Bears re-sign Jay Cutler - 7 years, $126 million with $54M guaranteed

[patsfan-1982]

he has not played a full 16 games in 4 years has not thrown 20 TD in 3 years has only thrown for 4000 yards once in a era were good QB's throw for 5000 yards and he has never had a passer rating of 90, his back up had a better season then him and he only played 5 games,

as much as we talk about Flacco getting that big deal he earned it never missed a game won at lest one playoff game his first 5 season and last year had one of the best postseasons in NFL history,

Jay Cutler has done noting his whole career just look at the bears offense two #1 WR's a good TE and one of the best RB's in the NFL who also had 74 rec they could have Drafted a kid in the 2th with a new HC coming in and saved that money to fix there defense

 

[Patriot Missile]

Wow. I thought for sure the Bears would let him walk. Broncos fans should be thanking McDaniels every Sunday before they turn they're tvs on.

 

[fair catch fryar]

Chicago was in a difficult position.

What exactly were their options if they did not retain Cutler?

Go with another soon to be free agent.
Consider who else is available: Michael Vick, Josh Freeman, Chad Henne, Matt Flynn, Kellen Clemens, Josh McCown. Seems like any of those choices are all downgrades of various degrees.

Go with a draft pick.
The Bears have the 14th overall pick, and right now there may be as many as seven teams picking ahead of them that may be looking to draft a quarterback. Meanwhile there are probably only four players that most are considering of being worth drafting in the first round.

Trade up for an earlier draft pick.
Now you're really rolling the dice by not only using a first round pick on an unknown commodity, but also giving away extra selection(s) to do so. And that's before considering all their other free agents to be that might not be re-signed, and will need to be replaced.

I see your point, but man, that's a lot of years and a lot of cap space for a while...I just don't get it based on what he has done, or hasn't done. Was Flacco worth his contract? IMO, no way, but at least he has some SB 'bling' to back it up. Cutler....not so much.

 

[fair catch fryar]

A clearer example of why the Patriots are successful year after year while others wallow in mediocrity there never was.

It's only clear because we are wearing "Brady glasses". It wasn't so clear for us before Bledsoe and Parcells graced the organization.

 

[supafly]

I see your point, but man, that's a lot of years and a lot of cap space for a while...I just don't get it based on what he has done, or hasn't done. Was Flacco worth his contract? IMO, no way, but at least he has some SB 'bling' to back it up. Cutler....not so much.

I think sometimes it just comes down to being a top 12-15 QB in the NFL, and basing it on what the market value seems to be.

Many don't agree with the pacts signed by guys such as Matthew Stafford, Matt Ryan, Tony Romo, Jay Cutler, Eli Manning, Joe Flacco---but if you look at what the new "norm" QB market has become, you can help to better justify it.

We continue to have these conversations whenever any QB signs a new deal and gets 17, 18 million dollars per year, but the reality that I see is that is just what the market dictates anymore. All of these teams have chemistry established with their QBs, and have seen these guys get them into a range where they either go to the playoffs or usually come down to the final game or two just about every year.

As many flaws that we see, I just see the new equation being top 12-15 QB = 17, 18 million dollars per year no matter what anymore.

 

[supafly]

It's only clear because we are wearing "Brady glasses". It wasn't so clear for us before Bledsoe and Parcells graced the organization.

March 2001:

Patriots sign franchise QB to a then NFL record salary of 10 yrs / 103 million dollars

I agree with you. We bought into the whole "our QB is definitely good enough and our problems lie in other areas" theory just the same.

Nothing has changed. It's just what the going rate is anymore.

Cutler "led" (and I use that term loosely) his team to yearly QB records of :

2010 10-5
2011 7-3
2012 10-5

They obviously assume that he's "good enough" particularly with the weapons that he has now, so they probably figure that they just are stuck paying market value. I'm not sure if I'd have done the same, but I can certainly understand the thinking of basically a 3 yr deal worth 54 million total, then re-assessing the situation after that.

 

[Christiancat]

March 2001:

Patriots sign franchise QB to a then NFL record salary of 10 yrs / 103 million dollars

I agree with you. We bought into the whole "our QB is definitely good enough and our problems lie in other areas" theory just the same.

