sooner.

Clausen has 1 win in his entire career. It was pointless for him to even be on the roster.

Maybe he should have tried benching Tucker from calling plays.
 

da_bears6

Well-known member
Joined:
Jan 3, 2014
Posts:
2,796
Liked Posts:
1,471
LOL

A coach in jeopardy wouldn't bench his QB if he felt that QB was his best chance at winning. Clearly, he was tired of Cutlers shit play.

The only mistake he made was not benching him sooner.

He should have taken Mel Tucker for a walk in the woods.
 

FirstTimer

v. 2.0: Fully Modded
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '19
Joined:
May 4, 2010
Posts:
27,077
Liked Posts:
15,145
Also, Trestman was trying to do something radical because he knew he job was in jeopardy after the back to back 50 point debacles with a bye week inbetween.

Well, Trestman rolled with Cutler for another five games after the back to back 50 point games.

Cutler and the offense were pathetic basically starting week 7. It was horrendous.

Most any of the offenses production was pure garbage time.
 

didshereallysaythat

Well-known member
Joined:
Aug 14, 2011
Posts:
20,858
Liked Posts:
9,781
Well, Trestman rolled with Cutler for another five games after the back to back 50 point games.

Cutler and the offense were pathetic basically starting week 7. It was horrendous.

Most any of the offenses production was pure garbage time.

2014 might have been the worst overall Bears team since right before Wanny was fired.
 

Mongo_76

Well-known member
Joined:
Dec 2, 2013
Posts:
9,959
Liked Posts:
5,233
Clausen has 1 win in his entire career. It was pointless for him to even be on the roster.

Maybe he should have tried benching Tucker from calling plays.

I fairness, he played better against the Lions that year than Cutler did.
 

NCChiFan

Bald, fat, toothless
Donator
Joined:
Mar 29, 2012
Posts:
10,893
Liked Posts:
4,788
Ok, so we all meet back here next year for our annual, "Jay Cutler" thread?
 

Woods

Chicago Bears Fan
Joined:
Sep 25, 2012
Posts:
2,501
Liked Posts:
1,443
This is all conjecture on my part, but here is my take on the Clausen start:

If the Bears were rebuilding with Trestman, then it would make sense to start Fales. The problem was that the Bears were still in "win now' mode, and Trestman was under the impression that he probably wouldn't be around much longer. Trestman's reason for going with Clausen is two-fold...one, if he could beat Detroit with Clausen, then he might 'save face' in the eyes of the rest of the NFL (his potential employers) because his offense worked with both McCown and Clausen...he's basically telling everyone "Hey, my offense isn't the problem...its Cutler". Two, in some sense he is giving the Bears organization and Cutler the middle finger by benching Cutler. I think the previous week Aaron Kromer had bashed Cutler for being a turd.

You're probably not far off. The underlined sentence I agree with 100%. He was sending a "FU" to someone, either Jay, the organization or both.
 

NCChiFan

Bald, fat, toothless
Donator
Joined:
Mar 29, 2012
Posts:
10,893
Liked Posts:
4,788
This is all conjecture on my part, but here is my take on the Clausen start:

If the Bears were rebuilding with Trestman, then it would make sense to start Fales. The problem was that the Bears were still in "win now' mode, and Trestman was under the impression that he probably wouldn't be around much longer. Trestman's reason for going with Clausen is two-fold...one, if he could beat Detroit with Clausen, then he might 'save face' in the eyes of the rest of the NFL (his potential employers) because his offense worked with both McCown and Clausen...he's basically telling everyone "Hey, my offense isn't the problem...its Cutler". Two, in some sense he is giving the Bears organization and Cutler the middle finger by benching Cutler. I think the previous week Aaron Kromer had bashed Cutler for being a turd.

You bring up an interesting point. I wonder what Fox promised or gave strong feelings toward the turn around when hired. Cutler may have played into coach Fox's 3 year plan, let's say. Fox to Pace, "let me get the Defence sorted, and we can hit the playoffs in 3-4 years with Jay." Weather you like him or not, at what price or not, he is a known quantity at this point.Not making an excuse and pointing out the obvious lesser QB's have made the playoffs and have even won Superbowls.
 

Top