WTF Pace

[cubzzzfanincali]

Well it's not an argument, its a fact. If you have the worse defense in the league you are not winning a super bowl. You can call me names if you want but at least what I provided was fact and not opinion.

Leo. The 2014 Bears and 2011 Patriots were ranked identically. #31. The 2011 Patriots were statistically actually considerably worse than the Bears. They not only made it in the playoffs (your original point), they came within literally a whisker of winning it all. Those are all facts.

In light of this, it is a miniscule stretch to say that a slightly even worse defense at #32 absolutely could win a Super Bowl. Your point is really not a fact. If you had said that no team HAS won a Super Bowl with the #32 defense, then, yes, that would be stating a fact. But the 2011 Patriots clearly prove that it is within the realm of possibility.

 

[cubzzzfanincali]

Joey has no ideal how much we all fought for Cutler for years. I still think he is a good guy and teammate. And I'm ok with him being our QB right now. Except being way way over paid. But last year proved beyond a doubt that Cutler is not improving with much better talent around him. Did we ruin him? Ya I think we did.

You know, I agree with you, it's fine, it is what it is and we will live with it. It is too late to do anything about it now. And at least he is not a nauseating personality to cheer for like, say, Dennis Rodman was. I'd actually like him to succeed, it would be really something for a guy with diabetes to do well. It's just that I have given up on that actually happening. And in the interim, having to read crap like "the only reason he hasn't is because of the fanbase" is going to irritate the hell out of me. The shitty O lines he played behind may have indeed ruined him, but the fans didn't.

 

[cubzzzfanincali]

Okay, I'm going to argue both sides a bit here for a moment.

Don't group me in with Joey or Leo on this topic. If you've read my posts here for the past 7-8 years you know I used to be a HUGE Cutler supporter, I used to fight to the death with "Cutler haters". BUT... I'm with Cubz, it's not some "Chicago sports fan defect". That's absurd. How you can still go to bat for this guy after seeing no more than 5-6 games last season is beyond me.

However, on the flip side… here's an example of my beef with the people who feel the need to tear Cutler to shreds at every stop. As if he spent his career pissing in his jock strap.

I would bet most anything that if I were to ask Wood, AI, etc... their opinion on Matt Stafford, that they wouldn't lay into him nearly as much as they do Cutler. They might even say he's decent, I don't know. But… nevertheless… I present to you their career numbers.

Cutler

GAMES: 119 RECORD: 61-58-0 (1-1 Playoffs) CMP: 2390 ATT: 3871 CMP%: 61.7 YARDS: 27749 TD: 183 INT:130 INT%: 3.4 QB RATING: 85.2 SACKED: 256 SACK%: 6.2

Stafford

GAMES: 77 RECORD: 35-42-0 (0-2 Playoffs) CMP: 1848 ATT: 3099 CMP%: 59.6 YARDS: 21714 TD: 131 INT: 85 INT%: 2.7 QB Rating: 83.6 SACKED: 161 SACK%: 4.9


Now, without any knowledge of these two QB's or their numbers, if I just put "QB1" and "QB2" in front of these guy's stats. You would no doubt say these two have EXTREMELY similar body's of work. Jay is better in QB rating, CMP%, overall record, he has a playoff win. Stafford has a higher TD rate while also accumulating a 0.7% better INT rate. He's also better in yardage, even if it's mostly because of his high number of attempts.

Granted, Stafford is 27, but I believe we all have a good idea who he is by now.

I've read QB rankings lists all off-season on different forums that have Stafford both as a top 10 QB, and just outside of the top 10. Meanwhile, Cutler is regarded as a total laughing stock.

Now, I would take Stafford 100% over Cutler. Possibly only because of his age, but there is absolutely no denying he's coming off of a better season either. However, there is ALSO no denying that these two are extremely comparable QB's if you look at their body of work. There just seems to be no breathing room ever for Cutler, people are looking for any excuse to throw him to the dogs.

He definitely deserves to be criticized, but it's like everything is always multiplied ten-fold with Jay. People look for any reason to try and blame him when he doesn't deserve it. Then… when he does deserve blame, people take it and run with it to SUCH AMAZING extremes.