Nothing has changed. It's just what the going rate is anymore.

Cutler "led" (and I use that term loosely) his team to yearly QB records of :

2010 10-5
2011 7-3
2012 10-5

They obviously assume that he's "good enough" particularly with the weapons that he has now, so they probably figure that they just are stuck paying market value. I'm not sure if I'd have done the same, but I can certainly understand the thinking of basically a 3 yr deal worth 54 million total, then re-assessing the situation after that.

Yeah, but out of his 8 years in the NFL, he's only been to the playoffs once. I am not saying Jay Cutler's not talented because he is. I just don't think he's worth what they are giving him and I don't feel he's a top 15 QB.

 

[supafly]

Yeah, but out of his 8 years in the NFL, he's only been to the playoffs once. I am not saying Jay Cutler's not talented because he is. I just don't he's worth what they are giving him and I don't feel he's a top 15 QB.

I think my point is just that any and all of these QBs starting from Stafford, Ryan, Cutler, Romo, Rivers, etc haven't had any success whatsoever in the playoffs, nor have they led their teams to more than one/two appearances (this changed this year with Rivers) overall, and yet they are all getting contracts north of 15+ million dollars and will continue to do so.

It's simply the market value for a starting QB in today's system.

As far as whether or not Cutler is a top 15 QB, I would include him with the following:

(top 15--in no order whatsoever)

Brady, Roethlisberger, Flacco, Luck, Manning, Rivers, Romo, E.Manning, Rodgers, Brees, Ryan, Wilson, Cutler, Foles, Stafford

outside looking in (ranked 16-17-18--no order)

Newton, Kaepernick, Dalton

(NOTE: I'm not in the mood to argue with anyone about places # 13-15-17-19 etc. You get the point. It's obviously somewhat of a grey area, but I believe that Cutler would be in the top 15-16-17 in most lists, therefore putting him as a capable NFL starter who's in the top half of the league. Some will have arguments to have him a place or two higher than 15-16-17, while others will have arguments at a place or two lower. The fact remains that he's lumped directly in with many other QBs who are mediocre and haven't seen much, if any, success in the post-season; however I believe this is simply what the market dictates anymore )

 

[Christiancat]

I think my point is just that any and all of these QBs starting from Stafford, Ryan, Cutler, Romo, Rivers, etc haven't had any success whatsoever in the playoffs, nor have they led their teams to more than one/two appearances (this changed this year with Rivers) overall, and yet they are all getting contracts north of 15+ million dollars and will continue to do so.

It's simply the market value for a starting QB in today's system.

As far as whether or not Cutler is a top 15 QB, I would include him with the following:

(top 15--in no order whatsoever)

Brady, Roethlisberger, Flacco, Luck, Manning, Rivers, Romo, E.Manning, Rodgers, Brees, Ryan, Wilson, Cutler, Foles, Stafford

outside looking in (ranked 16-17-18--no order)

Newton, Kaepernick, Dalton

(NOTE: I'm not in the mood to argue with anyone about places # 13-15-17 etc. You get the point. It's obviously somewhat of a grey area, but I believe that Cutler would be in the top 15-16 in most lists, therefore putting him as a capable NFL starter who's in the top half of the league )

Well where we would rank them is definitely subjective. I wouldn't put in the top 15 but that just my opinion and QB rankings vary from person to person. I think McCown played really well and would have made a good starter for much cheaper rate. Also Jay Cutler is also injury prone. Another thing to consider is their team needs rebuilding in some areas and because they gave cutler all this money they will face obstacles with the team rebuild because of this. I see your point and sorta of agree that many veteran QBs are getting 15 million +. I just think it's stupid when teams do this especially when the QB is medicore and the team needs the money for rebuilding. I put Cutler in top 20 QBs though.

