Tuesday, April 7, 2009

Kyle Orton = Winner, Jay Cutler = Loser, Clark Judge = Dipshit

In the words of Chris W, nothing makes a "solid leader" out of a shitty QB like a sportswriter with an axe to grind.

This is my take on the Chicago Bear's deal for Jay Cutler: They were better off with Kyle Orton.

This is Clark's way of explaining that he's dumb, in much the same way Skip Bayless is dumb. So dumb, and so forward with ridiculous opinions, that you almost have to believe he's fully conscious of the fact that he's being a moron and is just doing so in order to get attention from blogs like this.

You heard me.

We read you.

Orton can't throw the ball as far or as straight as Cutler, and you won't find anyone drooling over the velocity of his passes. But he has something Cutler does not, and that's a high score in the leadership department -- and, sorry, but I'll take that over physical ability any day.

Hey, you can't prove this wrong, can you? Even though Cutler was generally well-received by his teammates, there is nothing you can produce for Clark which will prove to him that Orton ISN'T a better leader than Cutler. Therefore, bad trade for the Bears. QED. Also, Scott Brosius has more World Series rings than Alex Rodriguez. Clark will take Scott as his third baseman any day.

As a rookie, he led the Bears to a 10-4 record -- including an eight-game winning streak -- before Rex Grossman returned.

Orton that year (2005): 52% completion rate, 9 TDs, 13 INTs, 59.7 QB rating. Bears defense that year: 2nd in the NFL in yards allowed per game (282), 1st by a mile in points allowed per game (12.6, Indianapolis was second at 15.4). That eight game winning streak? All Kyle.

A year ago, he was back as a starter and was there for critical late-season overtime defeats of New Orleans and Green Bay.

He was there! He was on the field! Give him the MVP trohpy already! Against New Orleans: 24 for 40, 0 TDs, 2 INTs, 49.2 QB rating. Against Green Bay: 14 for 27, 1 TD, 2 INTs, 48.7 QB rating. No way would Cutler grit out a couple of leadershippy performances like those.

OK, so the Bears didn't make the playoffs but don't blame Orton. Blame Chicago's 21st-ranked defense, a unit that blew three 10-point leads and self-immolated in a last-second loss to Atlanta.

But later, when pointing out that Cutler has never been to the playoffs, he'll be sure to not mention Denver's 28th-ranked (2007) and 30th-ranked (2008) defenses in his two full seasons as a starter.

At the NFL winter meetings last month, Chicago coach Lovie Smith said the Bears were a running team that had to play good defense, and no one disagreed.

And furthermore, everyone agreed: if you have a chance to add a 25 year old Pro Bowl QB for a pretty reasonable cost, for God's sakes, don't do it!

So what's a running team doing acquiring a quarterback who can throw the ball the length of Michigan Avenue? You tell me, because I think the Bears were better off with Orton.

Why would you want a quarterback who can throw far? The forward pass has been illegal since 1958!

He fit their personality.

Always a good reason to not trade away a guy with a career passer rating that barely cracks 70.

He wasn't flashy, but he was effective


before suffering an ankle injury.

Oh, well he doesn't sound very tough then.

He was tough.

What about the ankle injury and subsequent ineffectiveness???

He was gritty.

He and David Eckstein regularly had grit contests. Orton won 8 times out of 10.

And he won.

And the Bears won while he was on the field. In spite of his play.

Look it up: His record as a starter is 21–12, not bad for someone critics portray as the NFL's version of the Venus De Milo.

I don't get it. Critics think he's beautiful?

Cutler is 17-20, never made the playoffs and never had a winning season.

And remember, this is all his fault. No one else's. Just his. Maybe if he didn't blow so hard the Broncos wouldn't have given up nearly 30 points a game last year.

So the Bears trade away Orton and three draft picks and, sorry, Chicago, your team just got fleeced.

As a Bronco fan, let me tell you- we're laughing all the way to the bank!

You need offensive linemen. You need receivers.

And now that you've acquired a Pro Bowl QB with a very reasonable contract, there's no way you'll be able to attact either.

You need a defense that must play better.

You need a defense which plays better + Your defense must play better + not proofreading = that sentence.

Yet you just traded away the first round for a couple of years for a guy who throws a pretty pass and can't play .500 football in the AFC West.