OK, just as far as "Cutler vs. Stafford" goes, yes, I would definitely take Stafford, even just based on stats. Remember...with win-loss records...Stafford started his career that the year before had gone 0-16. 0-16. That team had nothing. Cutler came here and had a good defense. Stafford has played every game the last 4 years, Cutler hasn't played 16 since 2009. Last 4 years interception rates, Stafford 2.4%, Cutler 3.0%. By many metrics they are more or less very similar statistically the last 3 or 4 years, but Stafford is significantly younger and slightly cheaper. I don't know where exactly I would rate either Stafford or Cutler in QB ranks, but to me they are both like in the (roughly) 10-15 group of NFL QBs.

I agree that if one were to imply Stafford is nearly elite and Cutler a laughingstock, that would be foolish. I don't think that much space separates them. But given my druthers, to just magically pick one or the other and put them on my roster, yes, I would take Stafford.

 

[JoeyTourettes]

There just seems to be no breathing room ever for Cutler, people are looking for any excuse to throw him to the dogs.

He definitely deserves to be criticized, but it's like everything is always multiplied ten-fold with Jay. People look for any reason to try and blame him when he doesn't deserve it. Then… when he does deserve blame, people take it and run with it to SUCH AMAZING extremes.

This ^
What fun would a message board be, if everyone agreed and kept feeding each other the same bullshit? Jay Cutler for MVP!!! The campaign has begun! Comeback player of the year? The "ITYS" award! *I Told You So
I thought everyone likes the underdog story? With the way Jay is treated wouldn't that be the ultimate Underdog story right there? I can see the headline now:
"His own fans boo him, The national media laugh at him, people make up stuff about him, he doesn't actually smoke! Meet your 2015 NFL MVP!"

 

[cubzzzfanincali]

Joey, I promise not to criticize your response, so if you could condense all your feelings about Cuter into one sentence, what would it be? The essence only.

 

[leomaz]

Leo. The 2014 Bears and 2011 Patriots were ranked identically. #31. The 2011 Patriots were statistically actually considerably worse than the Bears. They not only made it in the playoffs (your original point), they came within literally a whisker of winning it all. Those are all facts.

In light of this, it is a miniscule stretch to say that a slightly even worse defense at #32 absolutely could win a Super Bowl. Your point is really not a fact. If you had said that no team HAS won a Super Bowl with the #32 defense, then, yes, that would be stating a fact. But the 2011 Patriots clearly prove that it is within the realm of possibility.

The 2011 patriots were no where near as bad a,defense than last years,Bears and 31,is not the worst defense. If you base it purley on yards but we all know it is scoring defense that is most important. The 2011 pats were no where near the bottom in scoring defense.

 

[blh7068]

The point you are missing, is this team led by Cutler is supposed to be able to keep up with the bad defense.

"Score more" doesnt work- not when the defense has an atypically bad PA. If you dont believe- look back at 2013- defense was just as bad, and it took a franchise record setting offense( 2nd in the league in PPG) to get the scoring differential to -33 and a pedestrian 8-8 season.

As Ive "hinted" at before, there is much more to blame than Cutler and the turnovers from last year. Run game management- and no Im not talking about how many times Cutler may or may not have checked out of run plays. Forte was 5th in the league in individual carries- as a team they were 30th. Thats too much of the same thing from one player, and not nearly enough from the other backs. IMO, that hurt Fortes production with just a 3.9 ypc. All other backs combined accounted for just 12% of total team carries, with Carey having the 2nd most touches among the RBs with 36. Also there was no FB on the roster. The negative impacts of that are compromising to the entire offense. Most importantly, NONE of what I said is Cutlers doing. That squarely falls on coaching and management.

 

[blh7068]

OK, just as far as "Cutler vs. Stafford" goes, yes, I would definitely take Stafford, even just based on stats.

Even last year where Cutler threw more TD passes, had a higher rating and completion pct? Jay had 27 total turnovers, Stafford had 18. Detroits offensive production mirrored the Bears. They also struggled to run the ball. The big difference is PA- Lions were tied for 2nd best- while the Bears were 2nd worst. Id say thats a major contributor as to why one team won 11 games, and the other only 5.