 

[supafly]

he has not played a full 16 games in 4 years has not thrown 20 TD in 3 years has only thrown for 4000 yards once in a era were good QB's throw for 5000 yards and he has never had a passer rating of 90, his back up had a better season then him and he only played 5 games,

as much as we talk about Flacco getting that big deal he earned it never missed a game won at lest one playoff game his first 5 season and last year had one of the best postseasons in NFL history,

Jay Cutler has done noting his whole career just look at the bears offense two #1 WR's a good TE and one of the best RB's in the NFL who also had 74 rec they could have Drafted a kid in the 2th with a new HC coming in and saved that money to fix there defense

They definitely could have, and that's a very fine argument that shows the other side of the coin to mine.

I think the concern is that all of these teams could have done the same thing. SD, ATL, DET, NYG, BAL, DAL, etc---it's all hard to try and determine whether or not that "new" 2nd round draft pick that you propose would be as good or as competitive. There's probably the exact same chance that the new 2nd round pick would suck, as opposed to being as good as some of these QBs, at least in certain aspects of the game.

I think the thought is that all of these QBs have shown to be at least competitive, so unless you're coming in that bottom 12 or so (places 21--32) on a consistent basis for QB rankings, they're probably going to lean towards paying you market value, at least for deals like this which are for the next 3 yrs then take it yr by yr or look at a possible extension.

Starting QB is obviously the most important position for any franchise, so I think they start there and then try to assess the rest. Just my opinion.

I think we're going to have the exact same argument about Andy Dalton, Cam Newton, Ryan Tannehill, etc down the road--just the same way I said we'd be having it about Stafford, Ryan, Romo, when Flacco happened, or vice versa. It just is what it is. No one wants to have to be in the position that MIN, CLE, HOU, etc are.

 

[supafly]

I see your point and sorta of agree that many veteran QBs are getting 15 million +. I just think it's stupid when teams do this especially when the QB is medicore and the team needs the money for rebuilding. I put Cutler in top 20 QBs though.

Yeah, I just think that we've seen so many prime examples of this anymore that it's hard to think otherwise, so that's why I feel this way. Time and time again we've had this exact discussion, and while your stance makes perfect sense on many levels, it's just not what seems to be happening in today's NFL.

As I said in my earlier post, I believe we'll probably having this discussion with guys like Andy Dalton, Cam Newton, Ryan Tannehill, etc down the road too. Just think about what Michael Vick received at one point, it was certainly comparable to the average or better starting QBs of the league. The reality is that most of them haven't won much of anything outside of Brady, Brees, Manning(s), Rodgers, Roethlisberger, and Flacco.

That leaves a lot of capable QBs in spots 8-18 or so for your next 10 selections. You could even go all the way up to QBs 1-20 if you chose to, and it'd likely be a lot of the same either now or in the near future. It won't stop these discussions from happening every time though

 

[thenepatsrule]

I have visited forums of a lot of the NFL teams since this news broke and one thing i found common with fans of all the teams was


They are all jumping with joy. Yes, the bears fans are joyous as they feel Cutler is their savior, and the rest of the NFL is happy as they know the Bears have sealed their fate for the next 7 years.

 

[Christiancat]

Yeah, I just think that we've seen so many prime examples of this anymore that it's hard to think otherwise, so that's why I feel this way. Time and time again we've had this exact discussion, and while your stance makes perfect sense on many levels, it's just not what seems to be happening in today's NFL.

As I said in my earlier post, I believe we'll probably having this discussion with guys like Andy Dalton, Cam Newton, Ryan Tannehill, etc down the road too. Just think about what Michael Vick received at one point, it was certainly comparable to the average or better starting QBs of the league. The reality is that most of them haven't won much of anything outside of Brady, Brees, Manning(s), Rodgers, Roethlisberger, and Flacco.

That leaves a lot of capable QBs in spots 8-18 or so for your next 10 selections. You could even go all the way up to QBs 1-20 if you chose to, and it'd likely be a lot of the same either now or in the near future. It won't stop these discussions from happening every time though

Yup, I agree for the most part. I don't think Vick should be in the NFL based on the atrocious things he has done off the field. I think teams need to take a better look at the big picture rather than throw 15 million + to a player simply because they are the starting QB. If the starting QB is worth it and the team is well built that sure throw the starting QB 15 million +

 

[Christiancat]

I have visited forums of a lot of the NFL teams since this news broke and one thing i found common with fans of all the teams was


They are all jumping with joy. Yes, the bears fans are joyous as they feel Cutler is their savior, and the rest of the NFL is happy as they know the Bears have sealed their fate for the next 7 years.

