26CornerBlitz Posted January 2, 2014 Author Posted January 2, 2014 I still say EJ maybe the guys, but I would draft a QB in the 1st from now until we know he have the guys. QB is the 1 position you can not address in free agency. Not realistic for an NFL Franchise to build a team this way.
K-9 Posted January 2, 2014 Posted January 2, 2014 no more than believing the players will only accept outrageous ones. was an odd comment to make from the get go. obviously any negotiation is two sided. if a deal is unsigned the team would say the player wants too much and the player would say the team didnt offer enough. What was odd about saying it takes two sides to agree to a deal? The inference was clear that the Bills don't make fair offers. This is simply not true and history bears that out. GO BILLS!!!
NoSaint Posted January 2, 2014 Posted January 2, 2014 What was odd about saying it takes two sides to agree to a deal? The inference was clear that the Bills don't make fair offers. This is simply not true and history bears that out. GO BILLS!!! and my retort was that, especially in the byrd case, we just dont know what was offered.
apuszczalowski Posted January 2, 2014 Posted January 2, 2014 Will he live for 7 years playing behind the Bears o-line? I figured they might re-sign him, but not for that long, maybe a couple of seasons until they can prove he is able to carry the offence
K-9 Posted January 2, 2014 Posted January 2, 2014 and my retort was that, especially in the byrd case, we just dont know what was offered. This is the first mention of Byrd in the thread. And again, the implication, even in the absence of knowing exactly what was offered, is that the Bills made an unfair offer. Is an offer anything less than what the player is seeking automatically construed as an unfair offer? You know as well as I that a certain faction of fans ALWAYS believes that to be the case, regardless of the numerous examples to the contrary. It's the old "Ralph is cheap" mentality. GO BILLS!!!
BuffaloBillsForever Posted January 2, 2014 Posted January 2, 2014 (edited) @kfishbain Jay Cutler has signed a 7-year deal with the Bears. The Chicago Bears are really dumb. If I was a fan I would be furious. Will he live for 7 years playing behind the Bears o-line? I figured they might re-sign him, but not for that long, maybe a couple of seasons until they can prove he is able to carry the offence For sure. Apparently playing multiple seasons with the number one defense and special teams wasn't enough to carry Jay Cutlers offense. How did the Bears not win a superbowl? Edited January 2, 2014 by BuffaloBillsForever
H2o Posted January 2, 2014 Posted January 2, 2014 Very smart move by him I would say. I was thinking he already hit the pinnacle of his career and was going to start on the downside. If this is a step down, it is about as small of a step as you can take. I predict the Bears will ultimately regret this move within a couple of years. But who knows? That was my thought when I read about it just a while ago. IMO, he got overpaid. Bears fans opinion? He got overpaid. Only time will tell.
NoSaint Posted January 2, 2014 Posted January 2, 2014 (edited) This is the first mention of Byrd in the thread. And again, the implication, even in the absence of knowing exactly what was offered, is that the Bills made an unfair offer. Is an offer anything less than what the player is seeking automatically construed as an unfair offer? You know as well as I that a certain faction of fans ALWAYS believes that to be the case, regardless of the numerous examples to the contrary. It's the old "Ralph is cheap" mentality. GO BILLS!!! again, ill say i was simply providing the flip side to your statement. sure the player has to be willing to sign, but likewise you could say the team has to give something worth signing. thats all. id say the fair stance is that sometimes we do, sometimes we dont. just like sometimes the player will demand too much, sometimes he will be reasonable. and of course the old, different schemes value different things so who knows if we value things the same as "the market" would. you are correct that a segment will always call the bills cheap though. all thaaaat said, its a needless sidetrack here. sorry for taking you down it, lets leave it to cutlers deal not the bills spending. (though it puts the fitz deal in a little bit of perspective for those that were furious wed pay a slightly below average starter 10m, if the 18m per is accurate for a slightly above average guy) Edited January 2, 2014 by NoSaint
BuffaloBillsForever Posted January 2, 2014 Posted January 2, 2014 (edited) That was my thought when I read about it just a while ago. IMO, he got overpaid. Bears fans opinion? He got overpaid. Only time will tell. The length of that contract is absurd but I'm sure there are some buyouts. Did I say the Bears are dumb? Edited January 2, 2014 by BuffaloBillsForever
NoSaint Posted January 2, 2014 Posted January 2, 2014 (edited) The length of that contract is absurd but I'm sure there are some buyouts. Did I say the Bears are dumb? realistically, id guess after 3-4 years they have a lot of freedom built into it. heck, as it outlasts signing bonus amortizations, depending on structure or options built in its very possible that several years could be axed with no hit potentially, but they have them there if they end up wanting them. Edited January 2, 2014 by NoSaint
Fan in Chicago Posted January 2, 2014 Posted January 2, 2014 (edited) The Chicago Bears are really dumb. If I was a fan I would be furious. I will eat crow on this one. I predicted that the Bears will choose to not retain him. The contract terms are still pending but the fact that they kept him stuns me. He is 1-8 against Green Bay !! This is philosophically equivalent of the Pats* dominating the Bills for the past decade. If the hopes are to win the division, then this simply won't do. Anyway, I was wrong. Edited January 2, 2014 by Fan in Chicago