 

[blh7068]

But last year proved beyond a doubt that Cutler is not improving with much better talent around him

What good comes out of a 3.9 ypc carry from the featured back that was 5th in the league in the league in carries. Or what good comes out of not using the other personnel as evident by the 30th ranking in team carries.

Trestman pretty much did the same thing in 2013, but Forte was much more effective running the football. Same one man gang carrying the load with too many of the same formations in 2014 that were used in 2013. Predictability will stymie talent and production more often than not. Otherwise, how else would you explain his drop from a 4.6 ypc of 2013 to 3.9 in 2014?

 

[cubzzzfanincali]

The 2011 patriots were no where near as bad a,defense than last years,Bears and 31,is not the worst defense. If you base it purley on yards but we all know it is scoring defense that is most important. The 2011 pats were no where near the bottom in scoring defense.

A major reason their PA was ranked lower was because the primary strength of that team was that their offense rarely turned the ball over. Opponents consistently had terrible field position. In terms of execution, yes, that defense was extremely bad. They just had a bigger margin for error.

 

[cubzzzfanincali]

Even last year where Cutler threw more TD passes, had a higher rating and completion pct? Jay had 27 total turnovers, Stafford had 18. Detroits offensive production mirrored the Bears. They also struggled to run the ball. The big difference is PA- Lions were tied for 2nd best- while the Bears were 2nd worst. Id say thats a major contributor as to why one team won 11 games, and the other only 5.

The Lions committed 9 fewer turnovers than we did. That wins you a few games right there. I'm not sure the degree to which turnovers hugely affect games is always well appreciated.

 

[JoeyTourettes]

Joey, I promise not to criticize your response, so if you could condense all your feelings about Cuter into one sentence, what would it be? The essence only.

"The most talented QB in Bears history, who hasn't met the unreachable expectations of Bears fans, provides more upside then replacement/journeymen/rookie QB's and a player the team can/have won with."

Now your turn.

 

[blh7068]

A major reason their PA was ranked lower was because the primary strength of that team was that their offense rarely turned the ball over.

That, and the defense was equally good at taking the ball away. The Packers had a similar defense when they went 15-1 a few years ago. PA was mitigated by the high number of takeaways.

 

[blh7068]

The Lions committed 9 fewer turnovers than we did. That wins you a few games right there. I'm not sure the degree to which turnovers hugely affect games is always well appreciated.

TBH, I think its a bit overblown. Mainly because not every turnover is worst case scenario, i.e each occurance doesnt represent the most compromising situation the defense will inherit. Defenses that are quite poor allow scoring from anywhere on the field. Thats been the Bears the last 2 seasons. Good defenses mitigate scoring, and are able to absorb the offensive turnovers that dont put the defense in the highest compromising situations.

That said, its the quality of defensive play and one teams ability to absorb mistakes that is the difference, and not the 9 TO difference between Stafford and Cutler. The former defines the body of work for winning, not the latter.

 

[NCChiFan]

Personally, I'll take Cutler over Stafford. Never really liked him as a QB, not that I'm thrilled with Jay.

 

[noonthirtyjoe]

TBH, I think its a bit overblown. Mainly because not every turnover is worst case scenario, i.e each occurance doesnt represent the most compromising situation the defense will inherit. Defenses that are quite poor allow scoring from anywhere on the field. Thats been the Bears the last 2 seasons. Good defenses mitigate scoring, and are able to absorb the offensive turnovers that dont put the defense in the highest compromising situations.

That said, its the quality of defensive play and one teams ability to absorb mistakes that is the difference, and not the 9 TO difference between Stafford and Cutler. The former defines the body of work for winning, not the latter.

I disagree with you BLH and think Cali is spot on. Who wins the turnover battle wins 99% of the time. It's huge and I think you underestimate how huge. What you said is sensible, but the stats say otherwise.

 

[anotheridiot]

"Score more" doesnt work- not when the defense has an atypically bad PA. If you dont believe- look back at 2013- defense was just as bad, and it took a franchise record setting offense( 2nd in the league in PPG) to get the scoring differential to -33 and a pedestrian 8-8 season.