Cutler can't even play defensive tackle, linebacker or safety. What a puss.

Tell me Chicago knows what it's doing.

It does/they do.

Smith had it right when he said you win in Chicago by running the ball and playing solid defense. The 1985 Bears had Walter Payton, a lights-out defense and Jim McMahon at quarterback.

There are no other ways to construct a winning team.

McMahon was tough, gritty and capable of big plays when you needed them, but he was hardly the second coming of Sid Luckman. He was perfect for that team because he epitomized its personality -- which was tough, gritty -- yeah, I think you get the idea.

As long as the idea is that you're a complete tard, yeah, I do.

Anyway, the Bears have to be that way because when it's November and December on Lake Shore Drive you don't win by having Jay Cutler throw the ball into 40 mph winds. You win by running, locking down your opponents and avoiding mistakes.

You win by having Kyle Orton throw the ball into 40 mph winds. Clearly a better recipe for success- just look at his record as a starter. Also, too bad the Bears traded Matt Forte for Cutler. Now they won't be able to run the ball anymore.

Anyone have any idea how many interceptions Cutler launched last year?

I'll bet you do!

I do.


It was 18, and only Brett Favre had more.

18 INTs in 618 attempts = a pick on 2.9% of all throws. Orton's 12 INTs in 465 attempts = a pick on 2.6% of all throws.

Then there's the matter of what Chicago gave up -- two first-rounders, a third-rounder and Orton. Are you kidding me? So Cutler was a Pro Bowl quarterback. Big deal. DeAngelo Williams wasn't elected to the team, which should tell you about the credibility of the honor.

One guy got snubbed from the Pro Bowl- therefore, Jay Cutler sucks.

I won't argue that Cutler is one of the most talented quarterbacks in today's game,

It sounds like you are doing just that. Talking about all his interceptions, etc.

but I also won't argue that he's one of the most spoiled prima donnas, either.


All you need to know about this guy is that he once said he had "a stronger arm than John [Elway], hands down" and that "he'd bet on it against anybody's in the league" -- as if that somehow measured his greatness.

People in Chicago hate athletes with bravado.

First of all, I don't know that he has a stronger arm than Elway. I don't know that anyone does. Second, Elway made a name for himself not with his arm but with wins and fourth-quarter comebacks. In his second year, Elway went 13-3 and won the AFC West. In his third year, he was 11-5. And in his fourth, he was in the Super Bowl. That's how you measure quarterbacks, Cutler, not by arm strength.

Take that, Jay Cutler- you just got a stern talking to from a shitheaded lummox of a non-name sportswriter.

Third, let's say you buy into Cutler as a franchise quarterback. OK, fine. So where's his franchise wide receiver? Devin Hester? Please. Earl Bennett? You've got to be kidding. There isn't one.

And there is no way whatsoever the Bears could acquire one during Cutler's time in Chicago- none. Can't be done. Plus, as the Patriots' Super Bowl teams showed, it's absolutely essential to have a big name WR if you want to win it all.

Which is why I would have much rather seen the Bears hang on to the draft picks and invest them in something more worthwhile -- like an offensive tackle and cornerback -- or two offensive tackles -- or an offensive tackle and a wide receiver.

All clearly more worthwhile than a 25 year old Pro Bowl QB with a great contract.

I imagine they'll find them anyway,

OK... what?

but they just mortgaged the future for a quarterback who, when faced with winning only one of his last three starts last season, couldn't close the deal.

Points allowed by Denver in those 3 games: 30, 30, 52. Two of them on the road against playoff teams.

Now he's going to magically transform the Bears into a division champion all over again when he couldn't do it with Mike Shanahan in the AFC West?

Yeah, probably. Wouldn't surprise me. Maybe not in 2009, but definitely soon.

There's a better chance of Terrell Owens serving as grand marshal at the next Mummers Parade.


[three paragraphs of idiocy omitted]

I just don't see how he fits in Chicago, and I don't see why the Bears decided to dump their first round -- as well as their quarterback -- for someone who has done nothing in three years.

Done nothing except be a very good NFL quarterback who is blossoming into a great one.

Good luck, Chicago. You wanted him. You have him. Now let's see you win with him.

When they do, I expect you to print an apology and then quit. Probably won't happen.


CHart said...

