Yes you can do that with any team. You brought up the 3 game spread between records. :shrug:

You're reeruned.

I pretty much agree with Mr. Mile High Mania that wins and losses don't tell a quarterback's entire story. But if you win a lot, it will get you a long term contract. Don't, and you get fired.

Personally, I've thought Cutler was overrated for a long, long time. It's true that he made Vanderbilt a better football team, but in retrospect, I realize that Aunt May playing tackle would have made Vanderbilt a better football team.

Unless or until he can set aside the excuses (bad defense, dropped balls, crummy coach, etc.) and start winning games it's going to come to a sad end for him. That's it. There is no more. The bird is morte.

Many are the quarterbacks who have come and gone in this league with phenomenal physical tools who weren't successful for one reason or another.

FAX

Fax... I don't think he's using any of these as excuses... just those of us on the forums. Hell, the Great Peyton never won his ring until the Colts woke up one post-season and figured out how to play defense after what had to be one hell of a good night's sleep. Prior to that, many viewed Peyton as a stats freak at QB that liked to blame his OL for mistakes and would never be able to win the big one.

Things certainly changed when his defense played better.

Cutler definitely has areas of improvement and is far from being the best QB he can be...

It took Rivers some time to grow up a bit, and some still debate if he has done that. But, many think he's now got "it" and can lead a team, pointing to his ability to put them on his back late in 2008.

Just don't forget it took him some time to get there...

This is Jay's 3rd full year going into camp as the starter, with a new coach and system... last thing we needed was this big drama, especially with Marshall's dumbass staring at a suspension.

We'll see what happens.

1.) 3 games is a big difference when you only play 16. You must know that.

2.) "Stupid to want a back-up QB over a Pro-Bowler. Cassell is a serviceable back up so long as he has a strong defense keeping the game close." was what I was responding to. It's not as if that poster was busy breaking down tape or talking to scouts prior to making his post. It was particularly foolish given that he was pimping a quarterback that has fewer winning seasons in College and the Pros than Cassel has.

I'm not sure whether to respond or just let you roll..

You're just not getting the point of my comments.

I'm getting it fine. I'm just not buying it. There's a difference.

Ahhhh... ok, so then you are fully expecting 10+ wins from Cassell in KC this year b/c it's all about the QB and not the other factors, like defense or OL.

Gotcha. Good to know.

The term "excuse" was probably poorly chosen, Mr. Mile High Mania. In fact, after reviewing my post, the entire thing makes little sense. I blame the drugs.

Nevertheless, Cutler has to start winning. It's that simple. He never has, so it's tough to compare him to Manning. As for the defense, great quarterbacks find a way to overcome the shortcomings of their team. Trent Green, for example, won a lot of games with a laughing stock of a defense. Literally. Anyhow, we're talking quarterback play - not defense.

My point is this; Cutler has great physical tools, but he's never developed to the point he can make the difference between a win and a loss - and come out on the winning side. He couldn't do it in college and he hasn't yet proven he can do it in the NFL. You're right, he might develop into something special. But, there is nothing in his history or current situation that leads me to believe he's about to make that transition.

FAX

I'm not expecting anything. I wasn't the one who made the post pimping Cutler at Cassel's expense. I merely responded to it. That's why I didn't buy your argument. It wasn't that your point had absolutely no historical validity, it was that it didn't apply to the given circumstances created by the first poster.

Jesus Christ; you can 'Tard Slap-Fight' for HOURS. I must admit; I'm impressed!

Rep!

Ok... Green had 2 winning seasons as the QB in KC.

2001: 6 wins
2002: 8 wins
2003: 13 wins
2004: 7 wins
2005: 10 wins

Defense pretty much sucked in each of those years, but it wasn't just Green... you had a guy named Priest, remember him and all that production?

Hell, in 2003 when Green finally broke .500 in wins... Priest had 1400+ yds and 27 TDs rushing.

So, are we still putting all the glory on Trent for 2003?

Oh and in 2005, the other year over .500 ... some guy named LJ had 1700 yds and 20 TDs.

Still all Trent?

I'm not suggesting he sucked, but c'mon... he was very good, but seriously, those double digit seasons were helped out quite a bit with the nice RB production.

Denver has had issues for a few years now, which is why Shanahan is gone...

He's not really that good...

...And McDaniels pass happy offense should shore that right up! :eek:

EDIT: added the first part of Mile High's post

I actually like what Denver's been doing. It's just unfortunate for them that the team's quarterback is less mature than your average zygote.