81tothehall Posted April 4, 2009 Share Posted April 4, 2009 I know this has been beaten to death, but one perspective I think hasn't been explored. I believe that Denver likes the prospect of Chicago's draft position next year. I personally don't think they will be that good, possibly giving Denver a top 10 pick, which probably will end up giving them two top 10 picks since they also will be pitiful. In my mind they make the trade knowing they possibly get Bradford, McCoy, or Tebow next year. That gives them a guy to take the licks while they learn in Orton and a potential superstar in waiting. It also allows them to build a top notch defense with good pick position this year and possibly the best defensive player in the draft next year as well. If it turns out that they get Maybin and one of the Big time LB's this year and then turn around pick up say a Taylor Mays next year to go along with one of the top 3 QB's then they look like geniuses. Now if the Bears go out and blow it up this year then that scenario goes up in smoke, but I just don't see them being better than Green Bay or Minnesota and to be honest not a whole lot better than Detroit. That outstanding defense is getting old and Orlando Pace's best days are behind him. Anyway that is my two cents worth, do what you will with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shilsu Posted April 4, 2009 Share Posted April 4, 2009 You may be right, but I don't think it's a reasonable assumption. Chicago Bears were 9-7 this season. Redskins were 8-8. Bears gained a massive upgrade in Jay Cutler and still have twice as many picks as the Redskins do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gregpeck99 Posted April 4, 2009 Share Posted April 4, 2009 It ain't worth 2 cents. Cutler will take the Bears deep into the playoffs, if not the Super Bowl. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dmac#5 Posted April 4, 2009 Share Posted April 4, 2009 Are you serious??? They were 9-7 last year while playing 3 different QB's, and you think by adding Cutler it makes them a 5 or 6 win team??? Strange. If anything they should be favorites in that weak division, I mean you have a pro bowl QB and pro bowl caliber RB in Forte to go along with that defense and elite special teams unit. They took the deal because they like Orton more than Campbell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RWJ Posted April 4, 2009 Share Posted April 4, 2009 Here's what I think. A) Denver didn't want Jason Campbell. It's been mentioned in articles time and time again. When Denver didn't want Campbell we had to find a trading partner and this is where Cleveland came into play. We were trying to get Cleveland to trade their 2nd round pick for Campbell, then Cleveland would have shipped Denver Quinn and had Campbell and Anderson fight it out in Cleveland. Cleveland didn't think Campbell was worth a 2nd round pick. I don't know why we didn't just do it for a 3rd round pick. Campbell has next season to prove his case, which I don't think he will. In the end, Campbell and Zorn will be let go and a new HC will be hired. I hope it is Cowher so Vinny gets the boot as well. The other option is Shannahan due to the fact he is a close friend of Vinnys. Either way a new regime will be in Washington. I look forward to 2010 with a new HC, HOPEFULLY front office and new QB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Mac Patty Wack Posted April 4, 2009 Share Posted April 4, 2009 That is not a bad assumption. Their d is getting very old and now don't have a first this year or next to get it younger or give cutler some new weapons. He's going to be on an island. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SirClintonPortis Posted April 4, 2009 Share Posted April 4, 2009 I think I mentioned this in another thread. Well, here are some facts. The Redskins had a decent pass defense in the league, despite a lack of the pass rush.(Yeah, it's 23rd in terms of yards given up, but that's more on the pass rush, not a lack of talent at DB. Very few big plays were pulled off by opposing offenses) The Redskins have pick up Albert Haynesworth. That solves the pass rush problem and makes the run defense even MORE dominant. The Redskins have better receivers than the Bears. Jay Cutler would have a smooth transition into this WCO. Redskins may not get the injury bug at the positions it had this year. The 6-2 start showed that this offense has potential to be productive with JC at the helm. Put Cutler in, and he will most likely be even more productive. The Redskins have 3 pass catchers with much more potential that whatever the Bears have. Their limitations were with the mental and intellecutal aspects of the game. Sooo, McDaniels must have thought the surety of the Redskins going 12 wins or more is much better than Da Bears, especially with Cutler. The Bears need to fix their WRs like right now, have a bad pass defense, and are getting old on defense. It seems less likely they'll be great winners even with Cutler, and factor in injuries too.