Venus De Milo -- No arm(s). Mmmm, gummy Venus. Sweet, sweet can.

Tonus said...

Remember, the most important quality in any NFL QB is his ability to make his defense play really really well.

Chris W said...

You could say theoretically that Cutler's high INT count kept his defense on the field and tired them out to the point where they were less effective.

But then I'd guess you'd have to say the same about Orton's constant stream of 3 and outs and missed passes to wide-open downfield receivers.

Martin said...

I liked the part where he said that the Bears don't have a "franchise wide receiver" (is there such a thing?) and then says he wishes the Bears had kept the draft picks and picked....a cornerback and o lineman. So in otherwords....they still wouldn't have a good wide receiver.

I've seen a couple articles like this, and hear a lot from the radio talking heads, but my question becomes, why don't they think that Cutler can play as badly as Orton in Chicago? They all seem to think that now Cutler is there that he's running the offense or something. The Bears are suddenly going to throw the ball 618 times a season? The offense is going to become Al Davis Verticle Game? I know it's not a great example, but I expect the Bears to use Cutler sort of like the Cowboys used Aikmen. Be a running team that passed a lot to the tight end and backs and went for the dagger to the heart every once in awhile. The Bears are not going to turn into Texas Tech for god's sake.

I think both teams did well. Two first round picks is a good price for a franchise type QB. Teams spend one all the time merely hoping the guy turns out right (see Young, V. and Leinart, M.) so two isn't unreasonable. I just want to see what the Broncos look like with Orton throwing the ball 600 times.

Tonus said...

I think that's the part that people seem to miss. Cutler gives a team with a good running attack a QB with a good arm who can keep a defense on its toes. In other words, a very good complement to a good running game!

Denver gets Orton, who eats grit and shits... grit. And is also gritty. Grit grit gritty mcgritson.

Actually, Denver gets three high draft picks. And Kyle Gritstein. Grit.

Chris W said...

The thing is, I have no idea where people get the idea that Orton is "gritty". He's not tough at all, he doesn't "hustle" and he's actually got a lot of talent that he just, essentially, wasted after getting upended by the Badgers

Chris W said...


I think you're GENERALLY right but if you remember--Ron Turner has about 3 plays:

--Run off tackle
--Pass to the flats
--Throw deep to the skinny post up the middle. Real deep. No. Longer. Keep going. Deep.

Orton was just a fucking slug at throwing deep. There were myriad times when Hester would be wide open downfield and Orton would over/under/sideways throw him.

If you remember, when Grossman and Berrian were on the team they used to connect maybe once every 2 games on a 60 yard skinny post. Now, Grossman sucked at everything else, so he wasn't a viable option (as much as that pains me to admit). Cutler, on the other hand, has the capability to manage flat routes AND throw deep.

This doesn't mean the Bears will have a good offense, nor does it mean that Ron Turner is anything but the worst OC in the league (because he is. The worst offensive coordinator in the league. Ron Turner, that is). But it does mean that Cutler will allow the Bears to be more viable offensively in a way that Orton and Grossman most assuredly did not.

Martin said...

Absolutly Chris. Nobody had to respect the deep ball against the Bears because that wasn't a play Orton could make, where as the deep ball was the only thing they had to worry about with Sexy Rexy in there. In my view, the Bears need a receiver, an O lineman, and I'd reload the defense, then go back after more offense next year. The NFC isn't that good, getting to the playoffs anything can happen, and once a team is in the Super Bowl, you only need to win once. I lvoed the run the Cards took this year, but seriously, they weren't in the top 10 teams in the league. Cutler makes the Bears an immediate Super Bowl threat, in my opinion.

Jarrett said...

Martin - What do you mean the NFC isn't that good? Don't you know who the NFC sent to the Super Bowl last year?

Larry said...

Everyone probably thinks Orton is "gritty" because one time they saw him get hit hard by a linebacker and he got up. Because god knows that QB's snap like twigs every time they get hit.

Anonymous said...

Larry B, welcome back to excellent writing and wity thrashing of a shitty writer. It's been awhile

Eddie said...

agreed w/ anonymous. fantastic bloggage!

Alex said...

What about Orton's "look in his eyes?" Did anyone get a look at those before they traded him? I suspect you can learn about his leadership by reading the eyes. The eyes.