So in other words out of 32 NFL teams only the fans of the Bears think Jay Cutler's deal is great. While fans of all the other teams are happy cause they predict 7 years of doom with Jay Cutler

 

[patsfan-1982]

They definitely could have, and that's a very fine argument that shows the other side of the coin to mine.

I think the concern is that all of these teams could have done the same thing. SD, ATL, DET, NYG, BAL, DAL, etc---it's all hard to try and determine whether or not that "new" 2nd round draft pick that you propose would be as good or as competitive. There's probably a much better chance that the new 2nd round pick would suck, as opposed to being as good as some of these QBs at certain aspects of the game.

I think the thought is that all of these QBs have shown to be at least competitive, so unless you're coming in that bottom 12 or so (places 21--32) on a consistent basis for QB rankings, they're probably going to lean towards paying you market value, at least for deals like this which are for the next 3 yrs then take it yr by yr or look at a possible extension.

Starting QB is obviously the most important position for any franchise, so I think they start there and then try to assess the rest. Just my opinion.

I think we're going to have the exact same argument about Andy Dalton, Ryan Tannehill, etc down the road--just the same way I said we'd be having it about Stafford, Ryan, Romo when Flacco happened, or vice versa. It just is what it is. No one wants to have to be in the position that MIN, CLE, HOU, etc are.

I agree its market value for a good starting QB but if you take the elite QB's out of the talks Peyton Manning, Tom Brady, Drew Brees, ben Roethlisberger and aaron Rodgers.

philip rivers, Tony Romo, Eli Manning, Matt Ryan, Joe Flacco and matthew Stafford, are the best QB's in the NFL after the Elite's and have all at some point played at a MVP type level and IMO Cutler has never played at that level im sure in a few years when Luck. Wilson and Dolton get there new deals it will make Cutlers deal look like a bargain,

I maybe wrong and Cutler has an amazing 2014 season cause he is a talent QB but for now I think the bears did not get the best end of the deal

 

[1960Pats]

I know finding a franchise QB is extremely difficult, but I really don't think teams like the Ravens or Bears are doing themselves any favors by throwing money and years at mediocre quarterbacks like Flacco and Cutler.

It amazes me that a Pats fan would call Flacco mediocre. If not for a dirty play by the Lions (who else) he may have knocked us out of the playoffs yet again.

 

[1960Pats]

It's only clear because we are wearing "Brady glasses". It wasn't so clear for us before Bledsoe and Parcells graced the organization.

I wouldn't call Tuna's tenure here as being graced. I would Bledsoe, but not so much as a QB than as a person. He was/is a class act all the way.

They didn't take us any further than Raymond Berry and Tony Eason did during the 80's, and not much further (thanks to Ben Dreith) than Chuck Fairbanks and Steve Grogan did in the 70's.

Those were all good teams, but what made us great was when we were truly graced with Brady and Belichick.

 

[RobertWeathers]

It amazes me that a Pats fan would call Flacco mediocre. If not for a dirty play by the Lions (who else) he may have knocked us out of the playoffs yet again.

As a regular season QB, Flacco is very mediocre.

As a playoff QB (especially 7 of his last 8 games) he is stellar.

 

[1960Pats]

As a regular season QB, Flacco is very mediocre.

As a playoff QB (especially 7 of his last 8 games) he is stellar.

Flacco took over for a Ravens team that went 5-11 the year before he arrived.

Since then he has played in every single game and led them to seasons of;
11-5
9-7
12-4
12-4
10-6
8-8 (that could have been a winning season if not for the cheap shot in game #14 when they were 8-6.

He has led his team to the playoffs in each of his first five years and had a fair amount of success, including a SB win and two knockouts of the Pats at Gillette.

I understand that Cutler deserves the criticism that he's getting, but not Flacco, and certainly not by fans of our team.

 

[Nunchucks]

Flacco is terrible. He got hot throwing the ball deep last year and he won. But, consistency is not in Flacco's game.