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shilsu Posted April 4, 2009 Share Posted April 4, 2009 Sooo, the surety of the Redskins going 10 wins or more is much better than Da Bears, especially with Cutler. The Bears need to fix their WRs like right now, have a bad pass defense, and are getting old on defense. It seems less likely they'll be great winners even with Cutler, and factor in injuries too.... This isn't Jay Cutler with Redskins vs Jay Cutler with Bears... It's Redskins vs Bears in 2010. So whether or not the Bears have better receivers or not than the Redskins has no merit. Not to mention the Bears still have a better chance of improving their team from the time of the trade than the Redskins, due to their sheer number of picks and salary cap room. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SirClintonPortis Posted April 4, 2009 Share Posted April 4, 2009 This isn't Jay Cutler with Redskins vs Jay Cutler with Bears... It's Redskins vs Bears in 2010. So whether or not the Bears have better receivers or not than the Redskins has no merit. I think you mean 2009-10, since the 2010 draft positions is figured from the performance of the teams in 2009. The Bears have to count on a rookie producing, having one of the ones that sat on the bench for them last year producing, OR getting Holt or Harrison for a couple years. Having Devin Hester as THE GUY is not going to cut it, even for Jay Cutler. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shilsu Posted April 4, 2009 Share Posted April 4, 2009 I think you mean 2009-10, since the 2010 draft positions is figured from the performance of the teams in 2009.The Bears have to count on a rookie producing, having one of the ones that sat on the bench for them last year producing, OR getting Holt or Harrison for a couple years. Having Devin Hester as THE GUY is not going to cut it, even for Jay Cutler. The flaw in your argument is the fact that Devin Hester was already THE GUY last year. So trying to use that as an argument against them doesn't work when trying to give reasons why they won't improve. On the other hand, saying that the Bears' defense is getting old IS a valid reason because that is something that will actually change between last season and this season. But one can say the same thing about the Redskins' lines, not to mention the Bears have more picks to address these issues than the Redskins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SirClintonPortis Posted April 4, 2009 Share Posted April 4, 2009 The flaw in your argument is the fact that Devin Hester was already THE GUY last year. So trying to use that as an argument against them doesn't work when trying to give reasons why they won't improve.On the other hand, saying that the Bears' defense is getting old IS a valid reason because that is something that will actually change between last season and this season. But one can say the same thing about the Redskins' lines, not to mention the Bears have more picks to address these issues than the Redskins. The guy with less receptions than Matt Forte and slot receiver-like stats. Maybe Cutler will suddenly gives him a 400 yard increase, but I doubt it. Now if they still had Berrian, then sure, they wouldn't be as bad as I think they are at WR, but he's not there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shilsu Posted April 4, 2009 Share Posted April 4, 2009 The guy with less receptions than Matt Forte and slot receiver-like stats. Maybe Cutler will suddenly gives him a 400 yard increase, but I doubt it. Now if they still had Berrian, then sure, they wouldn't be as bad as I think they are at WR, but he's not there. You're missing the point. We're not trying to rate their WR core, we're trying to figure out where the Bears will end up next year. They had Hester last year, and they have Hester this year. If all things remained the same, it would be a fair assumption to say they would probably go 9-7 again. Maybe true, maybe not, but the assumption is fair. Now add Jay Cutler plus draft picks plus free agency. Now subtract age and players lost to free agency or traded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IronMike Posted April 4, 2009 Share Posted April 4, 2009 It is impossible to assess the impacts of this trade until 2012 or later. Remember the Giants and San Diego trade when Eli Manning refused to play for SD. Yes, the Giants won a Super Bowl with Eli, but that Giants team was so much better than the Bears. AND look at San Diego. With all of the draft choices they received from the Giants they drafted: a damn good QB (Rivers), a great LB (Merriman) and a Kicker (Yes, some of you will laugh, but top tier kickers can win 2-4 games a year for good teams). Plus I think they also draft an OL (I may be wrong here). If Denver drafts as well as San Diego did, the Broncos will be laughing in 2011,2012 and beyond. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capt Rich Fla Posted April 5, 2009 Share Posted April 5, 2009 It ain't worth 2 cents. Cutler will take the Bears deep into the playoffs, if not the Super Bowl. I agree. Cutler was all they needed. They are going to be tough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shilsu Posted April 5, 2009 Share Posted April 5, 2009 It is impossible to assess the impacts of this trade until 2012 or later. Remember the Giants and San Diego trade when Eli Manning refused to play for SD. Yes, the Giants won a Super Bowl with Eli, but that Giants team was so much better than the Bears. AND look at San Diego. With all of the draft choices they received from the Giants they drafted: a damn good QB (Rivers), a great LB (Merriman) and a Kicker (Yes, some of you will laugh, but top tier kickers can win 2-4 games a year for good teams). Plus I think they also draft an OL (I may be wrong here).If Denver drafts as well as San Diego did, the Broncos will be laughing in 2011,2012 and beyond. Dude... The Bears were 9-7 last year... The Giants sucked and had just hired Tom Coughlin... Anyway, the goal in the NFL is to win the Super Bowl, so it's hard to call the Eli Manning trade a bad one, but the Giants could have constructed a better team had they not traded for Manning. But like I said, the goal is to win the Super Bowl so it's moot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NavyDave Posted April 5, 2009 Share Posted April 5, 2009 Here what I know. We are in a better position to not have given up two first round picks, a 3rd rounder and a player when we have numerous holes to fill along both lines. The Redskins have done quite well with their first round picks recently and I'm anxious to see in 3 weeks the position and player we pick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
commyderm2 Posted April 5, 2009 Share Posted April 5, 2009 If what you say is true, the Bears may have made Denver superbowl contenders for the next decade.. The bears, with their aging defense and horrid offense, and inability to create depth though the draft, will remain mediocre.. cutler or no cutler.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peregrine Posted April 5, 2009 Share Posted April 5, 2009 I think one of the reasons the Broncos were so eager to make this trade is because of all of those picks. Over the next two seasons the Broncos now have 9 picks in the first 3 rounds. 4 first round picks, 2 second round picks and 3 third round picks. That is a perfect situation for a new HC(McDaniels) to get in all the players he wants to run his type of team. Those are 9 projected future starters, a very large chunk of the team. Plus, if he brings in 3-4 more FA players, over half of the future starting roster could all be his guys in only 2 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Siven Posted April 5, 2009 Share Posted April 5, 2009 I think one of the reasons the Broncos were so eager to make this trade is because of all of those picks. Over the next two seasons the Broncos now have 9 picks in the first 3 rounds. 4 first round picks, 2 second round picks and 3 third round picks. That is a perfect situation for a new HC(McDaniels) to get in all the players he wants to run his type of team. Those are 9 projected future starters, a very large chunk of the team. Plus, if he brings in 3-4 more FA players, over half of the future starting roster could all be his guys in only 2 years. Not to mention, they could trade down if they have a high first rounder and gain more picks, or package picks and move up to snag a player they covet, while still possessing many key picks to address other needs. Kyle Orton is no slouch. If Cutler was on the Redskins.... and the Bears came offering 2 first rounders, a 3rd and kyle orton, i'd make that trade in a heartbeat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[[ghost]] Posted April 5, 2009 Share Posted April 5, 2009 Unless their defense can get it together, the Bears will be crippled bythis deal. The Broncos will throw away a legendary opportunity f they don't find a quality QB. If Orton is their guy, then they are straight. They could acquire Maybin/Brown with #12 and Tyson Jackson with #19. That defense gets better, and their O stays strong. This is all contingent on Orton though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fuzzyskins Posted April 5, 2009 Share Posted April 5, 2009 I love how everyone is applauding the Skins on here for not making the Cutler deal. Fact is they tried to make it happen and wanted Cutler in the worst way. The FO has no idea what it's doing.......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.