As Ive "hinted" at before, there is much more to blame than Cutler and the turnovers from last year. Run game management- and no Im not talking about how many times Cutler may or may not have checked out of run plays. Forte was 5th in the league in individual carries- as a team they were 30th. Thats too much of the same thing from one player, and not nearly enough from the other backs. IMO, that hurt Fortes production with just a 3.9 ypc. All other backs combined accounted for just 12% of total team carries, with Carey having the 2nd most touches among the RBs with 36. Also there was no FB on the roster. The negative impacts of that are compromising to the entire offense. Most importantly, NONE of what I said is Cutlers doing. That squarely falls on coaching and management.

I know that score more does not work, but when you put all your eggs in the offensive basket, there were no upgrades to fix the rest of your problems, their solution had them playing from behind every week. They went with baseball type logic and a slide rule to consider Houston the best available defensive end available while Denver chased and got a difference guy from Dallas. They went to PRO STATS to count all Jared Allens sacks over his prime years and paid him in his rocking chair years.

Now we fix it with the draft where these guys might contribute this year, next year or in two years so they are not overpaying, or paying retail on their own free agents like Jennings, Gould, Slausen. You move along on these guys so your cap is able to swipe a difference maker off someone elses team that you cannot develop.

Things are changing, but its gonna take time. The "difference makers" in Marshall and Bennett are getting a FU from this front office. Forte is gonna get one too, so the current dilemma is do we replace all these guys around a Cutler and end up with the same result? Even then, I am sure the apologists will find a way to still blame everyone else.

 

[JoeyTourettes]

TBH, I think its a bit overblown. Mainly because not every turnover is worst case scenario, i.e each occurance doesnt represent the most compromising situation the defense will inherit. Defenses that are quite poor allow scoring from anywhere on the field. Thats been the Bears the last 2 seasons. Good defenses mitigate scoring, and are able to absorb the offensive turnovers that dont put the defense in the highest compromising situations.

That said, its the quality of defensive play and one teams ability to absorb mistakes that is the difference, and not the 9 TO difference between Stafford and Cutler. The former defines the body of work for winning, not the latter.

I like this debate, We also have to consider this: Turnovers are going to happen more often when teams are down big- simply because taking more chances to get back into a game. The score does dictate some plays. Tight game might mean checkdown- limit mistakes. Down big will mean forced throws.
The Lions had a defense that kept Stafford in every game. Even when he had poor games the defense kept them closer.

 

[blh7068]

I disagree with you BLH and think Cali is spot on. Who wins the turnover battle wins 99% of the time. It's huge and I think you underestimate how huge. What you said is sensible, but the stats say otherwise.

Of course its sensible. What youre ignoring is the causality. That stat is upheld because bad defenses cant absorb a turnover by the offense- regardless of where they occur. Not every turnover is a worst case scenario. Points off turnovers is strictly derived from what happens on the ensuing drive after a turnover. The ensuing drive that nets a score is 99 yards or 1 yard is treated the same- its points off a turnover.


Good defenses can absorb the turnovers that arent among those situations most compromising to the defense. Bad defenses cant. That is the causality of 'winning the TO battle' stat.

 

[richig07]

OK, just as far as "Cutler vs. Stafford" goes, yes, I would definitely take Stafford, even just based on stats. Remember...with win-loss records...Stafford started his career that the year before had gone 0-16. 0-16. That team had nothing. Cutler came here and had a good defense. Stafford has played every game the last 4 years, Cutler hasn't played 16 since 2009. Last 4 years interception rates, Stafford 2.4%, Cutler 3.0%. By many metrics they are more or less very similar statistically the last 3 or 4 years, but Stafford is significantly younger and slightly cheaper. I don't know where exactly I would rate either Stafford or Cutler in QB ranks, but to me they are both like in the (roughly) 10-15 group of NFL QBs.

I agree that if one were to imply Stafford is nearly elite and Cutler a laughingstock, that would be foolish. I don't think that much space separates them. But given my druthers, to just magically pick one or the other and put them on my roster, yes, I would take Stafford.

I agree with all of this. I've just seen some QB lists where Stafford is at #9 and Cutler is at #20 or so. When I looked up Stafford's stats, I honestly was surprised they weren't better.

I wasn't making a case for Cutler over Stafford, at all. Just merely saying I don't think you can look at their body of work and suggest their is much separation between them.