26CornerBlitz Posted January 2, 2014 Author Posted January 2, 2014 (edited) I will eat crow on this one. I predicted that the Bears will choose to not retain him. The contract terms are still pending but the fact that they kept him stuns me. He is 1-8 against Green Bay !! This is philosophically equivalent of the Pats* dominating the Bills for the past decade. If the hopes are to win the division, then this simply won't do.Anyway, I was wrong. Given the dearth of available starting caliber QBs, the Bears had little choice to do anything besides re-signing Cutler. Edited January 2, 2014 by 26CornerBlitz
K-9 Posted January 2, 2014 Posted January 2, 2014 again, ill say i was simply providing the flip side to your statement. sure the player has to be willing to sign, but likewise you could say the team has to give something worth signing. thats all. id say the fair stance is that sometimes we do, sometimes we dont. just like sometimes the player will demand too much, sometimes he will be reasonable. and of course the old, different schemes value different things so who knows if we value things the same as "the market" would. you are correct that a segment will always call the bills cheap though. all thaaaat said, its a needless sidetrack here. sorry for taking you down it, lets leave it to cutlers deal not the bills spending. (though it puts the fitz deal in a little bit of perspective for those that were furious wed pay a slightly below average starter 10m, if the 18m per is accurate for a slightly above average guy) It's all good, NoSaint. The Fitz deal, oddly enough, was really one of the few that paid a player exactly as his statistical ranking merited (not that stats have any bearing). A good deal for both sides at the time. GO BILLS!!! Given the dearth of available starting caliber QBs, the Bears had little choice but to re-sign Cutler. What dearth? Why, I've been reading, right here on these very pages, that there is a plethora of starting QBs available in this draft alone! Or was that simply a plethora of QBs better than EJ is already? GO BILLS!!!
hondo in seattle Posted January 2, 2014 Posted January 2, 2014 Cutler........yuck. Not a QB I want to build my team around. An average QB, who take too many sacks, turns the ball over too much and doesn't have great pocket presence. If I'm a Bears fan I'm not thrilled with this news. Cutler might get you to 10 wins if the chips fall right, but he's not a guy who can advance his team deep in the playoffs. Will never contend for championships. Trent Dilfer won a Super Bowl. Almost any NFL starter can contend for a championship if the team around him is strong enough. Otherwise, I agree. I wouldn't want to build a team around Cutler either. If he hasn't solved the flaws to his game by now, it's unlikely he ever will. We're still not sure what we have with EJ. Bear fans know what they've got and it's not great.
Fan in Chicago Posted January 2, 2014 Posted January 2, 2014 Given the dearth of available starting caliber QBs, the Bears had little choice but to re-sign Cutler. I was thinking that Bears extend McCown and draft a QB to be Trestman's guy for the future. Perhaps they don't foresee a good enough prospect at their pick position in the draft. As a side note, the Bears have a ton of UFAs this year. Only a few are going to be pricey (Melton, Jennings, Tillman) but I wonder how many cannot be retained due to the Cutler contract. Of this list, I would be interested in Wootton and maaayyybe D.J. Williams if healthy. http://www.windycitygridiron.com/2013/12/30/5257132/chicago-bears-2014-free-agents-jay-cutler-henry-melton-charles-tillman-tim-jennings-salary-cap
26CornerBlitz Posted January 2, 2014 Author Posted January 2, 2014 What dearth? Why, I've been reading, right here on these very pages, that there is a plethora of starting QBs available in this draft alone! Or was that simply a plethora of QBs better than EJ is already? GO BILLS!!! Would it not behoove one to consider the sources?
DDD Posted January 2, 2014 Posted January 2, 2014 Cutler........yuck. Not a QB I want to build my team around. An average QB, who take too many sacks, turns the ball over too much and doesn't have great pocket presence. If I'm a Bears fan I'm not thrilled with this news. Cutler might get you to 10 wins if the chips fall right, but he's not a guy who can advance his team deep in the playoffs. Will never contend for championships. LOL considering the garbage the Bills have had under center for over a decade.
FireChan Posted January 2, 2014 Posted January 2, 2014 The Chicago Bears are really dumb. If I was a fan I would be furious. For sure. Apparently playing multiple seasons with the number one defense and special teams wasn't enough to carry Jay Cutlers offense. How did the Bears not win a superbowl? He got hurt.
BuffaloBillsForever Posted January 2, 2014 Posted January 2, 2014 (edited) Trent Dilfer won a Super Bowl. Almost any NFL starter can contend for a championship if the team around him is strong enough. Otherwise, I agree. I wouldn't want to build a team around Cutler either. If he hasn't solved the flaws to his game by now, it's unlikely he ever will. We're still not sure what we have with EJ. Bear fans know what they've got and it's not great. Yet it wasn't enough to carry Cutler who's defenses and special teams were ranked number 1 followed by years where they were top 4. Edited January 2, 2014 by BuffaloBillsForever
DDD Posted January 2, 2014 Posted January 2, 2014 Not realistic for an NFL Franchise to build a team this way. Disagree. Look no further than the Bills. You cannot win without a good QB.
Recommended Posts